Vaunce News

🔒
❌ About FreshRSS
There are new available articles, click to refresh the page.
Yesterday — May 9th 2024NB Blog Feed

CBS Is The Only Network To Cover Denial of Hunter Biden Dismissal Motion

n a normal world with normal media, breaking developments on the legal woes of the son of the sitting President of the United States would draw significant coverage. But we neither live in normal times nor have a normal media.  Therefore, the decision issued by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals upholding District Judge Noreika’s denial of a motion to dismiss drew minimal coverage, and only on the CBS Evening News. Watch the full report, as aired on Thursday, May 9th, 2024:    NORAH O’DONNELL: The trial against Hunter Biden on federal gun charges is on track to begin next month after a federal appeals court declined to dismiss those charges today. Hunter Biden is accused of falsifying a federal firearms form, and illegal possession of a firearm while using a narcotic. The president's son also faces federal tax charges in California, and is scheduled to stand trial later in June. He has pleaded not guilty in both cases. It goes without saying that if it were Donald Trump, Jr. who got busted on gun charges, the charges being falsely affirming one is not a drug addict on ATF 4473 for purposes of a gun purchase while smoking industrial amounts of crack, then the coverage would be significant and constant- on the gun charges, on Burisma, on everything.  CBS only mustered a scant 26 seconds on the matter but it was still 26 seconds more than ABC and NBC, which didn’t even bother to cover the story. Again, if it were Don, Jr.  Here’s some of the detail missing from CBS’s teeny-tiny report, via Politico: A federal judge in Delaware denied Hunter Biden’s bid to throw out his felony gun charges on Thursday, rejecting arguments from the president’s son that the federal prohibition on owning guns while using illegal drugs is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. Separately, a federal appeals court panel ruled against Biden earlier Thursday in another bid to have the charges against him tossed. The two decisions appear to clear the way for his case to head to trial on June 3, though his defense team can still pursue further appeals. Last year, Biden was charged with illegally buying a gun while using illegal drugs and with lying on a government form about his drug use when he made the purchase –– two separate criminal charges. Special counsel David Weiss alleges that Biden bought a gun in October 2018, a time when he was frequently using crack cocaine. Biden has spoken publicly about his struggles with drug addiction. CBS doesn’t even mention the district court denial of Hunter Biden’s Bruen defense against the gun charges, which puts many Second Amendment advocates in the unusual position of being sympathetic to the younger Biden.  The Regime Media only managed to muster a grand total of 26 seconds on Hunter Biden. If it weren’t for CBS, there’d be none at all.  

RFK Jr. Admits to Supporting ‘Full Term’ Abortion

It’s absolutely jaw dropping to me that people openly support what can be summed up as nothing less than infanticide. In an interview with podcaster Sage Steele, Democratic Presidential nominee Robert Kennedy Jr. was asked about his ideas when it comes to abortion restrictions. Kennedy, very confidently, insisted that all abortion decisions should be made by a mother and that he supports abortion “even if it’s full term.” The interview, released Wednesday as part of The Sage Steele Show, already has over 21,000 views on YouTube. LifeNews.com released a less than 30 second clip of the show and it already has more than 154,000 views on X with hundreds of retweets and comments. BREAKING: Robert Kennedy Jr. endorses abortions up to birth. "Even if it's full term."https://t.co/2VFOBxzChb pic.twitter.com/1xkzmDkwKt — LifeNews.com (@LifeNewsHQ) May 9, 2024 Steele asked if Kennedy, if elected, would keep abortion laws at the federal level as is, “Keeping it as is, with Roe versus Wade having being overturned and leaving it up to the states to determine if and when a woman can have an abortion?” “No, I wouldn’t leave it to the states,” Kennedy said. “We should leave it to the woman,” he added, a few moments later insisting that he’d not place any federal protections on innocent life but rather leave it up to a woman. “We shouldn’t have government involved,” he said. Steele pushed back in order to get Kennedy to clarify his stance: “Even if it’s full term?” What Kennedy said next shocked me. “Even if it’s full term,” he said, meaning that he’d support a woman’s decision to abort her child, even if it is fully formed and merely a few inches up the birth canal. LifeNews.com did indicate that even though Kennedy claims that he “may not support late-term abortions personally, his answer makes it crystal clear that his political policy would allow late-term abortions with no limits.” In response to the clip, many pro-lifers were stunned and heartbroken. Sean Feucht, a Christian singer who recently led worship at a pro-Israel march said, “No Bible-believing, Jesus-following Christian should come remotely close to endorsing this guy for President.” TPUSA president Charlie Kirk said RFK Jr. was “affirming his commitment to China-style full-term abortion, without limits, nationwide.” Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts shared that sentiment when he said, “The real radicals on abortion are those, like Robert Kennedy, who support full-term abortion. What a grotesque and evil concept.” I pray for the day that pro-aborts either wake up or stop ignoring the realities of what abortion is. Until then, that population, the most vulnerable population in our society, is under eminent risk with mindsets like Kennedy’s.  

Pro-Israel Protestors Rally & March Outside USC Campus: ‘Bring Them Home’

Pro-Israel students at the University of Southern California (USC) gathered together on Wednesday to march for the return of the innocent Israelis still held captive by Hamas, standing in stark contrast to the pro-Palestine protests that have erupted across college campuses around the nation, wreaking havoc, causing graduation ceremony cancellations, and bringing violence to school grounds. Pursuit Church teamed up with Christian worship artist Sean Feucht to hold the “United for Israel March” on Wednesday, where hundreds of both local and traveling pro-Israel marchers gathered by USC to stand in solidarity with those who lost their lives on October 7, as well as those still being held by Hamas terrorists. Feucht led worship songs at the start of the event before the march began. Later, marchers gathered outside the front gates of USC as the school's four-day long graduation ceremony series began. USC students in particular have been relatively vocal about their anti-Israel stance. In April more than 90 people were arrested during a protest at the campus after setting up illegal encampments on the school grounds. During the same month, USC even canceled its official commencement ceremony amid concerns of violence and noted that the valedictorian speech, which was set to be given by an outwardly pro-Palestine activist, was canceled, too. In the same vein, back in November, a Jewish professor at USC was banned from teaching on campus for the rest of the fall semester after comments he made against Hamas went viral. Hence why the location of this rally was of vital importance. Related: Indoctrination Nation: YOUNG Missouri School Kids Protest for Palestine - 'Zionism has Got to Go!' Rally-goers peacefully raised their hands to God and prayed for His protection over the Israeli citizens prior to the march. “The significance of us gathering on this University campus is to say, 'anti-semitism will be defeated,'" Feucht told the crowd before launching into a chant of, “Jewish hate must go!” Attendees included both Jews and Christians. USC 🚨: A Christian converted Muslim man from Iran, and Christian converted Jewish woman from Israel take communion together in symbolic peace between Muslims and Jews, and prayer said over the Middle East. pic.twitter.com/JckFzJOtnc — Anthony Cabassa (@AnthonyCabassa_) May 9, 2024 When the singing and prayer ended, attendees began marching down the streets of Los Angeles chanting things like, "Bring them home” while carrying both the Israeli and American flags.   Your daily dose of good news: At USC hundreds of pro israel supporters march at usc after an pro palestinian encampment was removed. Quite a difference with your average pro hamas crowd pic.twitter.com/zMrbYlLRU8 — Brian BJ (@iamBrianBJ) May 9, 2024 A plane even flew over the University with a banner behind it that read, “Israel is forever. Jewish Lives Matter.” Staff and members of the group Concerned Women for America, which seeks to "protect and promote Biblical values and Constitutional principles through prayer, education, and advocacy," attended the event and held signs that read “CWA Stands with Israel!” Paige Nelson, CWA’s Executive Assistant to the VP and Development Project Manager, issued a statement to MRCTV after attending the event herself: It is no secret that since October 7, 2023, antisemitism in the United States has spiked, specifically targeting Jewish students and faculty at some of our most esteemed institutions. Pro-Hamas protests are breaking out, coating these campuses in violence and hysteria, and creating dangerous environments for the Jewish community to exist. Yesterday’s march was the complete opposite and a testament to our God not being finished with His people. Christians and Jews gathered together in prayer and worship - acknowledging that we serve the same good Father and have power in numbers. The march was filled with joy and laughter, unity and peace. There were no arrests, blocking traffic, or disgracing the American flag. Instead, hundreds gathered to show support for our Jewish brothers and sisters and to spread the good news that our Lord has already won the battle, He has conquered death, and that He will not give up on the promised land. This event stands in stark contrast to the types of protests taking place across the nation, where pro-Hamas students and demonstrators have set up camp at various schools calling to "liberate" Palestine. “Hamas is Me! Hamas is You! Hamas is our Family,” one black supremacist at George Washington University yelled on Tuesday before pledging to destroy Israel. Students from Princeton went on what they called a “hunger strike,” voluntarily denying themselves food in an attempt to show their solidarity with Gaza, and the Latino Institute at UCLA attempted to place blame on police officers for terminating their violent and outrageous protests - and that’s all within just the last week. Like Nelson said, the violence many of the pro-Gaza protestors exude is not necessary, as demonstrated by the pro-Israel group. “There were no arrests, blocking traffic, or disgracing the American flag,” she said about Wednesday’s march. Maybe those pro-Palestine protestors should take a look at how advocating for what you believe in should actually be done. Follow us on Twitter/X: MRCTV's @Schineman joins One America News to talk Biden refusing interviews, Google censorship, and Maxine Waters' hypocrisy. pic.twitter.com/y4tXzsFlWY — MRCTV (@mrctv) May 9, 2024  

ABC Relieved Biden Abandoning Israel as Trump Leads War ‘Trust’ Poll

For weeks, the liberal media have had their eye on November as they’ve been trying to get President Biden to abandon Israel in hopes of getting the pro-Hamas votes in swing states like Michigan and Wisconsin. ABC’s Good Morning America seemed relieved on Thursday as they hyped Biden’s threat to stop sending weapons to Israel if they attacked Hamas’s final stronghold. They even noted the threat came as their latest poll showed former President Trump edged out on trust to handle the war. “This is President Biden's most direct warning to Israel since the start of this war and it could set up a historic clash with this critical ally,” boasted Biden’s chief apple polisher, ABC chief White House correspondent Mary Bruce. Biden’s latest comments about Israel also scratched ABC’s anti-American itch, because it allowed them to suggest that America had teamed up with the bad guys: BRUCE: For weeks, Biden warned Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu not to invade Rafah where over 1 million civilians are seeking refuge. And he's already taking action, halting a shipment of 3,500 U.S. bombs, fearing American weapons could be used against civilians. Something Biden now concedes has already happened. BIDEN: Civilians have been killed in Gaza as a consequence of those bombs and other ways in which they go after population centers. On the timing of the threat, Bruce noted that “Biden's stark warning comes as he faces growing criticism at home over his steadfast support for Israel. Our latest poll finding voters now trust Donald Trump more to handle this war.”     To the question “Trust more to handle Israel-Hamas War,” Trump led with a plurality of 37 percent to Biden’s 29. Meanwhile, 33 percent responded “neither.”  The poll, which was conducted between April 25-30 had a margin of error of two percent. Bruce concluded the segment by trying to have her cake and eat it too: Now, the President says the U.S. will still continue to provide for Israel's defense, like the Iron Dome missile system. But after months of urging Israel to do more to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, President Biden is adamant: if Netanyahu invades Rafah, the U.S. will not supply offensive weapons to Israel. There was similar hype for the threats against Israel on CBS Mornings, where foreign correspondent Ramy Inocencio seemed to revel in how “angry reactions are flying from Israel’s far-right politicians to President Biden.” He also seemed to tout how others say “Israel may have already lost in terms of its international standing” and that it was “an incredible achievement for Hamas.” Over on NBC’s Today, Gabe Gutierrez marveled: “For weeks the White House has said that it opposes a large-scale assault on Rafah, but President Biden is now taking a much harder line, threatening to withhold more weapons from Israel…” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 9, 2024 7:10:26 a.m. Eastern MICHAEL STRAHAN: Now to President Biden delivering a warning to Israel saying he'll stop some weapons shipments as Israel invades the city of Rafah. Our chief White House correspondent Mary Bruce has the latest for us. Good morning, Mary. MARY BRUCE: Good morning, Michael. This is President Biden's most direct warning to Israel since the start of this war and it could set up a historic clash with this critical ally. President Biden now threatening to halt the shipment of additional U.S. weapons to Israel, which he acknowledges have been used to kill innocent civilians. [Cuts to video] This morning, President Biden is calling out the Israeli government. PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: It's just wrong. We're not gonna supply weapons and the artillery shells used. BRUCE: Making it clear in his sharpest criticism yet that the U.S. will not provide Israel with weapons to attack Rafah. BIDEN: I have been made it clear to Bibi and the war cabinet. They're not going to get our support if, in fact, they go into these population centers. BRUCE: For weeks, Biden warned Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu not to invade Rafah where over 1 million civilians are seeking refuge. And he's already taking action, halting a shipment of 3,500 U.S. bombs, fearing American weapons could be used against civilians. Something Biden now concedes has already happened. BIDEN: Civilians have been killed in Gaza as a consequence of those bombs and other ways in which they go after population centers. BRUCE: Biden's stark warning comes as he faces growing criticism at home over his steadfast support for Israel. Our latest poll finding voters now trust Donald Trump more to handle this war. As some Republicans now accuse Biden of undermining Israel. SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): This is obscene. It is absurd. Give Israel what they need to fight the war they can't afford to lose. BRUCE: But Biden insisting U.S. support for Israel remains iron clad. BIDEN: We're not walking away from Israel's security. We're walking away from Israel’s ability to wage war in those areas. [Cuts back to live] BRUCE: Now, the President says the U.S. will still continue to provide for Israel's defense, like the Iron Dome missile system. But after months of urging Israel to do more to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, President Biden is adamant: if Netanyahu invades Rafah, the U.S. will not supply offensive weapons to Israel.

Rumble CEO Reacts to Being Banned in Russia, Unveils Pressures against Rumble to Censor

Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski reacted to Rumble being banned from Russia over its adamant free speech stance. On May 7, Pavlovski addressed an X Spaces hosted by social media personality Mario Nawfal. During the Spaces, Pavlovski was asked to explain why his platform was banned from Russia as well as his company’s experiences with other countries demanding censorship. Strikingly, Rumble has been criticized in the past for platforming Russian media and was even forced to leave France after that country demanded that the platform ban Russian news programs.  Similar: Russia Blocks Video Platform for Refusing Censorship “One thing that’s really striking to me right now is if you guys remember back … two years ago, we were banned, well, we left France, they threatened to shut us off at the local level, so we decided to make the decision to leave the country entirely,” Pavlovski said. “And we did it because they wanted us to shut down Russian, news sources that come from Russia, so we denied that request, and we ended up leaving France. And every single paper in the United States and Canada covered how we were allowing Russian news sources on Rumble, and we were, they called me every name in the book.” https://t.co/rgqHcq5wSj — Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) May 7, 2024 Pavlovski pointed out the bitter irony that Rumble had previously been banned for platforming Russian voices and that the legacy media, previously so critical of Rumble for being “pro-Russia,” is now conspicuously silent on Rumble being banned. “It might have happened a month ago, but we confirmed that Russia has put Rumble on a blocked list, and we are completely inaccessible within  Russia entirely,” Pavlovski explained. “And not a single news source, not a single news source that covered us prior, what we did in France, is covering this situation.” Pavlovski revealed that Rumble was banned after it refused to comply with censorship orders from the Russian government. He mentioned that one of the accounts was banned over a marijuana related issue. “Another account seemed to be some conspiracy channel, but I’m not sure because it was in a different language … and the other channel seemed to be an Arabic channel that was political in the Arabic language,” Pavlovski added. “Those were the types of channels that they wanted us to remove, and we didn’t see that they violated any of our terms of service, so we ignored the orders, and then they shut us off at the IP level.” Pavlovski was also asked if he received similar requests from Western governments. While he denied receiving any direct orders, Pavlovski pointed out that censorship in the West is conducted using an entirely different model from traditionally autocratic countries. “The way the U.S. market tries to impose censorship is by using media organizations to try to do hit jobs on your company,” Pavlovski said. “So they’ll bring up this person or that person or this piece of content, and they’ll write up a whole article about one video that they found on your platform out of millions, so the way censorship moves in America is through using media organizations. The media organizations are the entities that push censorship across all the Big Tech platforms.” He added that “the Big Tech platforms are scared shitless of the media organizations, and that’s what gets them to buckle.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Will the Media Hold NY Gov. Hochul Accountable for Racist Remarks? MRC’s Hamill Reacts on Newsmax

MRC contributing writer Stephanie Hamill was a guest on Tuesday’s The Balance on Newsmax with host Eric Bolling where they examined recent racist remarks made by New York Governor Kathy Hochul (D) during a forum in California where she said there are black kids growing up in the Bronx who ‘don’t even know what the word computer is.’  KATHY HOCHUL: In fact, I talk to a lot of other people who say, “I wish my governor had thought of that first”, and I say, “No no, this is New York. We like to be first, with all due respect to people from other states. It's sort of- it's sort of our attitude. You know, “we will be the best- we will be the first”. And I want others to follow because right now we have, you know, young black kids growing up in The Bronx who don't even know what the word “computer” is. They- they don't know- they don't know these things, and I want the world to open up to all of them because when you have their diverse voices innovating solutions through technology, then you're really addressing society's broader challenges. While most of the major mainstream media outlets initially covered her remarks and apology this week, it appears many have moved on as there haven't been any follow-ups.  One could only imagine what the coverage would look like if it were a Republican who said what she said. One could assume there would be wall to wall news coverage or even calls for her to resign.

Nets Play Propagandists for Biden in Wisconsin, Bemoan ‘Stubborn’ Economy

On Wednesday night and Thursday morning, the “big three” of ABC, CBS, and NBC dutifully complied with suckling coverage of President Biden’s trip to Racine, Wisconsin as part of Microsoft announcing a new headquarters for its artificial intelligence (A.I.) division and bemoaning how the economy’s remained a “stubborn challenge” for Biden to break through to Americans who’ve stupidly been “nostalgic” for the Trump economy. ABC’s World News Tonight and NBC Nightly News each served up a full report on Wednesday with the former, of course, turning to chief White House correspondent and chief Biden apple polisher, Mary Bruce.     “President Biden traveling to the critical battleground of Wisconsin today, where a new poll has him leading Donald Trump by the slimmest of margins. Biden there to announce Microsoft will build a $3.3 billion artificial intelligence center on the very same site of a failed Trump era project that was supposed to create tens of thousands of jobs, but never got off the ground,” Bruce began, sounding as though she were handed a script from Karine Jean-Pierre. Bruce cited all the key talking points about Microsoft’s alleged plans and how it will be positioned in the same spot that a largely failed Foxconn deal hawked by then-President Trump in 2018 fell through. “But the project fizzled. The field where Trump once broke ground with golden shovels now empty,” Bruce bragged, adding her President is “eager to sell his economic accomplishments to skeptical voters.” “Now, work on this new Microsoft project, we’re told, is already underway. President Biden certainly well aware of that new poll out today showing him leading Donald Trump in Wisconsin 50 percent to 44 percent in a two-way race,” she concluded. NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt also parroted the trip as Biden “work[ing] to sell voters on his economic achievements and the strength of the U.S. economy”, but fretted “he is still facing plenty of skepticism.” NBC White House correspondent Peter Alexander started off much like Bruce with the fluff:  President Biden tonight in Wisconsin, his fourth visit to the crucial battleground this year, announcing the creation of a multibillion dollar A.I. datacenter. Microsoft promising to bring thousands of jobs. (....) The President also trying to cast a contrast here at the same site where then-President Trump announced a $10 billion electronics factory, but that massive project never materialized. After a softball soundbite from a union worker who attended the event, Alexander put up the idea of skepticism by admitting “Biden has a lot of convincing to do” with “[a] poll this week shows Americans trust Mr. Trump over the President on the economy and inflation by double digits while two-thirds of Americans say they’re living paycheck to paycheck.” He also spoke to an ice cream shop owner who expressed frustration that “everything costs more” and “four years ago,” she “could just go to work — right — come home, not really have to worry about so much.” Thursday’s CBS Mornings gave CBS its puff ball piece. Fill-in co-host Natalie Morales played the opening stenographer: “President Biden is highlighting his record on the economy as he tries to deflect criticism over high inflation, and he underlined that message to voters in a campaign trip to the battleground state of Wisconsin where he praised a multibillion dollar project by Microsoft.” Chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes whined the economy’s been “a stubborn challenge” and seemed perturbed voters would say they wanted a return to the Trump economy when, in 2020, they said it was poor. Gee, wonder what happened that year (click “expand”): CORDES: You know, 80 percent of voters tell us in polls that the economy is a major factor for them in this election. It is the biggest issue and, when it comes to the economy, many voters say they’re nostalgic for the past, so President Biden is getting more aggressive about contrasting his record with former President Donald Trump’s. PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: On my watch, we make promises, and we keep promises. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] CORDES: President Biden paid a visit to this site in Racine, Wisconsin, Wednesday, not only because it’s the future home of a $3 billion Microsoft data center, but also because it’s where his predecessor wielded a golden shovel seven years ago to tout a project that ended up falling flat. DONALD TRUMP [in June 2018]: Really something, thank you, fellas. CORDES: Back then, the Taiwanese electronics giant Foxconn was promising a plant with 13,000 jobs, but later, Foxconn scaled that number back by 90 percent. BIDEN: Foxconn turned out to be just that, a con. [LAUGHTER] Go figure. CORDES: Biden is trying to tackle a stubborn challenge. In the battleground state of Wisconsin, 62 percent of voters think the economy was better under Trump even though only 36 percent of Wisconsin voters actually rated the economy as good when Trump was President in 2020. BIDEN [on CNN]: We have the strongest economy in the world. CORDES: In his interview with CNN yesterday, Biden touted the nearly 15 million jobs created since he took office as the nation bounced back from the pandemic. BIDEN [on CNN]: He’s never succeeded in creating jobs, and I’ve never failed. NBC’s Today had a partial segment on Biden’s roadtrip with senior White House correspondent Gabe Gutierrez conceding “[r]ecent polls show Americans trust Mr. Trump over Biden on the economy”, but noted the President jabbed the American people on CNN by saying “they have the money to spend.” To see the relevant transcripts from Mary 8, click here (for ABC) and here (for NBC). For transcripts from May 9, click here (for CBS) and here (for NBC).

Brain Worm Aficionados: The View Spouts Off on RFK Jr.'s Diagnosis

Masters of the subject, the liberal ladies of ABC’s The View kicked off their Thursday show by sounding off on independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his past diagnosis of having a dead worm in his brain. The irony that they, of all people, were going to mock someone else for having a parasite in their brain was completely lost on the cast. Following a soundbite of Kennedy explaining that he got the parasite while in India and that he had made a full recovery, moderator Whoopi Goldberg scoffed at his confidence. “Really? But he insists he's still up for the gig, and even tweeted – and I don't know why – that he could eat five more worms and still beat you-know-who and Biden in a debate,” she said. Co-host and “comedian” Joy Behar suggested – without evidence – that the brain worm was “the reason for his irrational behavior,” but wanted to know: “what is Trump's excuse?” “Does he also have a worm in his brain?” she quipped. “We know he suffers from narcolepsy. He's always falling asleep.” Staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) was worried about Kennedy’s “cognitive function.” Pretend-independent Sara Haines reminded Hostin that Kennedy “did not have this treated;” and despite it being Kennedy’s body and his choice, Hostin bloviated that she was “uncomfortable with the worm being there.”     Faux-conservative co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin and Behar played off of each other to suggest brain problems were what Kennedy and Trump supporters wanted: FARAH GRIFFIN: It's crazy but before you roast RFK too hard it's now showing that he may actually take more votes from Donald Trump than Joe Biden. BEHAR: Well sure, because they both have weird brains. So it makes sense. It makes sense. Kennedy might have a dead worm in his brain, but how does The View cast explain the things that come out of their mouths? In 2022, Goldberg claimed the Holocaust “isn’t about race.” She described the Holocaust as “white people doing it to white people. So, this is y'all go fight amongst yourselves.” Back in February, Behar claimed NATO was the military alliance that defeated Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. “Because I know history,” she ironically proclaimed in her rant. “And Putin will not stop at Ukraine if they don't -- if we don't help them. And Trump is saying he'll pull out of NATO. These are allies. We were all in this together in World War II, and now he’s going to pull out of this?! Outrageous!” Just last month, Hostin asserted that “climate change” was to blame for the solar eclipse and earthquakes. And in March, Haines declared: “Everyone belongs at a drag show!” As for The View’s fake Republicans, Farah Griffin cried that “sexism” was to blame for then GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley’s lack of endorsements. And while co-host Ana Navarro wasn’t on set to rip Kennedy, she’s denied the existence of his candidacy in the past and defends allegedly corrupt Democratic Senator Bob Menendez (NJ). The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 9, 2024 11:02:35 a.m. Eastern (…) ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.: Parasites are very common in India where I had done a lot of environmental work, and it comes from eating undercooked pork. [Transition] PODCAST HOST: So, you've made a full recovery. Is that fair to say? KENNEDY: Yeah. [Cuts back to live] WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Really? [Laughter] But he insists he's still up for the gig, and even tweeted – and I don't know why – that he could eat five more worms and still beat you-know-who and Biden in a debate. JOY BEHAR: Well, Whoopi. Now we know the reason for his irrational behavior, but what is Trump's excuse? [Laughter] Does he also have a worm in his brain? We know he suffers from narcolepsy. He's always falling asleep. GOLDBERG: It's crazy. He had a worm that died in his brain and I guess atrophied and is now part of his brain matter. SUNNY HOSTIN: It’s part of his brain! BEHAR: To make fun of the other two candidates, Biden and Trump, he's not exactly Arnold Schwarzenegger and now we know he has these ailments. He had other stuff years ago. (…) 11:04:25 a.m. Eastern HOSTIN: That worm doesn’t die – well, it dies in your brain and then calcified and it stays there forever. GOLDBERG: Didn't I say that just a minute ago? HOSTIN: I thought – [Crosstalk] HOSTIN: To hear Sanjay say it, for me, was sort of like – that worm is there, and I don't know how your cognitive function is still -- SARA HAINES: He did not have this treated, by the way. He did not have this treated. HOSTIN: No. HAINES: So, his is still in there like you're saying and it’s like a tumor. HOSTIN: Although, Sanjay sais sometimes you don’t have to – Now, I'm like quoting Sanjay. But Sanjay said you don't have to get it treated but he has treated it. But that worm is still there. I'm uncomfortable with the worm being there. (…) 11:05:11 a.m. Eastern ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: It's crazy but before you roast RFK too hard it's now showing that he may actually take more votes from Donald Trump than Joe Biden. BEHAR: Well sure, because they both have weird brains. So it makes sense. It makes sense. (…)

Russia Blocks Video Platform for Refusing Censorship

Russia reportedly blocked a video platform for taking a strong stand on free speech. Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski announced on May 7 that the Russian government had blocked his video-hosting platform after refusing to comply with censorship demands. The report comes as Big Tech companies and governments around the world step up their efforts to suppress free speech, even here in America. In a post to X (formerly Twitter), Pavlovski explained, “Russia has officially blocked Rumble because we refused to comply with their censorship demands. Ironically, YouTube is still operating in Russia, and everyone needs to ask what Russian demands Google and YouTube are complying with?” MRC Free Speech America just highlightedGoogle-owned YouTube as among the worst Big Tech censors of April for targeting Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Pavlovski testified before Congress this week, listing multiple countries where his platform faces legal challenges and government pressure to censor certain content. These countries include Brazil, France, New Zealand and Australia, according to Fox News coverage of Pavlovski’s prepared testimony for the House Subcommittee on Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organizations. “Freedom of speech and freedom of expression are the cornerstones of a democratic society,” the CEO said, adding that he finds it “extremely troubling” that “these fundamental rights are being threatened” by the American government too. The pro-free speech tech company also emphasized free speech when it released Rumble Cloud in March. At the time, Pavlovski explained that the cancellation of alternative social media Parler by Amazon Web Services drove Rumble’s decision to start Rumble Cloud. The goal is to shield businesses from Big Tech censorship. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency and an equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

MRC's Tim Graham on Fox Biz: NPR's CEO Should Be Afraid of Us and Our Evidence

After his boat-rocking testimony before a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on the leftist tilt of National Public Radio on Wednesday, NewsBusters Executive Editor Tim Graham appeared on The Bottom Line with Dagen & Duffy on Fox Business. Host Sean Duffy said it was unfair to make taxpayers fund a "radical liberal machine.". NPR CEO Katharine Maher declined an invitation to the hearing, and Graham said "Maybe she didn't want to show up because we had all of the examples today.... NPR likes books like In Defense of Looting. NPR likes the movie How to Blow Up a Pipeline and then it's everything they have to say about the Republicans, being 'hard right' Republicans who want to drive the country off a cliff. I don't know how you can defend all that. We had Democrats today trying to claim what NPR does is objective, you just don't like objective reporting, which is comedy. You can't provide a laugh track when they say that, because it impolite. But you sure wanted to."   Co-host Dagen McDowell suggested the Democrats don't listen to NPR so they can be "blissfully ignorant" when they call it unbiased, so they "can stay that without laughing." She called NPR a "sewage lagoon." They discussed how NPR claims they only receive one percent of the budget from the federal government, but in reality, the government funds the local affiliates, who send money back to Washington in "programming fees." So a defunding would be dramatic for them.  Tim said "What they really need to do is just take that threat, and say we getter go back to what we are supposed to be doing, which is allowing both sides to speak, let both parties speak. That is not what they are doing, they have softballs for Democrats and hardball for Republicans -- when they get a chance [to be interviewed]." See highlights from Tim's hearing here. 

With No Evidence, Reid Claims Trump Bribed Judge In Classified Docs Case With SCOTUS Seat

MSNBC’s Joy Reid took a break from covering former President Donald Trump’s hush money case in New York on the Wednesday installment of The ReidOut’s to discuss his classified documents case and the news that Judge Aileen Cannon has postponed the trial indefinitely while she considers all the pre-trial motions and other issues related to the case. Reid responded by putting on her tinfoil hat and declaring, with no evidence whatsoever, that Trump has implicitly bribed her with a future Supreme Court appointment. Reid asked legal analyst Joyce Vance, “If you're Jack Smith, do you try to somehow appeal it to the 11th Circuit and get her booted?” Vance gave a long, rambling answer that ultimately suggested such a move would, from her perspective, unfortunately not go anywhere, “You know, the best hook that Jack Smith has for an appeal would be if Judge Cannon were to make rulings that he didn't like when it comes to whether Donald Trump can use classified information at trial. He's got a right to appeal those. Of course, we're in that pre-trial phase where the government needs a special hook to take an interlocutory appeal. Most sorts of issues have to wait until afterwards. So, I think what Jack Smith has been waiting for has been these rulings on the classified information.”     Cracking herself up, Reid interrupted, “She's never going to rule.” Vance continued, “And that is one of the issues -- right. She suspended that this week. Those responses were due this week. Out of the blue, she gave Trump a continuance and so, for Jack Smith, I suspect he's now regretting the fact that he did not try to recuse her early on when he could have.” With absolutely zero evidence, Reid echoed an idea she floated on April 10 by following up with Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, “As the great Lawrence O’Donnell says, Eugene, the bribe is implied. She wants to be on the Supreme Court. She thinks she can get on if Donald Trump wins. She's going to kill this case. Catch and kill as one might say.” Also cracking himself up, Robinson began, “I know, but Aileen Cannon on the Supreme Court, come on. I mean, you know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know—” Reid insisted, “It's Trump. She's done him favors.” Robinson tried to start again, “Look, I know, I shouldn't put anything beyond the realm of possibility.” Interrupting again to take a cheap shot at another woman Trump appointed, Reid declared that “she has about as much experience as Amy Coney Barrett.” Robinson then lamented, “Well, yeah, but Amy Coney Barrett's a lot smarter than Aileen Cannon. I mean, look, this is an illustration of when a case goes before a federal judge, federal judges have enormous power. The federal judge is in charge of that case and so, this story that this case will not come to trial before the election, this story was written the day the case was assigned to Judge Aileen Cannon and it was” In New York, whenever the judge rules against Trump it is hailed as proof that nobody, not even a former president, is above the law or rules that govern court cases, but when something doesn’t go Jack Smith’s way, it is treated as a great scandal. Here is a transcript for the May 8 show: MSNBC The ReidOut 5/8/2024 7:23 PM ET JOY REID: If you're Jack Smith, do you try to somehow appeal it to the 11th Circuit and get her booted? JOYCE VANCE: You know, the best hook that Jack Smith has for an appeal would be if Judge Cannon were to make rulings that he didn't like when it comes to whether Donald Trump can use classified information at trial. He's got a right to appeal those. Of course, we're in that pre-trial phase where the government needs a special hook to take an interlocutory appeal. Most sorts of issues have to wait until afterwards. So, I think what Jack Smith has been waiting for has been these rulings on the classified information. REID: She's never going to rule. VANCE: And that is one of the issues -- right. She suspended that this week. Those responses were due this week. Out of the blue, she gave Trump a continuance and so, for Jack Smith, I suspect he's now regretting the fact that he did not try to recuse her early on when he could have. REID: As the great Lawrence O’Donnell says, Eugene, the bribe is implied. She wants to be on the Supreme Court. She thinks she can get on if Donald Trump wins. She's going to kill this case. Catch and kill as one might say. EUGENE ROBINSON: I know, but Aileen Cannon on the Supreme Court, come on. I mean, you know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know— REID: It's Trump. She's done him favors. ROBINSON: Look, I know, I shouldn't put anything beyond the realm of possibility. REID: She has about as much experience as Amy Coney Barrett. ROBINSON: Well, yeah, but Amy Coney Barrett's a lot smarter than Aileen Cannon. I mean, look, this is an illustration of when a case goes before a federal judge, federal judges have enormous power. The federal judge is in charge of that case and so, this story that this case will not come to trial before the election, this story was written the day— REID: Absolutely. ROBINSON: -- the case was assigned to Judge Aileen Cannon and it was.

Seven Blatant Biden LIES ABC, CBS, NBC Refuse to Report

It’s not just the gaffes that keep coming, it’s also the lies! President Joe Biden can barely open his mouth without a blatant falsehood falling out.  He dropped multiple fibs in just one Howard Stern Show appearance late last month. Did ABC, CBS or NBC fact check any of them? Of course not! From falsely claiming he was arrested during a desegregation protest to pretending he used to drive an “18-wheeler,” the following are seven Biden lies that ABC, CBS and NBC have refused to cover.  Here’s a brief montage via NewsBusters Media Editor Bill D’ Agostino:     1. Biden (Without Proof) Says He Was Arrested Standing on a Porch with Black Family During Desegregation Protest   On April 26, CNN.com reported:  President Joe Biden went on “The Howard Stern Show” on Friday and repeated his familiar story about the time he supposedly “got arrested” trying to defend the civil rights of Black Americans. As in the past, Biden told the story on Friday while recounting what his mother supposedly said while urging him to accept Barack Obama’s 2008 offer to be his running mate. His mom, he said, did not want him to turn down a man who was vying to become the first Black president. Biden told Stern: “She said, ‘Joey, let me — remember’ — true story, she said — ‘Remember when they were desegregating Lynnfield, the neighborhood…suburbia — and I told you — and there was a Black family moving in and there was — people were down there protesting; I told you not to go down there and you went down, remember that? And you got arrested standing on the porch with a Black family? And they brought you back, the police?’ And I said, ‘Yeah, Mom, I remember that.’” Facts First: There is no evidence Biden ever got arrested during a civil rights protest, as The Washington Post and PolitiFact found when they looked into this claim in 2022 — and Biden has at least twice told the story of his supposed presence at this particular Delaware protest without mentioning any arrest, instead claiming that the police merely took him home that day. ABC, CBS, NBC evening and morning show coverage: 0 seconds.   2. Biden (Falsely) Boasts That He Made a Most Eligible Bachelors List       On May 2, the Washington Post reported:  Three times in recent weeks — at an April 16 campaign event in Scranton, Pa., to supporters in New York on April 25, and to Stern — Biden said he was on a list of 10 most eligible bachelors after his first wife was killed in a car accident in 1972. Biden has made this claim at least twice before, saying last year that he was on the list for five years. He married Jill Biden in 1977. No such list can be found. The closest thing is a reference in a 1974 Washingtonian profile that quoted a press aide as saying that reporters kept seeking an interview with Biden after the tragedy: “A few weeks after Neilia’s death we got a call from Sally Quinn of The Post. She wanted to do a story on the Senator as Washington’s most eligible bachelor. Naturally we said no but it wasn’t easy because she kept calling all the time.” ABC, CBS, NBC evening and morning show coverage: 0 seconds.   3. Biden Claims He Was Sent “Salacious” Pictures From Women, Forwarded to Secret Service  On April 24 the New York Post reported:  President Biden recalled Friday that “lovely women” mailed him “very salacious pictures” when he was a young and unmarried senator — and that he handed the images over to the Secret Service — in a bizarre interview with Howard Stern. “A lot of lovely women — but women would send very salacious pictures and I’d just give them to the Secret Service. I thought somebody would think I was…,” the 81-year-old president said before trailing off. It’s unclear why the Secret Service, whose role is to protect the president and investigate counterfeiting and fraud, would have any interest in amateur soft-core porn sent to Biden while he was an unmarried senator from 1973 to 1977. ABC, CBS, NBC evening and morning show coverage: 0 seconds.   4. Biden Tells Wisconsin Crowd One of His Catholic School Teachers Was a Green Bay Packer – FALSE!      On May 8, the New York Post reported: President Biden blurted Wednesday that one of his childhood Catholic school teachers was drafted by the Green Bay Packers — an assertion disproven by a simple check of publicly available NFL records. The 81-year-old president shared the false claim as he boasted of his connection to Wisconsin sports fans during a trip to the swing state. “My theology professor at the Catholic school I went to was a guy named Reilly — last name — and he had been drafted by the Green Bay Packers,” Biden said in Racine, south of Milwaukee. “And he decided to become a priest before that, so he didn’t go. But every single solitary Monday that Green Bay won, we got the last period of the day off.” According to Pro Football Reference, the Packers have only drafted a single person with the last name “Riley,” “Reily,” or “Reilly” since the NFL began its annual college draft in 1936. University of Colorado quarterback Maurice “Tex” Reilly was selected with the 202nd overall pick in the 22nd round of the 1947 draft — after his education was interrupted by World Word II, during which he commanded bombing missions over the Pacific, according to a 2002 article in the Denver Post. Instead of playing professional football, the Bronze Star recipient rejoined the US Air Force in October 1947 as a civil engineer and was deployed to Japan and later Spain. Reilly also served as an instructor at bases in Ohio and Alabama before retiring as a major general, according to a military biography. ABC, CBS, NBC evening and morning show coverage: 0 seconds.   5. Biden’s (Inaccurate) Memory of Him Being a Football Legend On May 2, the Washington Post reported:  Biden was a football player in high school, but he exaggerated his record when he appeared on [Howard] Stern’s show. “By the way, I don’t think a lot of people know that you were a star receiver in high school. Star receiver! You were like the first-string guy. You were the guy who caught the ball,” Stern said. “Runner-up in state scoring, you know,” Biden replied. “What the heck? But I was a runt.” Biden made the same boast during a campaign event in Michigan in February and twice on the same day in December. But Biden is exaggerating. The Wilmington News-Journal reported that in 1960, Biden placed fourth — with four touchdowns and 24 points — in a five-school conference for private schools in Delaware. His high school, Archmere Academy, did place first in the league and was the state’s only undefeated team, while Biden was the team’s leading scorer. A season preview in the News-Journal described Biden, who was nicknamed “Dash,” as “one of the best pass receivers on the team.” When nonconference games are included, Biden earned a total of 60 points. But that was good enough only for fifth place in the state, according to a season wrap-up in the News-Journal. The state’s top scorer earned 108 points. ABC, CBS, NBC evening and morning show coverage: 0 seconds.   6. Biden Boasts About All the Lives He Saved as a Lifeguard  On April 26, The Daily Wire reported:  Speaking on Friday on “The Howard Stern Show,” Biden told the host he had “saved” a “half dozen” kids from drowning back when he was a lifeguard. When Stern followed up and asked him if he had saved any other lives and if he was still lifeguarding when he was “in law school,” the president said, “Yeah, people just need help sometime.” These are lies, as noted on X by one journalist, who included clips of Biden’s comments from the show. ABC, CBS, NBC evening and morning show coverage: 0 seconds.   7. Biden Recalls the Time He “Used to Drive an 18-Wheeler,” It Never Happened On April 24, CNN.com reported:  President Joe Biden has revived a debunked tale about his past – his fictional claim that he used to drive an 18-wheeler truck. Biden has repeatedly embellished or invented biographical tidbits. In 2021, he claimed during a tour of a Mack Trucks facility: “I used to drive an 18-wheeler, man,” then added, “I got to.” At a separate 2021 event, he told college students studying truck technology, “I used to drive a tractor-trailer,” adding, “I only did it for part of a summer, but I got my license anyway.” Biden’s claims were fact-checked at the time as false. But on Tuesday, during a campaign event in Florida, Biden said it again. A supporter told him, “The only reason I have a pension is because of you.” (The supporter appeared to be referring to the Biden administration’s $36 billion in aid to prevent steep pension cuts for more than 350,000 union workers and retirees, including truck drivers.) Biden responded: “Well, we did get that done. Anyway. Besides, I used to drive an 18-wheeler.” Facts First: Biden’s claim remains untrue. There is no evidence he ever drove an 18-wheeler. When CNN inquired about the claim in 2021, the White House noted that Biden once had a part-time job driving a school bus (which is not an 18-wheeler or a tractor-trailer) and that, as a US senator in 1973, he spent a night riding in a cargo truck (not driving it). ABC, CBS, NBC evening and morning show coverage: 0 seconds.

Lawsuit Where? Feds Reboot Big Tech Censorship Collusion, Report Says

Two major government agencies have reportedly rebooted their collusion with social media companies despite looming Supreme Court scrutiny for potential First Amendment violations. Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-VA) broke the news during a press briefing at the tech-tied RSA Conference, according to tech outlet Nextgov/FCW. At the event, the senator reportedly conceded that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) are back to their old work of coordinating censorship of free speech ahead of the 2024 presidential election. An FBI representative admitted the resumed Big Tech communications to The Federalist’s Shawn Fleetwood. CISA would not confirm the report, however.  “The FBI remains committed to combating foreign malign influence operations, including in connection with our elections,” the bureau’s representative claimed, as reported by The Federalist. “That effort includes sharing specific foreign threat information with state and local election officials and private sector companies when appropriate and rigorously consistent with the law.” Further expanding on its response, the representative added, “In coordination with the Department of Justice, the FBI recently implemented procedures to facilitate sharing information about foreign malign influence with social media companies in a way that reinforces that private companies are free to decide on their own whether and how to take action on that information.” The Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments for Murthy v. Missouri, a major free speech case that exposed an alleged massive network of government and Big Tech censorship collusion. Legal challenges reportedly limited government activity, but that is no longer the case, according to Warner and Nextgov/FCW. “There seemed to be a lot of sympathy that the government ought to have at least voluntary communications with [the companies],” Warner said, according to the tech outlet. The Democrat senator then urged the Biden administration to “call out” other nations for potential election meddling, asserting Russian interference in the 2016 election as a precedent. Yet Warner did not apparently address the issue of social media interfering in U.S. elections through censorship under U.S. government pressure. Warner announced an upcoming Senate hearing on election security, according to Nextgov/FCW. “If the bad guy started to launch AI-driven tools that would threaten election officials in key communities, that clearly falls into the foreign interference category,” Warner scare-mongered. The FBI and CISA are among the agencies accused of violating First Amendment rights. Notably, the FBI is tied to election interference, since Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted that his company censored the Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 election after FBI pressure. According to a poll conducted by the Media Research Center in November 2020, 17 percent of individuals who voted for then-presidential candidate Joe Biden admitted that they would not have done so if they had been aware of the scandals involving both Biden and his son, Hunter. These scandals were censored by Big Tech and the legacy media. Murthy v. Missouri is a historic case challenging alleged government collusion with major tech companies to censor Americans’ free speech. The complaint filed for the suit cited MRC Free Speech America’s unique and exclusive CensorTrack.org research. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Morning Joe Mocks Trump In Bomber Jacket: Biden/Obama, Hello?

Morning Joe had great fun today mocking Donald Trump over hosting a dinner at Mar-a-Lago last night for purchasers of his NFT trading cards, which feature Trump in a variety of heroic images. He's George Washington on the Delaware, he's Elvis Presley in a black jumpsuit with shades. But those weren't the ones they mocked. "MSNBC Republican" Elise Jordan singled out one image for particular ridicule: "The bomber jacket. Now, that is really quite a -- what did they do? Take Tom Cruise, and then just put Trump's head on it? I mean, that is actual, just complete propaganda." It apparently didn't occur to Jordan or any of the other panelists that Trump is not the only president with an affinity for bomber jackets. The difference is that people at MSNBC actually worship the coolness of Obama. Do the images below refresh your memory, Elise? CBS News, 2019: "Barack Obama goes viral in custom '44' jacket at Duke-UNC game." GQ, 2019:  "Barack Obama's Bomber Jacket: The Inside Story:The most exciting part of last night's Duke-UNC game took place off the court." Esquire, 2020: "The Story Behind Obama's (Extremely Good) Three-Point Bomber Jacket: The suddenly stylish former President has been rocking one particularly enviable pick from Lululemon." A replica Obama bomber jacket is actually on sale to the public. No word on whether Barack gets a piece of the action.  You can easily Google some embarrassing Obama-Adoration bomber jackets for sale. But apparently, that's on brand for MSNBC.  As long as we're on the subject, may we point out to Jordan that Tom Cruise was also a fictional fighter pilot? It's a mark of how popular culture is more real to some people than actual historical figures, fighter pilots like Chuck Yeager, Bob Hoover -- John McCain! -- among others.   Trump's sale of pieces of the suit he wore for his iconic mugshot in the dubious Fani Willis prosecution in Georgia was also the object of great mirth and hilarity, with Scarborough exclaiming "Oh my God! What the holy F is going on here?" And the normally even-handed Willie Geist flatly declared that the pieces of the mugshot suit for sale are "undoubtedly" not from that suit.  Evidence, Willie—or are all accusations against Trump fair game? He may not rival Obama in the movie-star worship, but even Joe Biden fans can buy the "Joe Biden Aviation Jacket" in leather. And don't miss the opportunity to get your own "Biden Harris Peace Love Equality Hope Diversity" bomber jacket on eBay. Elise Jordan should have one of those. The Biden-Harris website seems to prefer those "Dark Brandon" products with the shiny red eyes.  Kamala Harris superfans can just go to the National Archives Store for their "Madam Vice President" polo shirt and cap in pink, not to mention the cartoony "Madam Vice President" socks. Merchandise is bipartisan.  

Can’t Make This Up: WashPost Cites Debunked Study to Push DEI

Two writers for The Washington Post tried to make the case for discriminatory diversity equity and inclusion initiatives (DEI) in an article about DEI’s rebranding. However, they relied on debunked research to do it.  A May 5 article by The Post referenced a pro-DEI study by management consulting firm McKinsey & Company on the “business case for DEI” in response to the increased condemnation aimed at the infamous leftist acronym.  Strikingly, these studies, which linked greater diversity to profitability, had already been ripped to shreds long before May 5. In March 2024, UNC-Chapel Hill Professor of Accounting John R. M. Hand and Texas A&M Associate Professor of Accounting Jeremiah Green exposed these studies, noting that they could not replicate McKinsey’s work.  Green and Hand wrote that their “inability to quasi-replicate [McKinsey’s] results suggests that despite the imprimatur given to McKinsey’s studies, they should not be relied on to support the view that US publicly traded firms can expect to deliver improved financial performance if they increase the racial/ethnic diversity of their executives." The Post reporters Taylor Telford and Julian Mark not only ignored Green and Hand’s research but went ahead and cited McKinsey anyway.  “Many large companies see a correlation between a diverse workforce and financial success, and routinely tout the ‘business case’ for DEI,” they wrote. “Companies with the highest racial, ethnic and gender representation are 39 percent more likely to financially outperform, according to a 2023 study by McKinsey & Co. involving more than 1,200 firms worldwide.” Telford and Mark went on to mention that, “In his annual letter to shareholders this year, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon emphasized that DEI ‘initiatives make us a more inclusive company and lead to more innovation, smarter decisions and better financial results for us and for the economy overall.’” But where did Dimon get that idea? McKinsey—of course. JPMorgan leaned on McKinsey’s published fig leaves for discrimination. To this day, JPMorgan cites one of these McKinsey studies “Diversity Matters” on their website: “According to a study conducted by McKinsey & Company diversity creates increased client orientation and a diverse talent pool, which fosters creativity, improves collaboration and results in enhanced employee performance.” When JPMorgan Asset Management CEO George Gatch called diversity, equity and inclusion “critical to our success” in a video, McKinsey once again showed up in the footnotes.  Telford and Mark are correct that many corporate leaders embraced McKinsey’s DEI propaganda. The Daily Wire host Matt Walsh recently went after the former CEO of Intel and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban for using McKinsey as an excuse to push DEI.  Conservatives are under attack! Contact ABC News (818) 460-7477, CBS News (212) 975-3247 and NBC News (212) 664-6192 and demand they report on the dangers of leftist DEI ideology infecting corporate America.

Psaki Claims Being An Ex-Biden Official Makes Her a Better MSNBC Host

Former Biden White House Press Secretary and current MSNBC host Jen Psaki took her book tour to the Wednesday taping of CBS’s The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, where she declared that her history as a Democratic official makes her more qualified to be a host. Meanwhile, she also praised her former boss for halting weapons shipments to Israel. Colbert asked, “I watch your show, I mean, I enjoy it. I just—I would just imagine that, especially as we get closer to the election, that tension's going to be greater for you to stay objective, even if you actually believe in the objectives of the president of the United States.” Psaki downplayed the concerns because her views are well known, “That’s true, but I don't think my views of Donald Trump are a secret. I don't think yours are either, if I'm being honest.”     Wondering if there was a difference, Colbert retorted, “But, I’m not a journalist and I’m not—you know, I’m a professional clown.” The late night comedians have this bit where they want to be political influencers and view their jokes as a more entertaining and thus more effective way to make a political point than a 5,000-word essay that nobody reads, but whenever someone calls them out on it, they revert back to the clown posture. Ironically, Psaki undermined this conceit, “Yeah, I think you’re way more than that, you’re informing the public.” Getting back to her own show, she continued, “I think people who are watching my show, I hope, and this is the North Star we always talk about on our team is, do people come away with a better understanding of a person?” She also claimed, “I don't think it’s a secret, I don’t try to make it a secret. I worked for not just Joe Biden, I worked for Barack Obama, I worked on three presidential campaigns. That’s part of my story. I think I can bring a lot of insights to the public about how these things work, about how campaigns work, and also what’s actually at stake in this election.” Colbert wondered if she could be critical of Biden, but naturally he chose an issue from Biden’s left, “Is there something that you could inform the audience about that might be something that you feel like the Biden Administration is not doing correctly right now? … Much is being made of the fact young voters are turned off to President Biden, especially in light of his continued support of Netanyahu with the tragedy that’s going on in Gaza right now in response to the tragedy of October 7.” Psaki hailed recent news that Biden is halting weapons supplies to Israel, “I do think that there is some leverage we are all seeing being used. Should it have been used earlier? I think the answer is yes to that, but we are seeing them hold back on the sending of weapons. That’s actually a significant sign given that the United States and Israel has a long-standing connection on military support where the United States is a big provider of that.” After Colbert asked if that has happened before, Psaki rolled on, “Not many times before. It has happened before, but not many times before, but that is a significant step. Prime Minister Netanyahu, I would say, is someone who Joe Biden has had a tricky, challenging, difficult relationship with for some time.” Challenging? Yes, but because Netanyahu refuses to outsource Israel’s security to Biden’s Israel-hating base that he is now desperately trying to appease and because Democrats have gotten mad at Netanyahu for the war's length despite their demand he not attack Hamas in Rafah. Here is a transcript for the May 8-taped show: CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert 5/9/2024 12:05 AM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: I watch your show, I mean, I enjoy it. I just—I would just imagine that, especially as we get closer to the election, that tension's going to be greater for you to stay objective, even if you actually believe in the objectives of the president of the United States. JEN PSAKI: That’s true, but I don't think my views of Donald Trump are a secret. I don't think yours are either, if I'm being honest. COLBERT: But, I’m not a journalist and I’m not—you know, I’m a professional clown. PSAKI: Yeah, I think you’re way more than that, you’re informing the public. I think— COLBERT: Then I’m not doing my job very well. PSAKI: I think people who are watching my show, I hope, and this is the North Star we always talk about on our team is, do people come away with a better understanding of a person? Maybe it’s Joe Biden, someone running for office, maybe it’s a governor, and an issue, and/or an issue. So, is there an issue misconstrued out there that I can help explain? I don't think it’s a secret, I don’t try to make it a secret. I worked for not just Joe Biden, I worked for Barack Obama, I worked on three presidential campaigns. That’s part of my story. I think I can bring a lot of insights to the public about how these things work, about how campaigns work, and also what’s actually at stake in this election, so— COLBERT: Is there something that you could inform the audience about that might be something that you feel like the Biden Administration is not doing correctly right now? Some constructive information that they wouldn’t even mind hearing from you. For instance, how about outreach to young people right now. Much is being made of the fact young voters are turned off to President Biden, especially in light of his continued support of Netanyahu with the tragedy that’s going on in Gaza right now in response to the tragedy of October 7. PSAKI: Well, I would say, obviously I haven't been in there in two years, but I have worked in diplomacy, I worked for the former secretary of State. I do think that there is some leverage we are all seeing being used. Should it have been used earlier? I think the answer is yes to that, but we are seeing them hold back on the sending of weapons. That’s actually a significant sign given that the United States and Israel has a long-standing connection on military support where the United States is a big provider of that. COLBERT: Has the United States done that many times before? Withheld the weapons? PSAKI: Not many times before. It has happened before, but not many times before, but that is a significant step. Prime Minister Netanyahu, I would say, is someone who Joe Biden has had a tricky, challenging, difficult relationship with for some time.  People don't always see that, that it isn’t often talked about, but in terms of, to go back to your original question about what they could be doing differently, it’s very hard and difficult to explain the nature of diplomacy. It’s just very hard to talk about what’s happening behind the scenes sometimes because if you do, you’ll ruin the diplomatic talks and the conversations, but outreach and connection and listening to young people and hearing from them is certainly an important part of that. He is going to talk to Morehouse University, he is going to do the commencement address there in a couple weeks. That’s a good step. They could be doing more of that and I think that’s an important part of their outreach that they’ll have to do over the next couple months.

Election Interference: CNN Uses Audio of Private Briefing to Falsely Smear GOP’s Scott Perry

With Republicans holding a razor-thin House majority and President Biden struggling to build momentum against former President Trump, there’s no limit to how far the liberal media will go into interfere in the presidential election. Such an odious example came up on Wednesday as CNN.com eagerly published an account using audio from a private House Oversight Committee meeting to falsely paint Congressman Scott Perry (R-PA) as a racist. Typing unofficially on behalf of her liberal sources hellbent on ousting Perry, Annie Grayer bragged of “audio of Perry’s comments shared with CNN” that alleged Perry told colleagues “in a closed door briefing...on Tuesday that the Ku Klux Klan is the ‘the military wing of the Democratic party’ and that migrants coming to the US ‘have no interest in being Americans.’” Grayer further kvetched in the second graph that Perry’s “a right-wing Republican who has repeated elements of the anti-immigrant and antisemitic replacement theory before.” Nowhere in her smear job did Grayer allude to how Perry’s comments came about, what they were in response to, or that private briefings and hearings are meant to be secret with lawmakers and staff largely abiding by that in the name of this thing called trust. It took until a fourth paragraph for Grayer to even quote entire sentences from Perry, which she clearly tried to paint as inaccurate: “The KKK in modern times, a lot of young people think somehow it’s a right-wing organization when it is the military wing of the Democratic Party. Decidedly, unabashedly, racist and antisemitic,” Perry said according to the recording. The KKK is not affiliated in any way with the modern Democratic Party. Ah, splitting hairs, she is! Someone needs a history lesson like we had to provide to USA Today back in 2020. And we should also ask at this point: Will Grayer release the audio? And was what was said before Perry included? Funny how it works with the liberal media and anonymous sources. Grayer then deceptively argued Perry somehow brought up replacement theory out of the blue when one could almost certainly bet it was first invoked as a taunt by a House Democrat (click “expand”): Perry then defended replacement theory, which is the idea that white people are being slowly and intentionally replaced by minorities and immigrants. “Replacement theory is real” Perry said according to the recording shared with CNN. “They added white to it to stop everybody from talking about it.” While Perry said he is happy to accept people “that are here legally,” pointing to his ancestors who migrated to the US, he has an issue with migrants that are “un-American.” “What is happening now is we’re importing people into the country that want to be in America … but have no interest in being Americans, and that’s very different and to disparage the comments is to chill the conversation so that we can continue to bring in more people that we never met that are un-American,” Perry said, according to the recording. Earth to Annie: What part(s) of this are inaccurate? For example, since President Biden took office, there have been 7.5 million border encounters with illegal immigrants and an educated guess of another 1.7 million people who escaped detainment. That certainly doesn’t indicate attempts are made to stem the flow! Grayer also dishonestly refused to note the tail end of her quotation indicated Perry was addressing someone who had attacked him and/or those critical of illegal immigration. Who was that? Follow this link for a list of the Democrats on the committee. Take your best guess! Only at the bottom did she provide a statement from Perry excoriating “the radical Left” for “twist[ing] facts in order to silence conversation about its own crimes and Biden’s intentional failures to enforce laws and close or regulate our borders.” Grayer had no shame as she implied Perry supports mass murders and is even anti-Semitic: Replacement theory is the idea that white people are being slowly and intentionally replaced by minorities and immigrants. The xenophobic and racist rhetoric associated with the theory has found its way into the mainstream of American politics and elements of it appear to have motivated some of the most heinous recent mass murders in the US and around the world. There are specific antisemitic elements of the unfounded theory as well, that Jews specifically are organizing a flood of non-white immigrants.

Bud Light Still an Epic Failure Since Transgender Mulvaney Scandal

Just over one year following Bud Light’s terrible decision to hire transgender influencer and professional toddler Dylan Mulvaney to promote its once pro-America beer, the company's sales are plummeting. Again. According to the first-quarter earnings report released Wednesday, Anheuser-Busch, Bud Light’s parent company, has decreased 9.1% in revenue in the U.S. The news comes more than a year after Mulvaney dressed up as a wannabe Katherine Hepburn with black gloves, pearls and red lipstick in an attempt to help Bud Light sell more beer. Mulvaney was also gifted a custom Bud Light can with his face printed on it, which he drank in a bathtub before posting a video of it to social media last April. Given that the beer is usually consumed by pro-America, country-lovin’ men, the fake girl’s attempt backfired. Bud Light ended up being canned by millions of drinkers across the country and ended up costing the company more than $1 billion in sales. In February, Bud Light attempted to make a comeback with its Super Bowl ads focusing on patriotism and humor - but, as Fox Business pointed out, the company is “still suffering.” Aside from the 9.1% decrease in revenue in America, “sales to retailers in the U.S. were down 13.7%” in the first-quarter earnings," Fox News reported. Essentially, distributors don’t want to buy Bud Light to sell because they know that consumers won't buy it! As former Anheuser-Busch President of Operations Anson Frericks said, “They haven’t done a good job climbing out of this ditch at all,” when talking about how much the wokeness has failed Bud Light. “I think the biggest problem is that they’ve lost trust with their customers,” he added, “and they still haven’t gone out and personally asked for their customers to come back to them and until they restore that trust, I don’t think that this brand is gonna turn around and get back to growth anytime soon.” Honestly, I agree with Frericks. Brands that get" woke" end up going broke, and true comeback stories are few and far between. Related: Trans TikToker Dylan Mulvaney Becomes Bud Light's Newest Spokesperson - No, Really Look at Disney, which started implementing more and more woke crap into its parks, branding and programing and now, is suffering immensely with lack of customer interest and buy-in. Doritos Spain hired a transgender freak to promote its chips and received a ton of pushback. Sports Illustrated recently adopted a more "body-positive" approach to its issue covers and ended up cutting tons of its employees due to the lack of revenue from the failed attempt at appealing to audiences. Even fashion brands that have attempted to gender-neutralize their lines have been canceled. The truth is, people don’t want this woke crap ruining our perfectly good brands, and Bud Light is learning that the hard way. Follow us on Twitter/X: Woke of The Weak: The Left Continues To Push Their Fetishes On Normal People We used to have places to put these people. pic.twitter.com/Q9I8qK0qXD — MRCTV (@mrctv) May 7, 2024

PBS NewsHour: Trump's Wild Gestapo Remarks vs. Biden Faces 'Jaded Electorate'

The “Politics Monday” segment of the PBS NewsHour, as hosted by substitute anchor William Brangham, was spicier than usual. Brangham found “controversy” on Trump’s side (no surprise there) but President Biden eluded blame for his poor polling -- blame a “jaded electorate” instead. Brangham: It's already shaping up to be a busy political week, as Republicans navigate the fallout from controversial remarks made by former President Trump at a fund-raiser over the weekend. Meanwhile, six months out from the election, President Biden continues to deal with a jaded electorate, as he wrestles with the political ramifications of the war in Gaza. He was joined by the usual Monday political duo, Amy Walter of The Cook Political Report and NPR White House correspondent Tamara Keith. Brangham huffed: Six months out, as I just mentioned, from this election, this weekend, Donald Trump was at this campaign event and he made these comments where he basically equated the Biden White House with the Nazis, saying that they are running a -- quote – ‘Gestapo administration.’ Now, this is, obviously, Amy, the -- just the latest in a long history of Trump saying things like this. But one of his fellow Republicans, one who's vying to be the number two on the Trump ticket, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, came out and defended Donald Trump. Here's what he had to say. Gov. Doug Burgum (R-ND): The majority of Americans feel like the trial that he's in right now is politically motivated. And if it was anybody else, this trial wouldn't even be happening. So I understand that he feels like that he's being unfairly treated. In sarcasm mode, Brangham interjected his own thought. "So feeling like a trial is unfair is equivalent to being part of the Nazi secret police."  As if Democrats haven’t been calling Trump or all the other Republican presidential candidates some form of “fascist” for time immemorial. Walter lamented how Republicans must suck up to Trump to be his vice presidential candidate, as if that’s a novelty. Kamala Harris didn't have to demonstrate loyalty? Walter: What we are seeing as well, as you pointed out, Doug Burgum reportedly on the short list to be a vice-presidential candidate, is that loyalty to Donald Trump is always important. I think, in a Trump 2.0, it will be very, very top priority in picking who is around him. And so, when we talk about, what are the constraints or what are the restraints or the guardrails around a Trump presidency for things that he says or does, who's going to maybe rein him in, stand up and say no in the way that the vice president, Mike Pence, did, these folks are not saying that they would like to… Brangham: They're saying: I won't do that. Don't worry, boss. NPR’s Keith explained a sort of running mate beauty contest in Palm Beach. She mocked it as comparable to the soapy reality show The Bachelor: Tamara Keith: They brought all of these candidates, potential vice-presidential picks in, and then many of them went out on the Sunday shows. And what they had to do was show their loyalty to former President Trump. As Amy said, he does not want another vice president who will be loyal to him only up until when it matters and when the Constitution is on the line. He wants someone who will go out there and prove and tie themselves in knots, like Senator Tim Scott did on Meet the Press, just tie themselves in knots to stick with the reality that is Trump's reality, even if it is not true. Then Brangham ran the infamous clip from NBC’s Meet the Press of host Kristen Welker hassling Republican Sen. Tim Scott, a possible Trump VP choice, asking him SIX times if he would accept as valid the results of a presidential election that hasn’t taken place yet. No panelist admitted their fellow journalist's questioning was hackishly excessive, though both Keith and Walter agreed it went on “for a long time,” and the PBS clip skipped the part when Scott finally said in frustration, “This is why so many Americans believe that NBC is an extension of the Democrat Party.” The panel then turned to Biden’s poor polling. This snotty segment was brought to you in part by BDO. A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS NewsHour 5/6/24 7:45:57 p.m. (ET) William Brangham: It's already shaping up to be a busy political week, as Republicans navigate the fallout from controversial remarks made by former President Trump at a fund-raiser over the weekend. Meanwhile, six months out from the election, President Biden continues to deal with a jaded electorate, as he wrestles with the political ramifications of the war in Gaza. Following this all closely is our Politics Monday duo, Amy Walter of The Cook Political Report With Amy Walter and Tamara Keith of NPR. So nice to see you both. Happy Monday. Six months out, as I just mentioned, from this election, this weekend, Donald Trump was at this campaign event and he made these comments where he basically equated the Biden White House with the Nazis, saying that they are running a — quote — "Gestapo administration." Now, this is, obviously, Amy, the — just the latest in a long history of Trump… Amy Walter, The Cook Political Report: Yes. Yes. William Brangham: … saying things like this. But one of his fellow Republicans, one who's vying to be the number two on the Trump ticket, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, came out and defended Donald Trump. Here's what he had to say. Gov. Doug Burgum (R-ND): A majority of Americans feel like the trial that he's in right now is politically motivated. And if it was anybody else, this trial wouldn't even be happening. So I understand that he feels like that he's being unfairly treated. William Brangham: So feeling like a trial is unfair is equivalent to being part of the Nazi secret police. Amy Walter: Well, first, let's talk about the majority of Americans, as the governor said right there, feel that this is unfair, which, according to the most recent poll, the NPR/PBS/Marist poll, that is not true; 54 percent in that poll thought that it's fair. Now, 46 percent think it's unfair. So there are a lot of people… William Brangham: Right. Amy Walter: … who think the way the North Dakota governor does. But if we think that this candidate Trump or a Trump 2.0 president is going to look any different than the candidate we have known since 2016 or the person who was president for four years, you're going to be sorely mistaken. This is the reality of — this is just who Donald Trump is, how he's going to operate, how he is going to speak and behave. What we are seeing as well, as you pointed out, Doug Burgum reportedly on the short list to be a vice presidential candidate, is that loyalty to Donald Trump is always important. I think, in a Trump 2.0, it will be very, very top priority in picking who is around him. And so, when we talk about, well, what are the constraints or what are the restraints or the guardrails around a Trump presidency for things that he says or does, who's going to maybe rein him in, stand up and say no in the way that the vice president, Mike Pence, did, these folks are not saying that they would like to… William Brangham: They're saying: I won't do that. Don't worry, boss. Amy Walter: I'm pretty good with — I'm pretty good with the way that Trump is going to operate. Tamara Keith, National Public Radio: Yes. Right now, we are in the audition phase of the vice presidential pick contest… Amy Walter: Yes. Tamara Keith: … or, like, an episode of "The Bachelor" or something. And he — they had this event in Palm Beach. They brought all of these candidates, potential vice presidential picks in, and then many of them went out on the Sunday shows. And what they had to do was show their loyalty to former President Trump. He — as Amy said, he does not want another vice president who will be loyal to him only up until when it matters and when the Constitution is on the line. William Brangham: Right. Tamara Keith: He wants someone who will go out there and prove and tie themselves in knots, like Senator Tim Scott did on "Meet the Press," just tie themselves in knots to stick with the reality that is Trump's reality, even if it is not true. William Brangham: Let's take a look at what Tim Scott had to say, because he was asked about, will you accept the election results, regardless of who wins? Here's what he had to say. Kristen Welker, Moderator, "Meet the Press": Well, Senator, will you commit to accepting the election results of 2024, bottom line? Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC): At the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump. And I'm excited to get back to low inflation, low unemployment, and… (Crosstalk) Kristen Welker: Wait, wait. Senator, yes or no, yes or no, will you accept the election results of 2024, no matter who wins? Sen. Tim Scott: That is my statement. William Brangham: I mean, Kristen Welker went back and forth about this multiple times. Tamara Keith: For a long time. Amy Walter: Yes, for a long time. Tamara Keith: And this is relevant because former President Trump is still denying the results of the last election. He is going to Wisconsin and Michigan and saying, oh, no, I actually won here, when he didn't. So, it's entirely relevant whether you will accept the results of the 2024 election. He has also said in that "TIME" magazine interview that — it came out last week — that he doesn't think that there will be violence or any issues, as long as the election is fair. But, at the same time, he is saying that the last election, which was fair, wasn't. William Brangham: Fair meaning, "I won." Tamara Keith: Generally speaking, yes. (Crosstalk) Amy Walter: Yes. William Brangham: Amy, meanwhile, Biden has got polling that again showing not great news for his campaign. We want to put up this graphic here. A majority of the U.S. adults, 54 percent, disapprove of Biden's performance. That is a 3 percent jump since March. Now, that's within the margin of error. Amy Walter: Yes. William Brangham: But it is his worst rating since 2019. I mean, how panicked should that campaign be? Amy Walter: Well, he is deeply unpopular, but he's not that much more unpopular than Donald Trump is. And the poll that you're citing are — the Marist poll. So, Donald Trump's overall approval rating is 42 percent, the president being at 40 percent. Where we sit right now is really fascinating. It feels like we have been — this campaign has been going on for about 100 years, because it basically has. (Laughter) Amy Walter: We're rerunning 2020. William Brangham: You both look great for 100-year-old people. (Laughter) Amy Walter: Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate that. But the focus right now is on Joe Biden. He's the president now. Obviously, four years ago, it was Donald Trump. If the question is, should we go — which president do you think did a better job in his first term, right now, Trump is winning that argument. And you see in poll after poll when they ask questions about what do you think — who you did a better job on the economy, whose policies do you think have helped you the most, Biden or Trump, Trump is beating Biden on those matters. But if you talk about a campaign, which is about the future, that's the conversation that we haven't really gotten into yet. And that's why you saw even the Tim Scott interview. You hear the surrogates, as well as Donald Trump, talk a lot about, remember back in the days, let's bring us back to those days of four years ago… William Brangham: Right, booming economy. Amy Walter: … when the economy was great and inflation was low. So, remember, remember how great those times were. It's up to the Biden campaign to make the case that — not so much to fight about whether those times were great, but to talk about the next four years and what an administration of Biden's would look like and his policies and compare them to Donald Trump's. Tamara Keith: Which is why the Biden campaign continues to highlight all of the things that Trump says… Amy Walter: Yes. Tamara Keith: … like the Gestapo comments and everything else that he has said, while also really trying to amplify what he is saying he would do… Amy Walter: That's right. Tamara Keith: … and, in particular, on abortion rights, where he is trying not to say what he would do, and on any number of policy matters. In that "TIME" magazine interview, again, where he talked about wanting to round up migrants and… William Brangham: Right, deploy the military inside the U.S. Tamara Keith: Yes. And then he was asked, well, but the military being used on civilians? And he said, oh, no, they're not civilians, which is a pretty significant departure from norms. William Brangham: Right. Amy Walter: Yes. And this — the case hasn't really been prosecuted yet. Tamara Keith: Yes. Amy Walter: Believe it or not, we are still, which feels like either six months, you think, is a long time from now or a very short time from now. I tend to think of it as a short time. I think most normal voters think, well, we're a long way away from the election. William Brangham: So they just haven't dialed in yet. Amy Walter: Yes. And the — and both candidates soon enough will be on the airwaves making their case to voters. Theoretically, there will be debates between these candidates, where the differences between the two will become more of the conversation. William Brangham: Theoretically, on those debates. Amy Walter, Tamara Keith, so nice to see you both. Thank you. Amy Walter: You're welcome. Tamara Keith: Thanks, William.

CBS Only Network To Report Indictment of Laken Riley’s Killer

The murder of University of Georgia nursing student Laken Riley shook the nation, and hammered home the real dangers to which the nation became exposed when the border was flung open on January 20th, 2021. The media has been reluctant to cover the story because it casts Democrats (generally) and President Joe Biden (specifically) in a very bad light. That reluctance continues to this day. CBS Evening News was the only national network newscast to report on the indictment of the illegal alien that murdered Laken Riley. Here is that brief report in its entirety, as aired on Wednesday, May 8th, 2024: NORAH O’DONNELL: The 26-year-old man accused of murdering Georgia nursing student Laken Riley has been indicted by a grand jury on ten new charges, including kidnapping and being a peeping Tom. The suspect, a migrant from Venezuela, is charged with killing the 22-year old while she was jogging on the University of Georgia campus in February. That brief comes in at 20 seconds. Scant, to be sure, but still 20 seconds more than ABC or NBC could muster up. The details are harrowing. Per Fox News: A Georgia grand jury on Tuesday indicted Jose Ibarra, the suspect charged in Augusta University student Laken Riley's murder, on 10 counts, court documents show. Ibarra, a 26-year-old illegal immigrant from Venezuela, is accused of killing Riley, a 22-year-old nursing student, while she was out for a run along dirt trails on the University of Georgia campus in Athens on Feb. 22. The grand jury indicted Ibarra on counts of malice murder, two counts of kidnapping with bodily injury, two counts of aggravated assault with intent to rape, two counts of aggravated battery, obstructing or hindering a person from making a 911 call, tampering with evidence and being a "peeping Tom." Ibarra is accused of causing Riley's death by inflicting blunt-force trauma to her head and "asphyxiating her in a manner unknown to jurors," the indictment states. The report goes on to say that Ibarra, who is known to have ties with the murderous Tren de Aragua transnational gang, is suspected of going to the apartment of another person, a UGA staffer, to spy on her as well. The story just gets worse as details emerge. The national news media, bent on protecting Biden, will do everything they can to avoid covering this story, which hammers home the dangers of imposing open-borders policies upon a nation that wants nothing to do with them.  
Before yesterdayNB Blog Feed

Yep, the Much-Hyped CNN-Biden ‘Interview’ Was in Fact a Tongue Bath

CNN’s press release announcing anchor Erin Burnett’s sit-down with President Joe Biden promised an interview. Clearly, that didn’t happen. Instead, we got pure, unadulterated Regime Media sycophancy.  Burnett opens the interview with a thematic softball fresh off of Biden’s visit to Microsoft’s new AI data center, to be built on the site of the former Foxconn project in Wisconsin. Biden was allowed to mumble through his talking point set-pieces, with little to no follow-through. You'll be SHOCKED to discover that the former CNBC anchor offers NO pandemic recovery pushback on Biden's job creation whopper. Biden is just allowed to mumble his talking point set pieces unchecked. pic.twitter.com/F9kCD2L3uj — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) May 8, 2024 About those “100,000” jobs that Burnett and Biden throw around here- it should be noted that the actual site itself expects to generate 2,300 construction jobs and 2,000 permanent jobs. It’s right there on CNN’s writeup: The new center aims to create 2,300 union construction jobs and 2,000 permanent jobs over time, according to Microsoft. Microsoft said it will use the center to train about 100,000 workers across the state on generative AI by 2030, thanks in part to a partnership with United Way Wisconsin, United Way Racine and other community partners. It also plans to open a lab on the campus of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee to help companies and manufacturers infuse the technology into their businesses. Watch for more of the “100,000 jobs” sleight-of-hand, small potatoes for a media that, with the recent and notable exception of Katy Tur, already let Biden get away with claiming pandemic recovery as his creation of 15 million jobs. Watch next, as Burnett frets that Biden might not have enough time to turn the economy around, to which Biden responds “I’ve ALREADY turned it around.” CNN’s @ErinBurnett empathizes with President Biden on economy: “With less than six months to go to Election Day, are you worried that you’re running out of time to turn that around?” pic.twitter.com/598wDxQVxW — Brent Baker 🇺🇦 🇮🇱 (@BrentHBaker) May 8, 2024 The biggest and most easily verifiable whopper of the night? Biden claiming that inflation was at 9% when he took office. It was, in fact, at 1.4%, a fact that HAD to have been top of mind for the former CNBC anchor with a background in economics. But alas, no pushback or correction. Simply inexcusable. Another unchecked whopper: Biden claims the inflation rate was 9% when he took office. Inflation was in fact 1.4% in January 2021. pic.twitter.com/hLWJfwjUQa — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) May 8, 2024 Moving off of the economy, Burnett offered Biden a bridge from which to pander to “the youth vote”, assuming they interrupted their “free Palestine” chants at college campuses and “Little Gaza” encampments in order to watch the interview: Channeling hate agenda of terrorist-supporting anti-Semites. @ErinBurnett to Biden: “Mr. President, signs at college campuses, some say ‘Genocide Joe.’ Many of us who have gone to those campuses, sometimes we hear that chant. Do you hear the message of those young Americans?” pic.twitter.com/7WnPGehQRU — Brent Baker 🇺🇦 🇮🇱 (@BrentHBaker) May 8, 2024 Biden also announced the holdup of weapons shipments to our ally Israel over concerns they may be used in Rafah: Beyond 2,000 lb. bombs, Biden has held up artillery shipments to Israel over Rafah concerns. pic.twitter.com/i7nZyZIhuM — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) May 8, 2024 Now for the January 6th nostalgia portion of the interview: Another softball from @ErinBurnett to Biden to cue up his talking points: “How seriously do you take” Trump’s “threat” to not accept election results? Biden: “The guy is not a democrat with a small d.” pic.twitter.com/JgDYrLff5v — Brent Baker 🇺🇦 🇮🇱 (@BrentHBaker) May 8, 2024 And, finally, some Obama revivalism. What advice might the god-king offer Biden these days? “Keep doing what I’m doing”, says Biden. In her last question, @ErinBurnett relays Democratic concerns, noting Barack Obama “has said that this is an ‘all hands on deck moment,’” so “what’s his advice to you when you talk to him?” Biden: “Keep doing what I’m doing.” pic.twitter.com/5528QUrFst — Brent Baker 🇺🇦 🇮🇱 (@BrentHBaker) May 8, 2024 Most notably from the panel discussion, Scott Jennings and David Axelrod get into it over the parallels between Biden’s hold of military assistance to Israel, arguably over political considerations (see the aforementioned “youth vote” and the 18% “Uncommitted” vote in the Michigan Democrat primary), and former President Donald Trump’s call to Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy- which triggered an impeachment.  .@ScottJenningsKY rightly notes parallels between Biden weapons hold and first impeachment of Trump. And, yes, the Michigan primary and 18% uncommitted vote happened AFTER Gaza City and Khan Younis offensives. pic.twitter.com/Jxhj1pWTWX — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) May 8, 2024 We were promised an interview. Instead, we got a tongue bath from a Regime Media bent on protecting The Precious at all costs.

NewsBusters Podcast: A Fun Day on Capitol Hill Truth-Telling About NPR

The House Republicans on the Energy & Commerce Committee invited me to testify on Wednesday about allegations of bias at National Public Radio. The expose by former NPR business editor Uri Berliner galvanized the Republicans to introduce several bills about defunding NPR after more than 50 years of taxpayer support. Is there any hope that NPR will change its biased ways? Don't be wildly optimistic. However, I told them they should hold more hearings and press new NPR CEO Katharine Maher to explain how their content serves all the public, and not just the Democrat fraction. Maher declined this invitation, insisting she had an previously schedule all-day board meeting. We'll hope this committee can find a date to ask her to justify all the tilt we've been exposing.  I reminded Congress that supposedly civil NPR has in the last few years endorsed the book In Defense of Looting, called a book "excellent" that claimed anti-police riots should be called "rebellions," and hailed a movie called How to Blow Up a Pipeline. Then there is their attack on Republicans.  On January 18, 2023, the NPR interview show Fresh Air headlined their show, “How will the hard-right Republicans in Congress wield their newfound power?” Gross began: “Now that Kevin McCarthy has assumed his new role as speaker of the House, a position he won after making concessions to the far right of his party, what can we expect?” Between host Terry Gross and her guest, New York Times reporter Catie Edmondson, they labeled the House Republicans as “far right” or “hard right” 32 times. Democrats apparently don’t have an extreme. Nine days later, on Morning Edition, host Steve Inskeep laid out the red carpet for House Democrat leader Hakeem Jeffries to announce on the debt-ceiling debate, “We are not going to pay a ransom note to extremists in the other party." Republicans were suicidal in their opposition, Inskeep suggested: “You'd say to Republicans, "Drive the car off the cliff. We are not going to grab the wheel." Jeffries replied: "We're not going to let the car go off the cliff even though there are people who are willing to do it." On the PBS NewsHour, NPR White House reporter Tamara Keith said last October “what's happening in the House is a reflection of a broader divide in the Republican Party, where there's maybe like 20 percent or 30 percent of Republicans who don't want to burn it all down.” Enjoy the podcast below, or wherever you listen to podcasts. 

Morning Joe Expert: Stormy Daniels' Testimony Hands Defense 'Major Issue' For Appeal

MSNBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos has once again proven himself to be an independent thinker, someone who calls them as he sees them and doesn't dutifully toe the liberal media line. In the past, we've noted Cevallos saying that Roe was ripe to be overturned, because there was no constitutional basis for it. More recently, he called a Hunter Biden plea deal not merely a sweetheart deal, but a "gift from Heaven." Cevallos was back at his iconoclastic truth-telling on today's Morning Joe. He repeatedly called Stormy Daniels' testimony in Donald Trump's hush money trial a "major issue" available to the defense for the appeal of any possible conviction, which could lead to it being overturned. The notion was that her testimony was excessively prejudicial to Trump. Cevallos analogized the situation to the recent overturning of one of Harvey Weinstein's convictions on the grounds that overly prejudicial testimony had been admitted. Cevallos mentioned that even though trial judge Juan Merchan had rejected a defense motion for a mistrial based on Daniels' testimony, he did acknowledge that some of her testimony perhaps should not have been allowed. Said Cevallos: "If you're a defense attorney, you're marking your notebook, and now you have your first major issue." Concluded Cevallos: Concluded Cevallos: "So if two years from now, we're back here saying, the conviction got overturned: this is terrible! Well, this might be what we look at. And we can say, well, the prosecution took a calculated risk, and it's yielded benefits in the last 24 hours. But maybe in a couple years, those benefits will not have been worth the risk.        Bonus Coverage: Scarborough Bigfoots Mika Again -- And Again! Amid a press report that Mika is fed up with the incessant interruptions of Joe Scarborogh -- her husband co-host -- Scarborough was back at his bigfooting of Mika in the very first minute of today's show. It was clear from Mika's facial expression and body language that she was not pleased. Mika even emitted a "wow" in reaction to Joe's rude recidivism. Scarborough acknowledged that his latest interruption was sure to incite lots of email criticism. And despite asking Mika to forgive him, just three minutes later Scarborough cut Mika off yet again! Mika has forged a side career based on her "Know Your Value" books and conferences. The notion is to encourage and empower women to stick up for themselves in their careers. So, not a good look for Mika to permit herself to be regularly trampled by Bully Boy Scarborough.  View Rude Joe in action here.

Here Are the Best & Worst Moments From the House NPR Hearing with MRC’s Graham

On Wednesday, the Media Research Center’s NewsBusters executive editor Tim Graham testified before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations during a hearing on the decades-long liberal boondoggle that is National Public Radio (NPR). Not surprisingly, he came armed with examples of their virulent bias and hate for conservatives. Joined by Americans for Tax Reform’s James Erwin, the American Enterprise Institute’s Howard Husock, and Free Press co-CEO Craig Aaron, Graham took questions from lawmakers that fell into all-predictable camps of Republicans recognizing the problem and Democrats not only denying reality, but accusing critics of NPR of putting the lives of journalists in danger. Before we dive into the highlights and lowlights, here was Graham’s opening statement, which included examples dating back to the 1980s of NPR’s shameless partisan hackery (click “expand”):     I represent the Media Research Center, America’s preeminent conservative media watchdog organization. It was founded in 1987, and I joined up in 1989. We monitor national media outlets on a daily basis and provide daily coverage of the media’s tilt at NewsBusters.org.  Uri Berliner obviously tried to make the point that media bias became a bigger problem when Donald Trump ran for president. We are here to tell you this has been a problem for a very long time. NPR legal reporter Nina Totenberg destroyed the Douglas Ginsburg nomination to the Supreme Court in 1987, then she tried again with Clarence Thomas in 1991. They energetically channeled the accusers of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, and when a man arrived in an Uber on Kavanaugh’s street two years ago with weapons and plans to assassinate Kavanaugh, NPR failed to file a single feature story on it. Nina Totenberg could not be found. NPR, a supposed source of civility, didn’t demonstrate that cared one bit about this potential political violence. But in March, between Morning Edition and Fresh Air, Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford was granted an hour of taxpayer-funded air time to reproduce her unproven charges of teenaged sexual assault. Now, most of us, what we remember best has been mentioned. The Exhibit A here of NPR’s bias is the New York Post series on Hunter Biden’s laptop in October of 2020. Most of the so-called “mainstream media” tried to dismiss this story – falsely – as Russian disinformation. But NPR stood out. NPR’s Public Editor Kelly McBride quoted Terence Samuel, NPR’s Managing Editor for News. He said: “We don’t want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don’t want to waste the listeners and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions.” He dismissed the Post stories as a “politically driven event.” That’s interesting, since you could argue Nina Totenberg’s hostile reporting on Supreme Court nominees created “politically driven events.” Instead of seeking to investigate the Biden family’s influence-peddling, NPR’s Morning Edition broadcast a story titled “Experts Say Attack On Hunter Biden’s Addiction Deepens Stigma For Millions.” There wasn’t one word in it about Hunter Biden’s business practices involving his father, which was the point of the Post stories. The pattern continues today. When a House Oversight Committee had a hearing in March that Hunter Biden where he was supposed to appear, NPR’s All Things Considered wouldn’t consider a feature story on it. NPR covered the Pelosi-picked House January 6 Committee live for every minute, and then it couldn’t do a two-minute story on the Biden impeachment inquiry. Instead, the next morning NPR’s homepage was topped the next morning by their hot story: new details on Rupert Murdoch’s British phone-hacking scandal of 2011. NPR’s website did have a Biden mention. White House reporter Deepa Shivaram had a TikTok-like video shoot on President Biden grabbing a trendy boba tea in Las Vegas under the headline “Food stops can tell you a lot about a campaign.” NPR, that network of civility, also has encouraged chaos and disorder in society: On August 27, 2020, NPR’s blog “Code Switch”, with the slogan “Race In Your Face,” posted an interview promoting a new book titled In Defense of Looting. On The NPR Politics Podcast on July 17, 2021,they promoted a book by Yale law professor Elizabeth Hinton saying that protests against policy should not — they shouldn’t be called riots. They should be called “rebellions”. On NPR’s Fresh Air on April 15, 2023, their movie critic John Powers praised the movie How to Blow Up a Pipeline, hailing it as “hugely timely”. You know, this is what NPR is doing. They can devote our taxpayer dollars to getting behind looting, rioting, and blowing up pipelines . And yet, NPR represents the Republicans as uniquely extreme. We’ve seen this throughout this Congress where they come on and say, “oh, the hard right Republicans are ruining everything.” Um, they were doing this morning discussing Miss Taylor Greene, but they have had several sappy interviews with Hakeem Jeffries. Steve Inskeep at one said — said, “you say to Republicans drive the car off the cliff. We are not going to grab the wheel.” This is the way they treat Republicans, basically as nutballs who are gonna drive the car off the cliff. You might understand that’s why we might get a little upset. Congressman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) was on the flip side, accusing those investigating NPR’s political tilt of a “disturbing” return to “the dark days of McCarthyism” when, instead, the House should crack down on private “right-wing media organizations that have a long history of peddling misinformation, disinformation, promoting partisan agendas and sowing fear and division.” “Public cynicism about the media doesn’t come from NPR. It comes from the right-wing media,” he added as if to suggest NPR hasn’t done anything itself to harm its reputation. Congresswoman and full committee Chairwoman Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (R-WA) was the first member in the Q&A to speak with Graham, which afforded him the chance to call out Ranking Member Cathy Castor’s (D-FL) for claiming media critics are akin to Russia’s Vladimir Putin and those in the Chinese Communist Party: .@HouseCommerce Chair @CathyMcMorris on @NPR: “Mr. Graham, I’ll start with you. As you’re aware, Mr. [Uri] Berliner, in — wrote this op-ed, and in it, quote, he says, “By 2023, the picture was completely different. Only 11% describe themselves as very or somewhat conservative,… pic.twitter.com/QO7TTwvlMX — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 8, 2024 As the Democratic witness, Aaron served as a stand-in for NPR and lamented to Pallone that the motives of journalists would be questioned. This led Pallone to argue adversarial critiques of the news media are acts of political intimidation. Aaron agreed and said sustained (and outside) criticism of journalists made them “more timid, more cautious, more unwilling to ask hard questions” and thus it’s not only “harder for them to do their job”, but their lives are on the line. Moments later, Congressman Jeff Duncan used his time to lambaste NPR as “a Democrat propaganda machine funded by U.S. tax dollars” and mock the idea they’re providing “objective reporting”: GOP @RepJeffDuncan on @NPR in @HouseCommerce hearing: “You know, I used to drive 65,000 miles a year in my truck and like Mr. [@TimJGraham], I used to listen to NPR a good bit. In fact, I enjoyed All Things Considered. But unfortunately all things aren't considered now. The… pic.twitter.com/11JKUZq1bR — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 8, 2024 Congresswoman Debbie Lesko (R-AZ) went to Graham after noting “there’s a hunger in our society for just plain, unbiased news” that also doesn’t send blood pressures soaring. She asked Graham about what’s needed “to ensure NPR provides impartial coverage and serves a broader audience”:     And, in response to a question from Lesko, Erwin brought up what precipitated the last congressional hearing about NPR (that Graham also testified at), which was “a scandal where local affiliates were sharing donor lists with Democratic Party operatives” and suggested a remedy of allowing taxpayers to opt out of funding NPR (and PBS) on their tax forms. Congressman Gary Palmer (R-AL) astutely focused on the connection public broadcast has to far-left foundations: .@USRepGaryPalmer at @HouseCommerce hearing on @NPR: “I'd like to respond to my Democratic colleagues concerns about local media and the role that NPR plays in that. There was an article that pointed out that traditional outlets like The New York Times have moved so far to the… pic.twitter.com/pZFCMJKtWf — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 8, 2024 Later, Congressman Paul Tonko (D-NY) and Aaron fretted it’s “very dangerous” to be “attacking the media” because that’s how “democracies” die:     Sanity was restored when Congressman John Joyce (R-PA) acknowledged that “my constituents in south Central and southwestern Pennsylvania would be a target audience for NPR” with large, rural swaths dependent “on radio for news for emergency alerts and more”, but aren’t as NPR’s squandered away their trust with their liberal biases. Graham explained how NPR has strayed from its mission of representing all voices by explaining how, oftentimes, stories will claim to feature a Republican voice, but said voice will be from, say, Liz Cheney. Congressman Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) closed out the hearing by adding his voice to what were a parade of voices on the Republican side denouncing NPR CEO Katherine Maher from declining to appear before the committee. He then asked Graham about NPR’s future with Maher (click “expand”):     CRENSHAW: [Y]ou’ve collected a pretty impressive assortment of NPR’s failures on — and — and failures to have unbiased reporting. Give us your thoughts on that and is Ms. Maher a good — a good fit to change course? GRAHAM: Oh, I don’t think there’s any intention to change course. I think that’s why she was selected. It would be interesting to hear her try to explain, you know, what it is that they’re trying to do, because when we listen to this radio network on a regular basis, it’s quite clear. You can understand why the Democrats don’t want to have a hearing about this. It works very, very well for them, right? You can understand why the gentleman from Free Press has to say he’s not here to represent public broadcasting, but they’re very closely affiliated and fight for the funding together. You know, obviously, Democrats like the system exactly as it is right now. CRENSHAW: Yeah. GRAHAM: And so, the very least we can do is — yes, have the CEO in and try to explain who in there is doing anything to suggest maybe we should have a more balanced set of interviews. CRENSHAW: Yeah. GRAHAM: Let’s — let’s have a more balanced set of journalists. You won’t see anybody from Fox News on NPR. CRENSHAW: No, and you would think that’s what the whole point — if you’re gonna do unbiased media, then it has to be unbiased. Biased media is okay. You know, just — just admit it, though. MSNBC does not try to claim that it’s unbiased. I don’t even think Fox tries to claim it’s unbiased anymore. It’s just not right. It’s we’ve had. We’ve had biased media in this country since their founding, but if you’re going to be a taxpayer-funded media company, you actually have to adhere to the principles of — of unbiased news broadcasting or say the quiet part out loud and maybe that’s the benefit of the new CEO. She has said the quiet part out loud, pretty clearly. And so, there can be no — there can be no question about what direction NPR is headed and it — and it can be simply written off and maybe we should — we should look at ways to defund it. How — how would we in Congress, perhaps, some suggestions on how we would change course in NPR? To see the relevant transcript from the hearing on May 8, click here.

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr Says TikTok Legal Filing 'Gives Away the Game'

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr roasted TikTok’s “arrogance” as it attempts to escape severing its ties with the communist Chinese government. Last month, President Joe Biden signed a bill that would force TikTok’s Chinese-controlled parent company, ByteDance to divest itself from TikTok, or risk being banned from the U.S. market entirely. On Tuesday, TikTok responded to the bill with a legal challenge, claiming that divestiture is “impossible” and “infeasible.” But Carr is not buying it. “While TikTok trots out the expected grab bag of arguments, it adopts a strange strategy of ignoring the reason for the law,” Carr stated in an X post. “TikTok wants this to be a case about the content of its speech. It is not. It is about TikTok's malign conduct - conduct the Constitution doesn't protect.” Carr further addressed some of TikTok’s ludicrous claims in a follow-up post in which he said that “TikTok's legal filing gives away the game in several ways” and noted the platform’s continued hypocrisy as it is once again caught red-handed. “Despite claiming independence from Beijing, TikTok now concedes that it is the CCP (not TikTok) that controls the fate of its algorithm and foreign commercial transactions,” Carr noted.  Indeed, in its legal filing, TikTok admitted as much when it claimed that China’s regulation of exported technologies would prevent divestiture. “[T]he Chinese government has made clear that it would not permit a divestment of the recommendation engine that is key to the success of TikTok in The United States,” the platform wrote in its legal complaint launched against Attorney General Merrick Garland. Carr similarly drew attention to TikTok’s claim that it would be “impossible” to transfer its source code to a new owner. “Despite claiming for years that TikTok's national security threat could be addressed by having U.S.-based engineers inspect its millions of lines of code, TikTok now says that outside engineers would be unable to understand the complex code,” Carr wrote. In a third post, the FCC commissioner summed up the communist Chinese government-controlled platform’s flagrant and consistent pattern of claiming one thing and doing another as “arrogance.” “Arrogance is saying that U.S. user data doesn't even exist in China while TikTok's internal communications show ‘everything is seen in China,’” Carr declared. “Arrogance is claiming that TikTok U.S. is independent while former employees have made clear that Beijing-based personnel are calling the shots,” he later added. Carr went on ultimately concluding: “Arrogance is believing that TikTok could present a clear and present danger to U.S. national security and America would simply allow that threat to persist. Our Constitution compels no such result.” Arrogance is saying that U.S. user data doesn't even exist in China while TikTok's internal communications show "everything is seen in China." Arrogance is denying that TikTok illicitly surveilled the locations of Americans (and deriding the reporting as lacking "journalistic… https://t.co/qB0Gx7Ws9v — Brendan Carr (@BrendanCarrFCC) May 8, 2024 Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr Says TikTok Legal Filing 'Gives Away the Game'

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr roasted TikTok’s “arrogance” as it attempts to escape severing its ties with the communist Chinese government. Last month, President Joe Biden signed a bill that would force TikTok’s Chinese-controlled parent company, ByteDance to divest itself from TikTok, or risk being banned from the U.S. market entirely. On Tuesday, TikTok responded to the bill with a legal challenge, claiming that divestiture is “impossible” and “infeasible.” But Carr is not buying it. “While TikTok trots out the expected grab bag of arguments, it adopts a strange strategy of ignoring the reason for the law,” Carr stated in an X post. “TikTok wants this to be a case about the content of its speech. It is not. It is about TikTok's malign conduct - conduct the Constitution doesn't protect.” Carr further addressed some of TikTok’s ludicrous claims in a follow-up post in which he said that “TikTok's legal filing gives away the game in several ways” and noted the platform’s continued hypocrisy as it is once again caught red-handed. “Despite claiming independence from Beijing, TikTok now concedes that it is the CCP (not TikTok) that controls the fate of its algorithm and foreign commercial transactions,” Carr noted.  Indeed, in its legal filing, TikTok admitted as much when it claimed that China’s regulation of exported technologies would prevent divestiture. “[T]he Chinese government has made clear that it would not permit a divestment of the recommendation engine that is key to the success of TikTok in The United States,” the platform wrote in its legal complaint launched against Attorney General Merrick Garland. Carr similarly drew attention to TikTok’s claim that it would be “impossible” to transfer its source code to a new owner. “Despite claiming for years that TikTok's national security threat could be addressed by having U.S.-based engineers inspect its millions of lines of code, TikTok now says that outside engineers would be unable to understand the complex code,” Carr wrote. In a third post, the FCC commissioner summed up the communist Chinese government-controlled platform’s flagrant and consistent pattern of claiming one thing and doing another as “arrogance.” “Arrogance is saying that U.S. user data doesn't even exist in China while TikTok's internal communications show ‘everything is seen in China,’” Carr declared. “Arrogance is claiming that TikTok U.S. is independent while former employees have made clear that Beijing-based personnel are calling the shots,” he later added. Carr went on ultimately concluding: “Arrogance is believing that TikTok could present a clear and present danger to U.S. national security and America would simply allow that threat to persist. Our Constitution compels no such result.” Arrogance is saying that U.S. user data doesn't even exist in China while TikTok's internal communications show "everything is seen in China." Arrogance is denying that TikTok illicitly surveilled the locations of Americans (and deriding the reporting as lacking "journalistic… https://t.co/qB0Gx7Ws9v — Brendan Carr (@BrendanCarrFCC) May 8, 2024 Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Whoopi to Trump: ‘If You Didn't Do It, Why Are You in the Court?’

The View has championed so-called “criminal justice reform” efforts, praised cases of convicted criminals getting rulings overturned, and condemned former President Trump for his past calls to convict the Central Park Five. But on Wednesday’s edition of The View, moderator Whoopi Goldberg lashed out at Trump and proclaimed that he wouldn’t be in court if he didn’t commit the crimes he was accused of. Goldberg’s bitter rant came at the conclusion of their first segment when they reacted to the court testimony of porn star Stormy Daniels. Just before going to a commercial break, she popped off about how Trump being in court was all the evidence needed to prove he was guilty: GOLDBERG: You know, I just think if you didn't do it, why are you in the court? (…) GOLDBERG: Why are you there? (…) GOLDBERG: You brought this on yourself. You did this to you. Nobody did this to you. You told the untruth. You took stuff. This is on you. This isn't them. It isn't the judge. This is yours. Faux-conservative co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin suggested that Trump’s refusal to testify also proved his guilt and “comedian” Joy Behar added that “O.J. didn’t take the stand either.”     Earlier in the segment, Farah Griffin whined that “This whole trial” was giving her “the ick.” She was “so frustrated it's the first trial that we're seeing of Trump and potentially only before the election.” Farah Griffin lamented that Daniels’ testimony was a “mixed bag.” She claimed the porn star, who has lied publically, was “a credible person” but “hurt her credibility” by giving “salacious details” about her alleged affair with Trump. “We all met her. We had her on the show,” she reminded the rest of the cast. “I would have liked to hear from Stormy who is a mom, who wants to live a private life, wants to put this behind her, has been exploited by countless men in her life, Donald Trump, Michael Avenatti. And she’s there under subpoena just to confirm what she's able to.” Always able to prioritize the important things, Behar spouted off about how she didn’t “trust” Trump with the nuclear codes because he allegedly didn’t “think to wear a condom when he's having sex with a porn star.” Without evidence, Behar also decried the documents case in Florida getting pushed back by claiming Trump “could have given [the documents] to any dictator in the world!” “He may not go to jail for this but the American people can see what he is. He's a despicable person and we have to remember that,” she tried to calm herself down. What was actually worth remembering was that last year, The View decried the legal notion that Trump was entitled to a fair trial. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 8, 2024 11:04:58 a.m. Eastern (…) ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: This whole trial is giving me the ick. I'm so frustrated it's the first trial that we're seeing of Trump and potentially only before the election. Here’s my thing. Stormy’s testimony was a mixed bag for me. So, we all met her – JOY BEHAR: It was a what? FARAH GRIFFIN: Mixed bag. We all met her. We had her on the show. I actually don’t believe she needed to into salacious detail. I would have liked to hear from Stormy who is a mom, who wants to live a private life, wants to put this behind her, has been exploited by countless men in her life, Donald Trump, Michael Avenatti. And she’s there under subpoena just to confirm what she's able to. SUNNY HOSTIN: She said some of that. FARAH GRIFFIN: But I think if you're a juror – cause then she is showed to have lied on Jimmy Kimmel and then she gets into these salacious details. I think it hurt her credibility and she is a credible person. I absolutely believe that this affair took place. BEHAR: I thought it was very – go ahead. FARAH GRIFFIN: But my two things. There’s two things they have to prove: the campaign finance side of it. I think that's been proved. I think a consideration was how it would affect his campaign. But the falsifying business records, that’s tough. HOSTIN: Why? Why do you think it’s tough? FARAH GRIFFIN: He signed some things but he’s going to say, “I run an organization with thousands of employees, I make a lot of money, I sign things all the time my attorneys put in front of me.” (…) 11:07:25 a.m. Eastern BEHAR: I don't trust a guy with the nuclear codes who doesn't think to wear a condom when he's having sex with a porn star. I'm sorry. I think that it may – as you say, the other one down in Florida Cannon, that judge needs to be taken to task because she keeps kicking the can down the road on that whole trial – HOSTIN: It's indefinite now. BEHAR: - with the documents, which he could have given to any dictator in the world! And we’re not going to see that until after he's in office and then he’ll probably get rid of everybody who disagrees with him! But – He may not go to jail for this but the American people can see what he is. He's a despicable person and we have to remember that. (…) 11:10:47 a.m. Eastern WHOOPI GOLDBERG: You know, I just think if you didn't do it, why are you in the court? FARAH GRIFFIN: Or testifying. BEHAR: Get on the stand! FARAH GRIFFIN: He won’t. GOLDBERG: Why are you there? FARAH GRIFFIN: Because he will not be able to say “I did not have sex with that woman.” BEHAR: O.J. didn’t take the stand either. GOLDBERG: You brought this on yourself. You did this to you. Nobody did this to you. You told the untruth. You took stuff. This is on you. This isn't them. It isn't the judge. This is yours. BEHAR: Look in the mirror. GOLDBERG: We'll be right back.

Peterson, Elon Musk Have Choice Words About ‘Most Orwellian’ Law

Clinical psychologist and podcast host Jordan B. Peterson and X owner Elon Musk were flabbergasted by Canada’s latest infringement on civil liberties, anti-hate speech bill C-63. On May 7, Musk and Peterson responded to Canada's proposed “hate” speech bill. The bill, called. “Online Harms Bill C-63,” would implement fines of up to $50,000 on individuals who post “content that foments hatred” or “that, given the context in which it is communicated, is likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of such a prohibited ground.”  Musk initially responded to an X post by user Camus, who pointed out that C-63 would enable ex post facto fines for “hate speech” on social media. “This sounds insane if accurate!” wrote Musk. This sounds insane if accurate!@CommunityNotes, please check https://t.co/RB1Ea0upTk — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 7, 2024 Jordan Peterson seconded Musk’s sentiments and expressed his alarm over the bill, saying it was reminiscent of George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984. Mr. Musk@elonmusk It's much much worse than you have been informed: plans to shackle Canadians electronically if accusers fear a "hate crime" might (might) be committed. It's the most Orwellian piece of legislation ever promoted in the West:https://t.co/oSqX3pxiBB — Dr Jordan B Peterson (@jordanbpeterson) May 7, 2024 “It’s much much worse than you have been informed: plans to shackle Canadians electronically if accusers fear a ‘hate crime’ might (might) be committed,” Peterson posted at Musk. “It’s the most Orwellian piece of legislation ever promoted in the West:” Peterson has previously been very critical of the new bill and even dedicated a nearly two-hour interview with TRIGGERnometry host Konstantin Kisin and Canadian lawyer Bruce Pardy to point out why it is dangerous. “It is the most totalitarian Western bill I’ve ever seen,” said Peterson during the April 22 interview.  C-63 would create a new Digital Safety Commission to maintain compliance with the law by “social media operators” and to work with said companies to develop new regulations that would define government-sanctioned speech.   The bill would mandate that social media operators allow users to flag content as harmful. It would also require operators to designate a “resource person” to process claims against harmful content and “direct users to internal and external resources to address their concerns” including “the [Digital Safety] Commission or a law enforcement agency.” Under the bill, social media companies must create “digital safety plans” to be shared with the Digital Safety Commission. Social media operators that refuse to comply or hinder the Commission would be subject to heavy fines of “not more than 8% of the operator’s gross global revenue or $25 million, whichever is greater…” Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable

Levin NUKES ‘Linguini’ Biden, Media ‘Censorship’ Downplaying Oct. 7, Touting Hamas

Back on Saturday during his Fox News Channel Show Life, Liberty, & Levin, our friend and conservative talk radio legend Mark Levin used his opening monologue to torch President Biden and his allies in the liberal media for downplaying the animalistic October 7, 2023 terror attacks by Hamas on innocents in Israel the further we get from the attacks to commiserate with Gazans (despite their reported widespread support for their government’s attacks). Levin began by tearing into Biden’s brief May 2 speech about the pro-Islamic terrorism college students, calling it “not so much a speech” and instead “a statement” by a “pathetic” man with “linguini for a spine” and who’s “ so thoroughly pathetic” with “no moral center”.     Biden continued, taking issue with the media’s refusal to show (or even return to) the graphic footage from the attacks: How many news organizations, how many news platforms have played for you the video of what took place on October 7? Well, a lot of it. It’s on the internet. We have a lot of it because the monsters who perpetrated those heinous crimes of inhumanity, they took the video. They are very proud of it. The video was captured by the IDF, the Israelis. As I say, it is online. There’s a 47-minute video that shows in excruciating detail how the Islamist Hamas Nazis murdered people, raped people, butchered people, burned them alive, decapitated them, cut off their breasts, shot them in the groin. Oh, there’s all kinds of stuff — mass rape. Have you ever seen it on TV? Cable or network. No, you haven’t. Why? You haven’t even seen video that doesn’t show the worst of it, video where the terrorists are just going through the Nova festival field showing — showing of the kids they murdered, shot in the back, shot in the chest, shot in the head. Have you seen any of that on TV? No, you haven’t seen any of it. “[W]e don’t get video in our media, our main media of October 7. Oh, it is too gruesome. Instead, we get these looped videos over and over again of buildings in Gaza that have been destroyed because Hamas either destroyed them or they had the terrorists there, or they had their munitions there, and of course, it’s Israel’s fault,” he lamented. Levin dropped the hammer: “[Y]ou won’t see the video that exists. Why is that? It’s called censorship. That’s why. The American media is censoring what took place on October 7. Again, you can see it online, but the mass media where most people go for their news, you won’t see it. It is being covered up.” Levin expanded on this contrast and the lengths General Dwight D. Eisenhower went to ensure the horrors left behind were broadcast (click “expand”): When soldiers of the Fourth Armored Division entered the camp, they discovered piles of bodies, some covered with lime, others partially incinerated on pyres. The ghastly nature of their discovery led General Dwight D. Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe to visit the camp on April 12th, with Generals George S. Patton and Omar Bradley.And after his visit, Eisenhower cabled General George C. Marshall, the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from Washington, describing his trip to the death camp. He said, “the things I saw beggar description...The visual evidence and the verbal testimony of starvation, cruelty and bestiality were so overpowering so as to leave me a bit sick...I made the visit deliberately in order to be in a position to give firsthand evidence of these things, if ever in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to ‘propaganda.’” Eisenhower’s cable to Marshall on April 19, 1945, and I quote: “We continue to discover German concentration camps for political prisoners, which conditions of indescribable horror prevail.” From Eisenhower to General Marshall for eyes only. “I visited one of these myself, and I show you that whatever has been printed on them today has been understated. If you would see any advantage and asking about a dozen leaders of Congress and a dozen prominent editors to take a short visit to this theater in a couple of C-54s, I will arrange to have them conducted to one of these places, where the evidence of bestiality and cruelty is so overpowering, as to leave no doubt in their minds about the normal practices of the Germans in these camps. I am hopeful that some British individuals in similar categories will visit the northern area to witness similar evidence of atrocities.” And then Eisenhower the same day received this response: “Your proposal has been cleared and approved by the Secretary of War and the President.” — Truman — “Plans are being formulated and you will be kept advised.” This is what Eisenhower wrote in “Crusade in Europe” in its pages in his book: “The same day, [April 12, 1945], I saw my first horror camp. It was near the town of Gotha. I’ve never felt able to describe my emotional reactions when I first came face-to-face with the indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency. Up to that time I had known about it only generally or through secondary sources. I’m certain however, that I’ve never at any other time experienced an equal sense of shock. I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at firsthand about these things in case they ever grew up at home, the belief or assumption that the stories of Nazi brutality were just ‘propaganda’. Some members of the visiting party were unable through the ordeal to go through it. I only did so, but as soon as I returned to Patton’s headquarters that evening, I’d sent communications to both Washington and London, urging the two governments to send instantly to Germany, a random group of newspaper editors and representative groups from the national legislatures. I felt that the evidence should be immediately placed before the American and British publics in a fashion that will leave no room for cynical doubt.” He said: “Of all these displaced persons, the Jews were in the most deplorable condition. For years, they’d been beaten, starved, and tortured.” And in Ike, the Soldier: As They Knew Him, Merle Miller quotes Eisenhower speaking on April 25, 1945 to members of Congress and the journalists who had been shown Buchenwald the day before. He said: “You saw only one camp yesterday, there are many others. Your responsibilities, I believe, extend into a great field at informing the people at home of things like these atrocities is one of them...Nothing is covered up. We have nothing to conceal. The barbarous treatment of these people received in the German concentration camps is almost unbelievable. I want you to see for yourself and be spokesman for the United States.” Back in 2024, Levin noted the lack of (constant) focus on the horrors on October 7 by the liberal media is because “they are giving aid and comfort to the terrorists to Iran, to Hamas, to Hezbollah, to the Houthis, to the PLO” as well as “their front organization, Students for Justice in Palestine, the Jewish Vote, CAIR” and “the Marxist and Islamist professors”. Later, Levin powerfully concluded that not only will history look poorly on Biden, but the President and his allies in academia who’ve “given aid and comfort to the modern Nazis, in Iran, Hamas, and in our own country, the Hitler Youth and the imams that spew their hate” will be remembered like those in the 1930s and 1940s who “gave aid and comfort to Nazi Germany”. To see the relevant Fox transcript from May 4, click here.

Acosta Practically Begs IDF Spox To Give Up Fight Against Hamas

IDF spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Peter Lerner admirably managed to calmly, but firmly educate CNN Newsroom host Jim Acosta on Wednesday that there is “no magic wand” that will force Hamas to surrender amid Acosta’s pestering and insistence that enough is enough. As a White House correspondent during the Trump years, Acosta portrayed himself as an uncompromising fighter for truth. Now, in May 2024, Acosta put that aside for the idea that if a position is popular, it must be valid, “But Colonel Lerner, you must know, that there’s tremendous— there is tremendous condemnation that is coming in from all corners across the world that the cost to the civilian population in Gaza is too high. You must know that.”     He further added, “I understand what you're saying in terms of taking out leaders of Hamas and achieving these military objectives, and of course, what they were responsible for on October 7 is heinous, but don't you think you've reached a point now where, I mean, when you're hearing this kind of condemnation coming in from all corners across the globe that the price that is being paid by civilians is so high? There's just, there's just so much you can do — what you're doing right now.” Lerner began his response by mourning, “The price of the civilians, Israelis and Palestinians, are paying for this war are both horrific and tragic. There is no magic prescription to wish Hamas away. There is no magic wand that will make them miraculously disappear. If that could happen, that would be the chosen way of operations.” He continued, “Unfortunately, for us to achieve our goals of changing the security reality for Israelis and Palestinians alike, there is only one way that Hamas goes and is through the military action, you don't see them raising a white flag. You see them conducting a counteroffer to a deal that Israel, a generous deal—” Acosta then interrupted, “The civilians are saying the civilians—the civilians, folks at the World Food Program, members of Congress here in Washington, have essentially been pleading with you to please change these tactics because the cost of the civilian population is too high and Hamas is not coming out waving the white flag, but you are hearing—” As Acosta was repeating his argumentum ad populum, Lerner asked, “So, are you suggesting—are you suggesting Israel surrenders to Hamas?” Ignoring that critical question, Acosta rolled on, “You’re hearing from around the world that suffering is at a point that, that has just become too much.” Lerner then repeated his own question, “The suffering on both sides is terrible, the suffering, the reality on both sides is terrible and indeed we wish for a peaceful resolution, but unfortunately, our enemies that are bent on our destruction have no intention on living side-by-side in peace with Israel so what should we do? Surrender to Hamas and hope they don’t do it again when they promised that they will do it again and again and again given the chance?” Neither Acosta nor any of the groups he cited as a good answer to that. They have no knowledge, let alone, expertise, in military matters, but feel they get to lecture Israel on precisely that. They claim Hamas shouldn’t rule Gaza and then demand Israel stop its war on Hamas. They add that the suffering has gone on for too long and then demand Israel adopt policies that would prolong the war and hence, the suffering. It’s enough to drive a lesser man than Lerner insane. Here is a transcript for the May 8 show: CNN Newsroom 5/8/2024 11:26 AM ET JIM ACOSTA: But Colonel Lerner, you must know, that there’s tremendous— there is tremendous condemnation that is coming in from all corners across the world that the cost to the civilian population in Gaza is too high. You must know that. I understand what you're saying in terms of taking out leaders of Hamas and achieving these military objectives, and of course, what they were responsible for on October 7 is heinous, but don't you think you've reached a point now where, I mean, when you're hearing this kind of condemnation coming in from all corners across the globe that the price that is being paid by civilians is so high? There's just, there's just so much you can do — what you're doing right now. PETER LERNER: The price of the civilians, Israelis and Palestinians, are paying for this war are both horrific and tragic. There is no magic prescription to wish Hamas away. There is no magic wand that will make them miraculously disappear. If that could happen, that would be the chosen way of operations. Unfortunately, for us to achieve our goals of changing the security reality for Israelis and Palestinians alike, there is only one way that Hamas goes and is through the military action, you don't see them raising a white flag. You see them conducting a counteroffer to a deal that Israel, a generous deal— ACOSTA: The civilians are saying the civilians—the civilians, folks at the World Food Program, members of Congress here in Washington, have essentially been pleading with you to please change these tactics because the cost of the civilian population is too high and Hamas is not coming out waving the white flag, but you are hearing—” LERNER: So, are you suggesting—are you suggesting Israel surrenders to Hamas? ACOSTA: -- You’re hearing from around the world that suffering is at a point that, that has just become too much. LERNER: The suffering on both sides is terrible, the suffering, the reality on both sides is terrible and indeed we wish for a peaceful resolution, but unfortunately, our enemies that are bent on our destruction have no intention on living side-by-side in peace with Israel so what should we do? Surrender to Hamas and hope they don’t do it again when they promised that they will do it again and again and again given the chance?

ABC, CBS Ignore TikTok Admitting They’re Controlled By the Chinese Gov

During their Wednesday newscast, ABC’s Good Morning America and CBS Mornings boasted that TikTok was talking the American government to court because the company refused to comply with American law. The networks boosted TikTok’s claims in their legal filing that the law violated the First Amendment and their suggestion that members of Congress were hypocrites for having TikTok accounts, but what they failed to disclose to their audiences was the fact that those same filings proved that the Chinese Communist Party controlled TikTok. In their filing, TikTok admits: “Third, the Chinese government has made clear that it would not permit a divestment of the recommendation engine that is a key to the success of TikTok in the United States … By doing so, the Chinese government clearly signaled that it would assert its export control powers with respect to any attempt to sever TikTok’s operations from ByteDance, and that any severance would leave TikTok without access to the recommendation engine that has created a unique style and community that cannot be replicated on any other platform today.” ABC senior congressional correspondent Rachel Scott trumpeted that “TikTok is taking on the federal government, setting up a showdown in court over free speech and national security.” Ignoring the fact the filing admitted they were taking orders from the Chinese government, Scott framed their lawsuit as an act of brave defiance. “TikTok's parent company is making it clear they cannot and will not be selling the platform,” she proclaimed. Scott concluded her report by touting: “The bottom line, TikTok will remain available in the United States as this plays out in the courts.”     Over on CBS, correspondent Scott MacFarlane parroted TikTok’s talking points that “it's being asked to do the impossible -- to be divested or sold to an approved buyer by their China-based owner ByteDance within months or face a ban in the United States.” “They say that's a violation of the First Amendment and that they're being singled out because of their ties to China,” he added. While ignoring the part of TikTok’s filing that admitted that they were controlled by the Chinese Government, MacFarlane quoted another: In their new legal petition, they say, “There's no question the act will force a shutdown of TikTok by January 19th, 2025, silencing the 170 million Americans who use the platform to communicate in ways that cannot be replicated elsewhere.” “The company denies those allegations and has asked a court to delay or stop enactment of this law. And they note in their legal petition many of the members of Congress who passed the law, Natalie, have and use TikTok accounts themselves,” he chided. Meanwhile, on NBC’s Today, correspondent Savannah Sellers quoted the damaging part of the filing but failed to connect the dots: TikTok and ByteDance arguing the law’s requirement to divest “disregarded less extreme alternatives” and “is simply not possible: not commercially, not technologically, not legally.” Going on to say: “The Chinese government has made it clear it would not permit a divestment...” Lawyers also arguing that TikTok is protected under the First Amendment's guarantee freedom of expression. The networks still refused to mention that TikTok users had threatened to kill a U.S. Senator and commit suicide after TikTok directed their users to contact their congressional representatives. The transcripts are below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America May 8, 2024 7:13:43 a.m. Eastern ROBIN ROBERTS: Now to TikTok suing the federal government over the law that would force its Chinese owners to sell the video-sharing app. Our senior congressional correspondent Rachel Scott has the latest. Good morning to you, Rachel. RACHEL SCOTT: Hey, Robing. Good morning to you. TikTok is taking on the federal government, setting up a showdown in court over free speech and national security. It has been two weeks since the President signed that bipartisan bill into law that forces TikTok's Chinese parent company to either sell the app or face a total ban in the United States. Well, this morning, TikTok's parent company is making it clear they cannot and will not be selling the platform. So, on one end of this, you have a bipartisan group of lawmakers, even the President, they are arguing that TikTok poses a national security risk and that by using the platform the Chinese government could have access to your data, including your browsing history, even your location. TikTok denies those allegations. They say it would take years for them to find a new set of engineers to figure out how to program the platform and that it would force a shutdown of the app here in the United States by January of next year. They also argue a ban infringes on the rights of 170 million Americans who use the platform here in the United States. In this lawsuit, TikTok also points out that the Biden campaign continues to use the platform even after the President signed that bill into law. They insist that completely undermines their argument that it poses a risk to Americans’ safety. The bottom line, TikTok will remain available in the United States as this plays out in the courts. Michael. MICHAEL STRAHAN: All right, Rachel. Thank you very much for that. CBS Mornings May 8, 2024 7:24:21 a.m. Eastern NATALIE MORALES: TikTok is going to court to try to stop a new law that could lead to a nationwide ban on the social media giant. It says the law demanding that it sever ties with its China-based parent company would stifle free speech. However, supporters of the measure say it is essential for national security. Scott Macfarlane is on Capitol Hill. Scott, good morning. SCOTT MACFARLANE: Natalie, good morning. TikTok says it's being asked to do the impossible -- to be divested or sold to an approved buyer by their China-based owner ByteDance within months or face a ban in the United States. They say that's a violation of the First Amendment and that they're being singled out because of their ties to China. In their new legal petition, they say, “There's no question the act will force a shutdown of TikTok by January 19th, 2025, silencing the 170 million Americans who use the platform to communicate in ways that cannot be replicated elsewhere.” Congress overwhelmingly and swiftly passed this law arguing TikTok’s ties to China are a national security concerned and risk the private data of its users. One House committee chair says TikTok is like a spy balloon in your phone. The company denies those allegations and has asked a court to delay or stop enactment of this law. And they note in their legal petition many of the members of Congress who passed the law, Natalie, have and use TikTok accounts themselves. MORALES: So interesting. All right, Scott. We'll be following this one.

Media Panic that Pro-Hamas Campus Protests May Hurt Biden, 'Like 1968'

After weeks of defending pro-hams campus protests, the media are now panicking that those same protests might hurt biden’s re-election chances. In the past week, a slew of political commentators have written articles comparing the current situation on college campuses to the anti-war protests of 1968, and warning that a summer of radical leftism may clinch the 2024 election for Donald Trump. CNN’s Jake Tapper put it best during the April 29 edition of The Lead: When you look at these protests, these images, when you see the controversies about the ones that have an antisemitic element, and on and on, just like what you’re seeing on the side of your screen right now. Do you think to yourself... “Wow, this is a real in-kind contribution to Donald Trump.” The corporate media are certainly aware that these protests are unpopular. But rather than condemn them outright, their focus is instead on what that means for their preferred Presidential candidate. Watch:

Macklemore New Song: 'Screamin' Free Palestine 'Til They're Home At Last'

It seems that celebrities will do absolutely anything to remain relevant. In Macklemore’s latest attempt to stay at least somewhat popular, the 40-year-old rapper released a song called “Hind’s Hall,” which is all about the liberation of Palestine.  “Block the barricade until Palestine is free,” the first verse of the song reads, as well as the line “f**k the police.” Macklemore continues with his pro-Palestine rhetoric in verse two, calling out the elites who aren’t pro-Palestine with: “Seen the rubble, the buildings, the mothers and the children and all the men that you murdered, and then we see how you spin it.” How they spin it? Like how Macklemore is spinning the narrative to insist that Palestine is some innocent country that played no part in the brutal terrorist attack involving kidnaping, rape and murder of innocent Israeli citizens? Sure, Macklemore. “Screamin’ “Free Palestine” ‘til they’re home at last (Woo),” he said. Macklemore also calls out President Joe Biden in the third verse, which begins with, “Claimin’ it’s antiSemetic to be anti-Zionist / I’ve seen Jewish brothers and sisters out there and ridin’ in," and ends with, “The blood is on your hands, Biden, we can see it all / And f**k no, I’m not votin’ for you in the fall.” Related: Terrorists in Training: Pro-Hamas 'Protesters' Vandalize WWI Memorial in Central Park, Burn American Flag In the last portion of the song, Macklemore insists that he’s glad he’s an independent artist, suggesting if he belonged to a label, he’d probably be dropped.  “I’d be fine with it ‘cause the heart fed my page / I want a cease fire, f**k a response from Drake," he raps. The music video for the song featured police officers dealing with violent pro-Palestine protestors, Palestinian flag-waving, and a video montages of  legislators - I assume ones who Macklemore thinks could do more for the Palestinian people. HIND’S HALL. Once it’s up on streaming all proceeds to UNRWA. pic.twitter.com/QqZEKmzwZI — Macklemore (@macklemore) May 6, 2024 In response to Macklemore’s attempt of a roast in a song, both those in support of his message and those against it responded. Fox News freelance opinion editor Dan Gainor condemned Macklemore, telling him, “You support gang rape and murder,” pointing out the number of innocent Israeli citizens who’ve fallen victim to Hamas attacks.  “Just deleted every song I ever had of yours,” a different user wrote, while investigative journalist Laura Loomer called Macklemore “a straight up retard” and a “f**king moron.”  Others disagreed, writing things like, “as a Palestinian we appreciate this” and “this has a great lyrically message.” Ultimately, while Macklemore is entitled to his opinion, can’t he just stick to writing music about girls or something instead of virtual signaling until ends meet?! Seriously, this is not even entertaining. Follow MRCTV on X: Things That Need To Be Said: I Don't Care Leftists cry and scream about "freedom for Palestine," but these entitled brats have no idea the real problems facing America. pic.twitter.com/MuAuXPt4x2 — MRCTV (@mrctv) May 6, 2024

Worst Censorship of April: Are Meta Platforms Stepping Up Censorship?

Spring was in the air and snow melting in April, but Big Tech platforms — especially Meta’s — continued to freeze free speech. Utilizing its unique CensorTrack.org database, which has logged 6,745 cases as of publication, MRC Free Speech America tracked censorship across multiple platforms in April. Meta platforms Facebook and Instagram seemed particularly determined to suppress free speech, targeting content that included an anti-communist meme and criticism of President Joe Biden’s border crisis. Google-owned YouTube, meanwhile, continued its election interference by censoring a high-profile Independent presidential candidate.  And while Meta’s censorship only made up 9 out of a total of 28 cases in April, the Zuckerberg-led platforms’ speech suppression packed more of a punch.  Below are the worst cases of censorship from April. Humorless Meta targets memes. Both Facebook and Instagram censored satirical memes this past month. Young Americans for Liberty (YAL), a “pro-liberty organization on America's college campuses,” posted a meme on Facebook of horses standing under an immense table and chairs in a field with the caption, “This farm owner was denied a council permit to build a horse shelter. Fortunately, you don't need a permit to build a table and chairs.” YAL commented, “What a nice table.” Facebook slapped a fact-check label on the post calling it “partly false” and linked to articles from Check Your Fact and Lead Stories. Reportedly, the German farmer wasn’t denied a permit but did build the table shelter to avoid regulations.  Instagram, meanwhile, put a sensitive content filter on an Atlas Society post of a meme showing Care Bears with the caption, “What communists think they do.” The next image was of a firing squad with text saying, “What they actually do.” Instagram asserted the meme “may contain graphic or violent content," and required users to click through in order to view the meme. Facebook has found that users fail to click through similar interstitials 95 percent of the time. Instagram attempts to restrict followers of an account critical of LGBTQ ideology. On April 17, 2023, users started sharingscreenshots of an Instagram notice that popped up when users tried to follow Libs of TikTok. “Are you sure you want to follow libsoftiktokofficial? This account has repeatedly posted false information that was reviewed by independent fact-checkers or went against our Community Guidelines,” the notice read. The notice disappeared by April 18, and no clarification was offered on the platform’s reasoning. Google-owned YouTube censors one of President Joe Biden’s opponents. YouTube imposed a fact-checking label on a video of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s appearance on Chris Cuomo's NewsNation show. Kennedy aimed to “clarify [his] position on January 6” during the appearance. YouTube slapped a context label on the video with a link to the Wikipedia page for the events at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The label asserted, “On Jan. 6, 2021, the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., was attacked by a mob of supporters of then-U.S. president Donald Trump, two months after his defeat in the 2020 presidential election.” Facebook disabled the account of a show host for criticizing radical Islamic terrorists. Daniel Greenfield, a journalism fellow for FrontPage Magazine’s David Horowitz Freedom Center, declared on April 15 that Facebook had disabled FrontPage Editor Jamie Glazov’s account as of April 4 for discussing Islamic terrorism. Facebook reportedly objected to a “Glazov Gang” interview headlined  “Oct. 7 Coming to the USA?” The platform alleged that the interview, which discussed terrorists crossing into America through the open southern border, violated its “community standards” and threatened “the security of people on Facebook,” according to Greenfield. Glazov’s account appears to have been restored by Facebook. Instagram censors critique of IRS for no clear reason. The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) posted an image of a Hanna Cox tweet on its Instagram page, stating, “There are 724 billionaires in the US and 87,000 new IRS agents. They're not going after the rich, cupcakes. They're coming for you.” Instagram then imposed a “Missing Context” label on FEE’s post, asserting, “The same information was reviewed by independent fact-checkers in another post.” Clicking on the warning, though, only brought up the message, “This information is not available.”

I TOLD YOU SO: CBS’s Latest Trump Smear Unraveled In Less Than A Week

One of the risks inherent to Regime Media, as opposed to performing legitimate fact-based journalism, is that their Trump Derangement Syndrome drives them to say things that are easily debunkable or quickly proven wrong. Take, for example, CBS’s Chief White House Correspondent Nancy Cordes. During her report last week fretting the effect the pro-Hamas campus protests might have upon President Joe Biden’s reelection prospects, she threw in a 15-second non-sequitur accusing former President Donald Trump of making an “unfounded claim about campus demonstrators”- a fancier and more succinct “without evidence”. We flagged it the time, and memorialized it via X in anticipation of the inevitable: Laying down this marker for when it is discovered that at least ONE (1) foreign-born student and/or outside agitator was paid by some radical oligarch-funded organization. pic.twitter.com/kR0GYRjIU0 — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) May 3, 2024 As we said when covering her broader report: Cordes’ shootdown of Trump’s statement so early into the protest fallout is arrogant to the point of recklessness. All it takes is ONE paid foreign student/agitator in order to make Cordes look like a total fool. Well, you’ll never guess what inevitably happened next. It turns out that there, in fact, are foreign-born outside agitators funded by outside organizations most charitably classified as “woke philanthropy”. As Joe Simonson reported in the Washington Free Beacon: A New York City nonprofit that received more than $12 million from Goldman Sachs' charitable arm encouraged anti-Israel activists to re-create the violent protests of  "the summer of 2020," just hours before rioters stormed and occupied a building on Columbia University’s campus. More than 100 masked and keffiyeh-clad activists convened in the People’s Forum’s Manhattan office Monday evening to plan their next moves as anti-Israel protests reach a fever pitch across the country. The meeting, which was scheduled to start at 6:45 p.m., was delayed to give protesters from Columbia time to make it downtown. Once the Columbia protesters arrived, People’s Forum executive director Manolo De Los Santos urged the group to "give Joe Biden a hot summer" and "make it untenable for the politics of usual to take place in this country." Los Santos praised Columbia students for "decid[ing] that resistance is more important than negotiations," and urged those assembled at the People’s Forum to "support our students so that the encampments can go for as long as they can." Sounds very outside agitation-y. Who funds The People’s Forum, you ask? Well: The People’s Forum’s operations are made possible in large part by a $12 million donation from Goldman Sachs’s charitable arm. The source of that money is likely Neville Roy Singham, a communist who has "long admired Maoism." Singham, an American businessman who lives in China, reportedly helps finance the Chinese Communist Party’s "propaganda worldwide," according to the New York Times. His wife, Jodie Evans, is the leader of the activist group Code Pink. Under her leadership, the group has celebrated China as "a defender of the oppressed and a model for economic growth without slavery or war." So we have woke-funded outside agitation. Where, might one ask, was this gentleman born? Per The New York Post: Manolo De Los Santos, the 35-year-old leader of the Midtown-based nonprofit The People’s Forum (TPF), came to The Bronx from his native Dominican Republic at age 5 and has made a career of spurring protests on the streets of New York City. He first traveled to Cuba in 2006 and was there as recently as March to demand an end to the US blockade against the socialist state which has been in place since 1962. Well, there you have it. A foreign-born outside agitator funded by nonprofits. As an added bonus, he got himself arrested at a campus encampment last night:  🚨BREAKING! Multiple leaders of the ALL OUT FOR RAFAH march in NYC were arrested by the NYPD while they led over a thousand pro-Palestine demonstrators in the streets of Manhattan. We will not stand for the intimidation of the NYPD. The more they try to silence us the louder we… pic.twitter.com/DlAqq5ZXH7 — The People's Forum (@PeoplesForumNYC) May 7, 2024 Will Nancy Cordes retract her smear of Trump or issue an apology? Probably not, as that would distract from her ongoing battle with ABC’s Mary Bruce for most Biden-sycophantic White House correspondent. The cost of being Regime Media is that, more often than not, you are going to be made to look ridiculous. 

Dale Claims Soros Is a 'Target Of Anti-Semitic Conspiracy Theories'

After former President Donald Trump gave some remarks to reporters assembled outside of his New York trial on Tuesday, CNN’s host of The Lead, Jake Tapper, brought on the network’s resident fact-checker, Daniel Dale, to assess the accuracy of Trump’s claims. In one instance, Dale shamed Trump for calling D.A. Alvin Bragg a Soros-backed prosecutor, even going so far as to claim Soros is a frequent victim of anti-Semitism. Tapper began, “Let's bring in CNN's Daniel Dale, who fact-checks what we just heard from Donald Trump. He started off criticizing the case, what happened on the case. Daniel, then he turned to protests on college campuses, then he turned to inflation, then back to the case. What's -- what caught your notice?”     For his first fact-check, Dale chose a topic of questionable importance: is Trump leading in all the polls or merely most of them? He declared, “There was a lot there. Some of it was subjective opinion. I won't try to fact-check, but a few things to fact check. One, he claimed again that he's leading in all the polls. No, he's slightly leading in national polling averages, but he's trailing in a good number of polls, especially those that have come out in the last week or so. There are at least a few.” Dale then went off the rails, “He refers frequently to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, the prosecutor behind this case, as a Soros-backed district attorney. Now, I'd say there's some arguable basis for that, but I think it's important to clarify the facts.” He elaborated, “So, Mr. Soros, who's a liberal billionaire philanthropist, also a frequent target of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, did not make any direct contributions to Mr. Bragg's election campaign. He also says he's never spoken once to Mr. Bragg. What did happen was he donated to a liberal PAC that then in turn donated to Mr. Bragg's campaign, as well as other reform-minded prosecutors. So, this is at best a one-step removed relationship.” As Dale would say, “there was a lot there.” First, with anti-Semitism surging on college campuses, labeling criticisms of Soros’s political donations to far-left causes, including those anti-Israel encampments, as anti-Semitic is as nonsensical as it is appalling. Second, Dale wants to pretend as if Soros giving money to an organization, which in turn donates it to a candidate, is somehow evidence that Soros doesn't financially support Bragg. Soros doesn’t need to have spoken to Bragg to support him. Plenty of people donate to organizations, who in turn donate to candidates because they support those groups’ missions and trust them to donate to candidates who support that mission. Soros just does so in great quantity. Third, “reform-minded” is a convenient way of hiding their soft-on-crime progressivism. Here is a transcript for the May 7 show: CNN The Lead with Jake Tapper 5/8/2024 4:35 PM ET JAKE TAPPER: Let's bring in CNN's Daniel Dale, who fact-checks what we just heard from Donald Trump. He started off criticizing the case, what happened on the case. Daniel, then he turned to protests on college campuses, then he turned to inflation then back to the case. What's -- what caught your notice? DANIEL DALE: There was a lot there. Some of it was subjective opinion. I won't try to fact-check, but a few things to fact check. One, he claimed again that he's leading in all the polls. No, he's slightly leading in national polling averages, but he's trailing in a good number of polls, especially those that have come out in the last week or so. There are at least a few. He refers frequently to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, the prosecutor behind this case, as a Soros-backed district attorney. Now, I'd say there's some arguable basis for that, but I think it's important to clarify the facts. So, Mr. Soros, who's a liberal billionaire philanthropist, also a frequent target of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, did not make any direct contributions to Mr. Bragg's election campaign. He also says he's never spoken once to Mr. Bragg. What did happen was he donated to a liberal PAC that then in turn donated to Mr. Bragg's campaign, as well as other reform-minded prosecutors. So, this is at best a one-step removed relationship.

PLOT TWIST: Soros Comrade Condemns Bidenomics: ‘I’d Give Them an F’

The former managing director at Soros Fund Management panned President Joe Biden’s management of the economy during a CNBC appearance.  During the May 7 edition of Squawk Box,  Stanley Druckenmiller, billionaire investor and former chairman and president of Duquesne Capital, gave his frank assessment of Bidenomics — and it was not positive, to say the least. In the interview, CNBC anchor Joe Kernen asked Druckenmiller about the nation’s overspending under President Biden. In response, Druckenmiller seemed overcome by disgust before telling Kernen, “If I was a professor, I would give [Biden] an F." This is an incredible election-year statement coming from a man who once managed money for leftist billionaire George Soros. Earlier in the interview, Druckenmiller criticized Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and the Biden administration for the state of the economy. He said, “The day Powell pivoted, gasoline was $2. It went to $2.80. It's now at $2.55.” Druckenmiller also suggested that the current state of affairs would be politically damaging for Biden, adding, “the average American cares more about gasoline prices than they do about stock prices and they are getting hurt.” He went on to mention economic difficulties previously highlighted by CNBC: “There was an interview earlier on your show about people being priced out of the housing market.” This is true,  Biden’s policies are taking a toll on the average American. Since January 2021 (when Biden took office), the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate has risen from 2.77% to 6.8% on April 4, 2024.  Druckenmiller also mentioned that “Inflation is 21% higher than it was in 2019. To me, even politically, that's more consequential than keeping the markets up than trying to nail the soft landing and not having a recession.”   Indeed, Americans have been brutalized by 5.5% average monthly inflation under the Biden administration.  The former Duquesne Capital president went beyond the impact of Bidenomics on struggling Americans, suggesting that Biden’s missteps would have horrible ramifications for the future.  “All government needed to do was get out of their way and let them innovate. Instead, they have spent and spent and spent,” Druckenmiller said. “And my new fear now is that spending and the resulting interest rates on the debt that’s been created are gonna crowd out some of the innovation that otherwise would have taken place. We’ve got a 7% budget deficit at full employment. It’s just unheard of.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact ABC News (818) 460-7477, CBS News (212) 975-3247 and NBC News (212) 664-6192 and demand they report fairly on how Bidenomics is crippling the American economy.

Column: PolitiFact Shames Talk of 'Outside Agitators' at College Protests

You can tell when the PolitiFact website is going to negotiate around the facts. On May 7, their top headline on the home page asked: “Are ‘outside agitators’ co-opting campus protests?” This isn’t quite the right question. The media have presented these events as “student” protests, so if half the participants aren’t college students, how would they describe the non-students? PolitiFact writers Kwasi Gyamfi Asiedu and Loreben Turquero offered this summary: 1. Police, city and university officials nationwide have blamed “outside agitators” for campus protests but have provided little evidence for their claims. 2. Law enforcement experts say police often consider “outside agitators” to be people who move from city to city and are paid to be agitators. 3.  Historians say government and law officials commonly use the “outside agitator” narrative to delegitimize protesters and their demands. First, the “little evidence” is a weird claim, when PolitiFact’s article acknowledges facts like the New York Police Department reported that 32 out of 112 people arrested at Columbia’s private campus were unaffiliated with the university. At nearby City College, 102 out of 170 people arrested were not students. Add it up, and 134 out of 282 protesters were not students. So when Mayor Eric Adams complains about “outside agitators,” he’s not in need of a “fact check.” They even scolded leftist Reps. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) and Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) over their “agitator” concerns. They did not mention the recent story of an outside agitator named James Carlson, who was part of the army who briefly occupied Hamilton Hall at Columbia University. He’s a 40-year-old trust fund heir who owns a townhouse in Brooklyn worth $3.4 million. PolitiFact typically seeks out “experts” to match the narratives it wants to underline. They don’t like people suggesting these protesters aren’t local and they might be paid to protest. They found William & Mary law professor Timothy Zick to define the outside agitator spin: "It was used as sort of a phrase that would link protesters, no matter how peaceful they were, to Communists and other infiltrators who were causing disruption." The term is used to cast doubt on protester “sincerity.” Angus Johnson, "historian of student activism" at Hostos Community College in New York, explained, "The idea behind the concept of the outside agitator is that dissent can never be coming from the people who are expressing that dissent.”  They also turned to Johnston to underline, “Some experts have been quick to note the main goal of a protest is to get others to join in.”    This spin is nothing like how the media spun the Tea Party protests against ObamaCare legislation. They sought to discredit them as donor-funded “Astroturf” (not grass-roots). They went looking for the most racist or ignorant-sounding sign they could find, to present protesters as a kooky “fringe” movement.  NBC’s Chuck Todd decried “town hall madness.” The front page of The Boston Globe lamented the “quarrelsome masses hollering questions downloaded from activist websites." MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann ranted, “The truth is out about the societal sabotage dressed up as phony protests against health care reform...When Hamas does it or Hezbollah does it, it is called terrorism.” That looks pretty funny right now, since these protesters are a much better match for that Hamas spin. All of this was about "delegitimizing protesters and their demands." Protests are covered in wildly divergent ways, depending on whether the activists are on the Left or the Right. This is just as true for liberal “fact checking” organizations as it is for liberal media outlets. 

Networks Mourn Indefinite Postponement of Trump Classified Docs Trial

Across the dial, the network evening newscasts closed their coverage of the Trump business records trial in New York with coverage of another matter- the classified documents trial in Florida federal court. Specifically, a collective mourning over the fact that this trial won’t go before the 2024 presidential election. Most emblematic of the coverage: ABC, with its lengthy (for a brief) anchor introduction and framing question. Watch the full report as aired on ABC World News Tonight on Tuesday, May 7th, 2024: DAVID MUIR: And meanwhile, there's another breaking headline involving the former president tonight. The judge overseeing Donald Trump's classified documents case at Mar-a-Lago has now indefinitely postponed that trial. Is there any chance this now happens before Election Day? Let's get right to our Chief Justice Correspondent Pierre Thomas, live in Washington. Pierre, what have you learned? PIERRE THOMAS: David, the likelihood there will be a trial in the classified documents case before the election is fading fast. Judge Aileen Cannon has officially taken a May 20th trial date off the calendar, saying there were too many pretrial motions and legal issues to resolve before trial could go forward. Some of the issues have sat for months, and some are not even scheduled for hearings until later this month or June. The special counsel tonight declining to comment. But David, this delay makes it all but certain the classified documents case will not go to trial before the election. MUIR: Pierre Thomas tonight with us as well. Pierre, thank you. ABC Chief Justice Correspondent Pierre Thomas felt compelled to provide a full rundown as to the procedural reasons why the classified documents trial isn’t going forward, complaining that “some of the issues have sat for months”. Thomas then whines that this case will not go to trial before the election. A similar tone was struck at CBS, as far as whining over a lack of a trial before the general election. Below is the transcript of the full report as aired on CBS Evening News on Tuesday, May 7th, 2024: NORAH O’DONNELL: And Robert, I do need to ask you about a separate trial involving that classified documents. What have we learned today about that trial? ROBERT COSTA: Norah, a stunning development late today. Florida federal judge Aileen Cannon has now decided to indefinitely postpone that classified documents trial that was looming on the horizon for the former president, raising a real question about whether Trump will ever face a trial on that front before the election, or even this year. O’DONNELL: Robert Costa, thank you. Despite Costa’s hysterics, the development is not all that stunning. Not mentioned in these reports is that at least some of the hangup in the classified documents case is due to the procedures governing discovery under the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA), which governs discovery in this trial. Costa might not have been so stunned, perhaps, had he read CBS’s own primer on CIPA.  Fun fact, per the report: the CIPA bill was originally introduced by Senator Joe Biden. Finally, on NBC, the same lamentations citing the same complex motions, with one added bonus: Lester Holt and Laura Jarrett work in the January 6th trial, which is also on hold pending the Supreme Court’s opinion on presidential immunity. Below is the transcript of the full report as aired on NBC Nightly News on Tuesday, May 7th, 2024: LESTER HOLT: And Laura, at the top of the newscast, I mentioned a big development in another Trump case, this, the classified documents case in Florida. What happened? LAURA JARRETT: Yes, Lester, the judge tonight making official what was already widely expected, putting that trial date officially on hold, wiping it away, saying essentially there are too many unresolved issues and complex motions left to resolve here, Lester. HOLT: And one more federal case, the one focusing on election interference. Where does that stand? JARRETT: Lester, that one too also in limbo, with no trial date as we await a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court about whether the former president is in fact immune from prosecution at all, making this case in New York, Lester, perhaps the only case that will be complete before the November election. Lester. HOLT: All right. Laura Jarrett, thanks. Laura Jarrett closes her report by noting that the New York trial may well be the only one to conclude before the 2024 presidential election, thus forcing the left to settle for one quarter of its originally-scheduled judicial election interference- much to the chagrin of the Regime Media.  

NYT's Hypocritical Horror Over Al-Jazeera Ban: Tried to Kick Murdoch Out of AUS, UK

The New York Times came out stridently in defense of pan-Arab news network Al-Jazeera after the Israeli government temporarily shut down its local operations, claiming it was threatening Israel’s security by serving as a “mouthpiece” for Hamas. The paper was highly aggrieved over the “anti-democratic” move while ignoring Al-Jazeera’s history as a virulently anti-Israel outlet Arab news network. Of course, wartime censorship is not unheard of even in democracies (including Ukraine) or the Arab world in general, and Israel is existentially vulnerable surrounded by enemies and with elite opinion firmly on the side of the pro-Hamas demonstrators on college campuses throughout America. Five reporters in all contributed to The Times' report, “Israeli Cabinet Votes to Shut Down Al Jazeera’s Operations in the Country,” in Monday’s edition. Israel moved on Sunday to shut down local operations of Al Jazeera, the influential Qatari-based news network, in an unusual step that critics denounced as anti-democratic and part of a broader crackdown on dissent over Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Al Jazeera, a major source of news in the Arab world that has often highlighted civilian suffering in Gaza, of harming Israel’s security and inciting violence against its soldiers. Israeli officials did not immediately provide examples of Al Jazeera content it claimed posed a threat. In a statement, Al Jazeera called the decision a “criminal act” and said that “Israel’s suppression of the free press to cover up its crimes has not deterred us from performing our duty.” …. Pointing to the government’s diminishing tolerance for freedom of expression, Ms. Touma-Sliman noted that in November, she was suspended from all parliamentary activities for two months after publicizing press reports about Israeli forces attacking Gaza’s main hospital. The military had denied the accounts. Meanwhile, reporter Steve Lohr found “media experts” to condemn the only democracy in the region as a censor: “Media experts condemn Israel’s move against Al Jazeera.” The Israeli government’s decision to shut down Al Jazeera’s operations in that country and block its reports there was condemned by American media and free speech experts as a troubling precedent and further evidence that Israel was engaging in a harsh wartime crackdown on democratic freedoms. There was no criticism of Al-Jazeera from the Times itself, which merely relayed accurate Israeli criticism in a dismissive tone, even though Al-Jazeera has shown terrorist sympathies like throwing a “birthday party” with cake and fireworks in 2008, to celebrate the release of Lebanese terrorist, who killed four in Israel, including a four-year-old girl (see MEMRI’s clip). The Times also failed to mention that Al Jazeera reporters Ismail Abu Omar and Mohamed Washah were caught moonlighting as Hamas commanders. In February, The Times of Israel reported that "the IDF revealed a trove of images" that showed Washah in a Hamas uniform training fighters how to shoot rocket-propelled grenades, build warheads, and operate drones armed with an RPG. "Abu Omar infiltrated into Israel and filmed from inside Kibbutz Nir Oz during Hamas’s onslaught," they noted.   #عاجل #خاص في الصباح صحفي في قناة #الجزيرة وفي المساء مخرب في حماس! @AJArabic ⭕️خلال نشاط لقواتنا قبل عدة أسابيع داخل احدى معسكرات حماس في شمال قطاع غزة تم ضبط كمبيوتر متحرك يعود إلى المدعو محمد سمير محمد وشاح من مواليد 1986 من البريج حيث يتضح من المستندات ان محمد وشاح هو قائد… pic.twitter.com/s8CX1kOfvP — افيخاي ادرعي (@AvichayAdraee) February 11, 2024   By contrast, the Times has eagerly highlighted moves to squash outlets run by media mogul Rupert Murdoch’s supposedly dangerously right-wing news outlets. Censorship fever (from another media outlet!) ran particularly high in late 2020 and 2021, with the Times attacking Murdoch on bogus issues like climate change or spreading extremism. In February 2021, London bureau chief Mark Landler’s obsessive hostility toward Murdoch’s media empire was on display in his coverage of two fledgling right-of-center news outlets, in “Murdoch to Challenge U.K.’s Fairness Statute With Fox News Playbook.” He began with a tiresome attack against the “poisonous political culture” of Fox News, then suggested Murdoch could be banned in Britain, “where television news is regulated to avoid political bias.” In October 2020, Times reporter Isabella Kwai filed on an online petition in Australia targeting Murdoch, posted by former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, asking “the government to establish a Royal Commission, the country’s highest form of inquiry, into the dominance of Australian media by Mr. Murdoch’s News Corp.” Rudd called “Murdoch “an arrogant cancer on our democracy.” An impartial voice for sure! In January 2021, columnist Nicholas Kristof launched a quest to ban Fox News from basic cable packages (just for a start) in order to “stop supporting networks that spread lies and hatred, and cable companies should drop channels that persist in doing so….” But now that a left-wing anti-Israel outlet is being temporarily suspended during wartime, the Times conveniently morphs back into free-speech absolutists.

Hypocrisy: TikTok Cries Censorship in Ultimatum Lawsuit — Despite Banning Others

Communist Chinese government-tied TikTok is seemingly desperate to hold onto both its China ties and the American market. Last month, President Joe Biden signed legislation that would force TikTok into either divestment from its Chinese parent company ByteDance or a ban in America due to national security concerns. TikTok has now sued, claiming economic harm to creators and a free speech violation, according to Bloomberg. This argument is paradoxical because TikTok itself has an infamously anti-free speech track record. Bloomberg noted that the lawsuit marks the first legal challenge since the legislation was enacted. TikTok is claiming the legislation could suppress free speech and harm the business owners and users who benefit financially from the app, alleging an “illegal punishment without due process”, the outlet added. “There is no question: the Act will force a shutdown of TikTok by January 19, 2025, silencing the 170 million Americans who use the platform to communicate in ways that cannot be replicated elsewhere,” the company reportedly complained in the court filing. Experts have emphasized TikTok’s national security risks. Moreover, multiple former TikTok employees recently confirmed close ties between TikTok and Chinese ByteDance. As MRC founder and President Brent Bozell emphasized, “TikTok must divest itself from China if it wants to do business in the United States.” TikTok must divest itself from China if it wants to do business in the United States. We at the MRC have been consistent from the beginning. TikTok is a national security threat. @BrentBozell pic.twitter.com/FfSh1futU3 — Media Research Center (@theMRC) March 12, 2024 In April, the same month that the ban legislation was signed, TikTok announced a counteroffensive to suppress alleged “misinformation” and “conspiracy theories.” The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) owns a board seat and maintains a financial stake in TikTok’s parent company ByteDance. The CCP-tied app has repeatedly targeted free speech, making its free speech arguments incongruous. According to leaks, TikTok has censored content to please the CCP in the past, including videos about the independence movement in Tibet and the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. Last year, the app boastedabout removing over 500,000 videos related to the Hamas-Israel conflict. In 2022, MRC revealed that TikTok had “permanently banned” eleven pro-free speech organizations. Conservatives are under attack. Contact TikTok via email at communitymanager@tiktok.com and demand Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment and provide transparency. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Free Speech Alliance Members Applaud House Hearing on Leftist Tilt at Tax-Funded NPR

The House Energy and Commerce Committee's Oversight Subcommittee is holding a hearing on Wednesday morning to address the political tilt of taxpayer-subsidized National Public Radio. NewsBusters Executive Editor Tim Graham is one of the experts who will testify.  Members of the MRC-led Free Speech Alliance sent a letter to committee chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) applauding the hearing and insisting taxpayers "should not be compelled to pay for a politicized media outlet whose primary objective is to undermine American ideas and ideals." The letter argues PBS and NPR have made a mockery of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, which mandates “objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature.” Therefore, "NPR must not be rewarded for its unlawful behavior and anti-American objectives." Signatories include MRC founder and president Brent Bozell, Young America’s Foundation President Governor Scott Walker, American Values President Gary Bauer, and American Principles Project President Terry Schilling.  The letter is below:  Dear Chair McMorris Rodgers, We applaud your decision to investigate National Public Radio (NPR). Its politicized leadership and programming have once again been brought into the spotlight, but its history of biased reporting is legendary. It long ago abandoned even the appearance of abiding by its statutory mandates in favor of pursuing a leftwing agenda.  Taxpayers should not be compelled to pay for a politicized media outlet whose primary objective is to undermine American ideas and ideals, including our First Amendment free-speech rights as well as the economic system that creates the wealth that NPR feeds off of.  It is critical that this hearing expose NPR’s unlawful conduct and how its leadership and reporters have used its resources to pursue political outcomes.  For its entire existence, NPR and its sister organization, the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), have made a mockery of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, which mandates “objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature.” NPR must not be rewarded for its unlawful behavior and anti-American objectives. Many argue that no media outlet should be subsidized with US tax dollars, but NPR has certainly lost the moral authority to demand our continued support.  We encourage you to thoroughly investigate how NPR uses its talent and resources in contravention of the law. The Committee should determine the following:  With thousands of alternative media outlets now available to the public, has NPR outlived its usefulness? Are NPR’s hiring practices designed to prevent diversity of viewpoints in its programming? Has NPR used its power, reach and resources to interfere in elections, including the 2020 and 2024 presidential elections? Half of Americans are conservative or lean right in their political views; how does NPR attempt, if at all, to address the interests of this swath of Americans? In 1967, Congress determined that funding NPR and PBS, both entities under the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), was necessary since there were only three broadcasters on television and only a small number of news-oriented radio stations across the country. Today, the internet has allowed countless alternative news sources to flourish. There are tens of thousands of online media sites and countless podcasts where the public access news daily.  Black-and-white televisions have been replaced with 5G technology and most radio stations now have apps to compete with audio streaming services. Why should taxpayers continue to finance PBS and NPR now that there’s CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, Spotify, Pandora, Sirius XM, iHeart Radio, Amazon Prime, Apple Music, and countless others?  Thank you for holding this important hearing. We look forward to learning how the Committee intends to reform NPR and the role taxpayers play in funding its operations.  Sincerely, L. Brent Bozell III Founder and President Media Research Center   J. Christian Adams President and General Counsel Public Interest Legal Foundation   Saulius “Saul” Anuzis President The American Association of Senior Citizens    Brent Baker Vice President for Research and Publications Media Research Center   Gary L. Bauer President American Values   Ryan Bomberger CoFounder & Chief Creative Officer Radiance Foundation   David N. Bossie President Citizens United   Floyd Brown Founder The Western Journal   The Honorable T. Kenneth Cribb, Jr. Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs President Ronald Reagan   Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II   Elaine Donnelly President Center for Military Readiness   Steven Ertelt Editor LifeNews.com   Kevin Freeman Founder NSIC Institute   Mark J. Fitzgibbons President of Corporate Affairs American Target Advertising   Lady Brigitte Gabriel Founder & Chairman ACT For America   Paul Gessing President Rio Grande Foundation   Tim Graham Executive Editor NewsBusters   Mike​​​​ Gonzalez Angeles T. Arredondo E Pluribus Unum Senior Fellow, Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation   Mike Hill  Former Member  Florida State House   Phil Kerpen President American Commitment   Kelly M. Kullberg General Secretary American Association of Evangelicals    Jim Lakely Vice President & Director of Communications The Heartland Institute   George Landrith President Frontiers of Freedom   John Pierce  Chairman National Constitutional Law Union   Richard Manning President Americans for Limited Government   Josh Manning Deputy Managing Editor The Western Journal   Mr. Edward Martin President Phyllis Schlafly Eagles   James L. Martin Founder/Chairman  60 Plus Association   Christie-Lee McNally President Raven Strategies   Cleta Mitchell, Esq. Founder Election Integrity Network   C. Preston Noell III President Tradition, Family, Property, Inc The Honorable George K Rasley Jr Managing Editor ConservativeHQ.com   Khadine L. Ritter, Esq. Chairman Eagle Forum of Ohio   Craig Shirley Chairman and CEO Shirley & McVicker Public Affairs   Terry Schilling President American Principles Project   Cameron Sholty Executive Director Heartland Impact   Dan Schneider  Vice President for Free Speech Media Research Center   Jon Schweppe Policy Director American Principles Project   Sharon Slater President  Family Watch International   Sean Spicer Host The Sean Spicer Show   James Taylor President The Heartland Institute   Tim Throckmorton  President Lifepointe Ministries   Kristen A. Ullman President Eagle Forum   Governor Scott Walker President Young America’s Foundation   Gavin Mario Wax President New York Young Republican Club   Deborah Weiss, Esq.,  President, Vigilance, Inc   Tim Wildmon President American Family Association  

West Point Teaches Army Recruits About Cross Dressing & Gender Norms

Nope, this isn’t satire. Former Congressman Scott Taylor was recently sent an image of classes given to Army recruits at the U. S. Military Academy at West Point. One of the classes was titled “Uniformed Perspectives: The Evolution of Cross-Dressing in the Military and Gender Norms." The United States Military Academy was founded on March 16, 1802. It’s a four-year college that “builds, educates, trains, and inspires the Corps of Cadets to be commissioned leaders of character committed to the Army Values and ready for a lifetime of service to the Army and Nation,” its website states. It’s long been respected as the premiere institution for military and academic training. Now however, I have a feeling that once pristine reputation  - may be tarnished. The class, taught by Morten Ender, Professor of Sociology and co-chair for Diversity & Inclusion Studies, is an obvious indicator that our military training strategies are going woke. Other than the cross-dressing/gender norms class, Ender also plans to hold one called “Do My Leaders ‘Get’ Me?: Unpacking the Importance of Representation in the Military.” This was sent to me, classes at @WestPoint_USMA Quite sure China and Russia are not teaching this nonsense to their officers. Fix yourself. #dod #army pic.twitter.com/QrhEuG8nHb — Scott Taylor (@Scotttaylorva) May 4, 2024 In response to Taylor’s post about the classes, users on X were pissed that THIS is what our U.S. Military is prioritizing. “I expect China and Russia military schools have this up as a motivational poster, no longer fearing the U.S. military” one user wrote. Another user said, “For those that think the military will not be used against us, think again. This is not the military of old. This is the woke military.”  Others called the class “disgusting” and asked “what can we do?” This isn’t the first indicator that the U.S. Military is heading down a path of wokeness. Last month a member of our military posted a TikTok video in his camos shaking his booty for the camera. Last year the Navy appointed a drag queen for help in recruitment in order to attract a “talented” and “diverse workforce.” Similarly, oftentimes around pride month in June, multiple branches share their solidarity with LGBTQ people. In 2022 the U.S. Marines posted a helmet with rainbow pride bullets lodged in it, the U.S. Air Force wrote #CelebratePride in a post and the U.S. Space Force posted a graphic with the words “QUEER SPACE” on it and an astronaut holding a pride flag. Thing is, when our foreign threats see things like these, see that our eventual troops are learning about queer crap and cross-dressing instead of how to protect our nation, those foreign threats are going to have no fears of coming in and demolishing us. We need to facilitate a military of strong warriors, not woke social-justice warriors.

UPDATED: Facebook: We ‘Mistakenly’ Blocked Biden Opponent's Video… We Swear

UPDATE: After the publication of this piece, Facebook a Meta spokesperson responded to MRC Free Speech America's request for comment saying "The link was mistakenly blocked and was quickly restored once the issue was discovered." Meta has once again deemed Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s ideas too dangerous to be allowed on Facebook and Instagram. Kennedy’s Super PAC American Values 2024 (AV24) announced Sunday that it will file a lawsuit against Facebook and Instagram’s parent company after the platforms suppressed links to Kennedy's newly released documentary, “Who is Bobby Kennedy?”  “Facebook is putting its thumb on the scale this election,” Kennedy posted on X. “Please help me understand how this Woody Harrelson film about my life violates Facebook’s community standards?”   Kennedy uploaded the 30-minute film to Facebook on May 3.  But when Facebook users tried to share links to the film’s website, the platform claimed the content violated its “Community Guidelines” and would not allow users to post. Instagram users had a similar experience when trying to post the link in Instagram stories, according to screenshots included in a TikTok video that Kennedy’s team posted on May 5. The Kennedy Beacon, the substack newsletter of AV24, alleged that Facebook and Instagram labeled the documentary as “spam,” and accused the film of  showing “support or praise of terrorism, organized crime or hate groups,” “solicitation of sexual services,” and “sale of firearms or drugs.” AV24 also alleged that Facebook and Instagram have shadowbanned the film, citing low engagement numbers as evidence.  Tony Lyons, the founder of AV24, lambasted Facebook and Instagram for their actions infringing on the rights of the American voter. “When social media companies censor a presidential candidate, the public can’t learn what that candidate actually believes and what policies they would pursue if elected,” Lyons told The New York Times. “We are left with the propaganda and lies from the most powerful and most corrupt groups and individuals.”  Meta has since claimed that the video being labeled spam was a mistake rather than overt censorship.  “It was mistakenly blocked and corrected within a few hours,” said Meta spokesman Andy Stone told The Times. When asked for comment, a Meta spokesperson said that the link was blocked by mistake. "The link was mistakenly blocked and was quickly restored once the issue was discovered," said the spokesperson.    Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Time For a Reality Check: The Left Loves Furries, Trans People & Fetishes

Welcome to Woke of the Weak where I’ll update you about the most woke, progressive, insane, and crazy clips and stories that the left thinks is tolerable and well, point out why exactly they’re nuts. The left has a toxic tendency to think that it’s the arbiter of truth - that whatever progressives say is not only their truth but gospel truth and should not only be respected but widely accepted and spread throughout the nation. If you ask me, however, the left - well, most of it - is living in fantasyzland and needs nothing more than a reality check. This week we took a look at some of those examples of delusion. For starters, one teacher bragged about teaching his students about transgenderism. A different professor showed up to teach at UC Berkeley as a furry! At the same time, over at Columbia and Harvard, med students made cringey music videos to encourage students to attend their programs. I certainly hope that none of the “doctors” wasting their time making those videos become my physician anytime soon.   While thinking about people I don’t want to interact with, I’d also never like to interact with the man in the yellow dress and a sunhat who insisted that he deserved to use the women’s restroom. A different set of freaks held a pride event in Utah where kids were invited to check out the BDSM and fetish gear. Yup, that actually happened. Towards the end of the episode, we heard from a lady who explained that you were a bigot if you didn’t want to date an obese person, we saw a lady with lip injections the size of Texas and even a “demi-sexual trans lesbian.” Can’t make this crap up!

The Slow Decline of the United Methodist Church

“O never give me over to my own heart’s desires, nor let me follow my own imaginations!”– John Wesley There are many reasons for the modern church’s loss of its prophetic voice, politics being just one of them. As in ancient times, trying to embrace what the rest of the world is doing has diminished the power of the church to address what used to be called “sinful behavior.” The latest, but surely not the last example, is what the United Methodist Church did last week at their convention in Charlotte, North Carolina. Delegates voted 523 to 161 to replace the definition of marriage as exclusively between a man and a woman and will now allow gay Methodist ministers to be ordained and perform same- sex marriages. They dropped language that said homosexual practice “is incompatible with Christian teaching.” African delegates voted against the change. What do they know that others have forgotten? Marriage between a man and a woman IS compatible with Christian teaching. The majority of delegates should read and obey the Scriptures that John Wesley, the founder of their denomination, preached without compromise. In Genesis, it says: “A man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife and the two will become one flesh.” The idea is to express love through mutual pleasure and produce children. (Genesis 2:24) Jesus quotes that verse in the New Testament, affirming traditional marriage (Matthew 19:5-6) In Judges, it says: “In those days Israel had no king. Everyone did as he saw fit” (Judges 21:25). We see that reflected in today’s attitudes about sex, marriage and so many other things. Paul writes that in the end times, “to suit their own desires, they will gather round them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear” (2 Timothy 4:3). We have entered that age and not just when it comes to faith. It’s the same with politics and politicians, too many of whom are telling us what we want to hear, rather than what we need to hear. There are numerous warnings about what will happen – and has happened – if especially religious leaders ignore Scripture. The ancient Israelites were severely punished for doing just that and now too many Christian denominations are climbing into the same boat. But the boat is sinking, as reflected in the number of people who have left these churches. As The New York Times reported about Methodism three years ago, “ America’s second-largest Protestant denomination is in the final stages of a slow motion rupture that has so far seen the departure of a quarter of the nation’s roughly 30,000 United Methodist churches, according to the denomination’s news agency.” It has only gotten worse since then. What else should be expected if the preaching and teaching reflects what the secular world believes? Why attend these churches? Many congregants are fleeing to other denominations, spending their Sunday mornings at a local coffee shop or staying home. To put things on a secular level, most businesses that lose customers would change their way of doing business to win them back. Not the Methodists, Episcopalians, United Presbyterians, and a branch of Lutherans among others. They are doubling down. Strongly evangelical churches that believe and preach Scripture are growing. Heresy is a bad “business model” for the church. Martin Luther said: “Peace if possible, truth at all costs.” If we can’t agree on truth, then anything goes. Historically, the church has been a moral voice when it stood for what Scripture calls “righteousness.” It affirmed doing right things and opposed wrong things. It was a major influence in ending slavery, promoting the right to vote for women and civil rights. While there was opposition to all these, the right prevailed. If the church has lost its voice, who will speak up against wrong things? Who will listen?

‘Prove a Point’: The View Wants Trump in Gitmo for Violating Gag Order

No one has ever accused the liberal ladies of ABC’s The View of having rational, measured responses to political happenings. Last year, they decried the legal notion that former President Trump was entitled to a fair trial; then on Tuesday, they wanted him sent to “Guantanamo Bay” with the terrorists because he violated the gag order for his hush money trial and was held in contempt of court. Moderator Whoopi Goldberg had a bit of a breakdown after playing a soundbite of Trump outside the New York City courthouse condemning the gag order as a violation of his constitutional right to free speech. “When did you read the Constitution?” she screeched. “You know, you could’ve had – you had four years to read the Constitution and figure it out,” she added before her words broke down into indiscernible animal noises: “But I – He just read it now. He just read it. It’s a ba gah [gags and hisses].” Feigning high-mindedness, staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) bloviated that she was “conflicted over whether or not he should be held in contempt and … put in jail for it.”     Hostin came down on the side “put him in the clink” in order to “prove a point” about how it’s the judge who controls the trial and not Trump: HOSTIN: The other thing I will say. We all saw, many of us are old enough to have seen the O.J. case. Remember how Judge Ito lost complete control of the courtroom. And I think that had a lot to do with the win. You cannot let Donald Trump be a runaway train in that courtroom. GOLDBERG: No. No. HOSTIN: It's not his courtroom. It's the judge's courtroom. And so, I think to make a point, to prove a point, put him in the clink! Why not? Put him in the clink! This turn in the conversation got Goldberg so excited she started doing a little peepee dance.   peepee dance pic.twitter.com/0Y88TA05wz — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 7, 2024   “But which prison would be best?” Goldberg wanted to know. “Rikers” Island was “number one” for both Goldberg and Hostin (the latter was so excited they were on the same page that she did her own unhinged convulsions). Goldberg then floated some other prisons including reopening Alcatraz and the terrorist prison at Guantanamo Bay: GOLDBERG: But you know, I'm okay if he goes to Alcatraz and they re-open it. HOSTIN: Maybe. GOLDBERG: You know? What about Guantanamo Bay? Okay. (…) That's right! What about Supermax? Supermax would be interesting. El Chapo was in Supermax, you know, hey now, he wants to be with the hip people, come on. Faux-conservative Ana Navarro loved the idea of sending Trump to Gitmo because it “would be close to Mar-a-Lago. Melania can come and visit.” She followed that up with mocking laughter. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 7, 2024 11:18:20 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: When did you read the constitution? [Laughter] You know, you could’ve had – you had four years to read the Constitution and figure it out. [Applause] But I – He just read it now. He just read it. It’s a ba gah [gags and hisses] – SUNNY HOSTIN: Even if he read it, it didn't matter to him. Right, Whoopi? I'm sort of conflicted over whether or not he should be held in contempt and put in pri -- he's already been held in contempt but put in jail for it. But I do think that 71 percent of Americans have said that he should be put in jail if he is convicted. The other thing I will say. We all saw, many of us are old enough to have seen the O.J. case. Remember how Judge Ito lost complete control of the courtroom. And I think that had a lot to do with the win. You cannot let Donald Trump be a runaway train in that courtroom. GOLDBERG: No. No. HOSTIN: It's not his courtroom. It's the judge's courtroom. And so, I think to make a point, to prove a point, put him in the clink! Why not? Put him in the clink! [Applause] GOLDBERG: Ooh, ooh, oh! If – I don't want this to sound like I'm doing wishful thinking. HOSTIN: Yes. GOLDBERG: But which prison would be best? [Laughter] HOSTIN: I know which one. GOLDBERG: I’m going to give you— HOSTIN: Rikers. GOLDBERG: Well, that’s what I – That’s number one; is Rikers! But you know, I'm okay if he goes to Alcatraz and they re-open it. HOSTIN: Maybe. GOLDBERG: You know? What about Guantanamo Bay? Okay. ANA NAVARRO: Oh, that would be close to Mar-a-Lago. Melania can come and visit. [Mocking laughter] GOLDBERG: That's right! What about Supermax? Supermax would be interesting. El Chapo was in Supermax, you know, hey now, he wants to be with the hip people, come on. So, these are my suggestions in case anybody wants to know. (…)

Jacqui Time Drops Hammer on WH Supporting Israel, Whether Student Camps Need to Go

In case you missed it, Monday’s White House press briefing was dominated by questions about Hamas supposedly agreeing to a ceasefire deal that, as we would quickly find out, was one they more or less concocted on their own (as opposed to one backed by Egypt, Israel, Qatar, and the U.S.), so Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich made a point to wonder whether the Biden regime still wants Israel to win the war. “John, noting everything that you’ve said about the concerns expressed by the U.S., about the risk to Palestinians in Gaza with a full-scale operation, is the U.S. still aligned with Israel in its intention to eliminate the terrorist threat posed by Hamas,” Heinrich wondered to national security spokesman John Kirby.     When Kirby replied with a simple “of course”, Heinrich followed up: And is there any feeling that Hamas may be trying to trick the public in some way? You heard Israeli officials commenting on this latest proposal as a trick, and there’s been a lot of pressure...on the administration to make sure that the needs of Palestinians are — are being served and that the U.S. support for Israel isn’t, you know, overhanded. And you had the — the report come out earlier today, or maybe yesterday that the U.S. was potentially weighing withholding an arms shipment to Israel. Is there any concern that Hamas was trying to capitalize on that public pressure and, you know, play a trick, as Israeli officials put it? Since he’s apparently the only adult in the room with ounces of moral clarity (but not here when he did his best Jean-Pierre impression), Kirby said he would only be able to “answer that question unless I got between the ears of Mr. Sinwar, and that’s a place I really don’t want to be” and these questions need to go to him. Kirby then lowered the boom on these radical Islamists: You know, it’s interesting. I stand up here and answer questions. Karine, Matt Miller at the State Department, Pentagon colleagues, the President does, Prime Minister Netanyahu does, and the IDF military spokesman does. You know who hasn’t answered a single question about his intentions and what games he might be playing or where he intends to take this? Mr. Sinwar, head of Hamas, and I think it’s a — I think it’s high time that he answers some of these questions, and he come clean about what his intentions are. After he said the administration’s examining it, Heinrich questioned whether it’s “still a good idea to try to negotiate with terrorists”. Kirby countered that, unfortunately, “you gotta negotiate with who you got to negotiate to get people back with their families.” Heinrich closed whether she began with concerns about the U.S. supporting “Israel’s intention to eliminate Hamas.” Kirby didn’t back down and said Israel has the “right and responsibility to go after the Hamas threat — to eliminate that threat” that inflicted such harm on their citizens. The Fox correspondent also got in a few questions to Jean-Pierre on the pro-Hamas encampments on college campuses. After a “no” on the possibility that Biden would “get out there and talk to students,” Heinrich asked about whether President Biden and the administration would support a dismantling of a the (terrorist sympathizing) camp at the George Washington University (click “expand”): HEINRICH: GW’s president has called for Metro police in D.C. to intervene to dismantle what they’ve deemed an illegal encampment and D.C. police have so far refused to respond to that call. It’s happening in the President’s backyard. Is there any reaction from the White House on what should happen?” JEAN-PIERRE: So, that is something that I’m going to leave to the local law enforcement and universities., That’s for them to figure out — for them to work it through. They know what is happening on the ground, and we’ve always been very clear about that and we’ll continue to be clear about that. We’re going to continue to call for peaceful protest and, you know, dissent cannot lead to disorder and so going to continue to be very, very clear, as the President has been — as I have been, and so many of us here in this administration has been. HEINRICH: Any idea why DC police would not respond to this call? JEAN-PIERRE: I would — I would refer you to the D.C. police. That’s something for them to speak to. Elsewhere in the briefing, an Al Jazeera correspondent and The Wall Street Journal’s Annie Linskey kvetched to an unfortunately sympathetic Kirby about Israel shutting down the pro-Hamas, Qatari-funded Al Jazeera (click “expand”): LINSKEY: And just really quickly. The Israelis stopped broadcast of Al Jazeera over the weekend. Can you comment on whether that’s appropriate action for a United States ally? KIRBY: We don’t support that action. As we said, very clearly on World Press Freedom Day on Friday, I know Karine talked about this, the work of independent journalism around the world is absolutely vital. Um — it’s important to an informed citizenry and public, but it’s also important to — to — uh — to help inform the policy making process, so we don’t support that at all. LINSKEY: And did the President bring it up at all in his call? KIRBY: The focus of the call was on hostage deal and on Rafah. KARINE JEAN-PIERRE: I’m gonna give you to — KIRBY: But you say my — sorry — I think I put a statement out this morning on that. So we have officially reacted to it. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Al Jazeera in the back. AL JAZEERA CORRESPONDENT: Thank you so much, Karine. Thank you, John. Uh, is that administration planning on discussing the banning of Al Jazeera in Israel with the Israeli government? We just celebrated the freedom of the press here in the United States and across the globe, and then this decision came and it was really a big shock. KIRBY: As I just said, we don’t — AL JAZEERA CORRESPONDENT: Will this administration raise this issue with the government of Israel? KIRBY: We have raised this issue and I made a — a public statement about it. On a different topic NBC’s Gabe Gutierrez and CBS’s Ed O’Keefe ended the briefing by questioning Jean-Pierre about the seemingly never-ending saga of Governor Kristi Noem’s (R-SD) memoir: NBC's @GabeGutierrez: “Just really quickly. What's your response to Kristi Noem’s comments, implying that Commanders should be put down?” KJP: “Look, you know, when we learned last week, obviously, like all of you in her book that she killed her puppy, you heard me say that was… pic.twitter.com/QmxlsIZlms — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 6, 2024 To see the relevant transcript from the May 6 briefing, click here.

Retired IDF Officer Calls Out Hasan For 'Parroting Hamas's Talking Points'

Former MSNBC host and current CEO and editor-in-chief of Zeteo Mehdi Hasan joined CNN NewsNight host Abby Phillip and Foundation for Defense of Democracies fellow and retired IDF Lieutenant Colonel Jonathan Conricus on Monday to discuss the latest Israel-Hamas War developments. Hasan finally got his comeuppance as Conricus accused him of “parroting Hamas’s talking points,” despite Phillip pointing out Hamas’s latest propaganda is just that: propaganda. Specifically, Phillip was talking about Hamas’s claims that it has accepted a ceasefire, “But it's really kind of a counterproposal that includes elements that they know Israel never agreed to. So, was this some kind of propaganda effort by Hamas to say, ‘we're at the table, we're agreeing to something’?” The short and correct answer would be “yes,” but Hasan suggested Hamas’s announcement was some sort of negotiating genius, “The Israelis apparently were on board until, of course, Hamas agreed, and then the Israelis’ bluff was called. And now they're saying, well, we don't agree to this proposal because we want to free the hostages, even though the proposal would help free the hostages. You saw Haaretz, the Israeli newspaper—”     Phillip cut him off, “Can I just pause you there for a second, because I think I just want to add one bit of information I think is critical here? The part that Israel didn't agree to is the part that calls for a permanent end to the war and I think this is really what is at issue here, that Israel has never agreed to that.” Undeterred by facts, Hasan kept rolling, “In what world is Hamas going to say, we're going to release all the hostages and you carry on killing us? Obviously, outside world, America, Western countries has been wanting a ceasefire for a while. We were told Hamas was the obstacle, and now they're calling Israel's bluff.” He also claimed “the obstacle to a hostage deal has always been Benjamin Netanyahu… Those are the words of Haim Rubinstein, the former spokesperson for the hostage's family, who told the Israeli press last week that Netanyahu’s been the obstacle. He says that they found out there was a deal on the table back on October 9th, 10th to get hostages released, but Netanyahu hid it from them.” Hasan naturally omitted the major detail that Israel would have to agree not to enter Gaza. No country that just suffered a crime that was the per capita equivalent of 13 9/11s was going to agree to that. Still, Hasan thought the reason for the war’s continuation is Israeli domestic politics, “He hid it from them because he knows that if he agrees to a hostage deal, his fascist colleagues and his coalition government will collapse his government. This is Israeli domestic politics.” Phillip then turned to Conricus, “If the hostages are all released, shouldn't Israel seriously consider ending hostilities in Gaza and allowing for a political settlement that leads to the future?” Later on, Phillip would press Hasan about how Hamas could dictate the terms of its own surrender in a war it started, but for now, Conricus began, “Yeah, I'm listening to the second edition of Mehdi Hasan's monologue that I saw earlier and it's not surprising that you're parroting Hamas' talking points.” He then doubled down while pointing out that the timing of Hamas’s announcement was awfully convenient: They're the ones for the last four months have been refusing any… now, when push comes to shove and when they see Israeli tanks lined up on their way to Rafah, all of a sudden they are agreeing. They're agreeing to something that wasn't on the table. And it's quite absurd that this is even how it's covered. And it’s classic deception 101 by an organization that is very savvy in deception and unfortunately has figureheads and mouthpieces all over western media doing their work, whether it's Al Jazeera or other places, and getting that message that out that Israel is the problem, when Israeli civilians and soldiers are the ones that have been abducted. That is the problem with Hasan. He sets up a strawman about Israel’s position, only this time someone was there to call him out on it. Other shows that think he is worth their while should do the same. Here is a transcript for the May 6 show: CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip 5/6/2024 10:24 PM ET ABBY PHILLIP: But I want to ask you about this reporting, about Hamas, saying publicly they've agreed to a ceasefire deal. But it's really kind of a counterproposal that includes elements that they know Israel never agreed to. So, was this some kind of propaganda effort by Hamas to say, we're “at the table, we're agreeing to something”? MEHDI HASAN: Well, look, the reporting we have says that, yes, it was an Egyptian-Qatari proposal that the Americans were involved in, too, Abby. The CIA director, Bill Burns, has been involved in this. The Israelis apparently were on board until, of course, Hamas agreed, and then the Israelis’ bluff was called. And now they're saying, well, we don't agree to this proposal because we want to free the hostages, even though the proposal would help free the hostages. You saw Haaretz, the Israeli newspaper— PHILLIP: Can I just pause you there for a second, because I think I just want to add one bit of information I think is critical here? The part that Israel didn't agree to is the part that calls for a permanent end to the war and I think this is really what is at issue here, that Israel has never agreed to that and that maybe this is a counter-proposal, but that means essentially that everybody has to get back to the table and agree to what is on the table now. HASAN: Yes. But let me just say, in what world is Hamas going to say, we're going to release all the hostages and you carry on killing us? Obviously, outside world, America, Western countries has been wanting a ceasefire for a while. We were told Hamas was the obstacle, and now they're calling Israel's bluff. The reality is, Abby, that the obstacle to a hostage deal has always been Benjamin Netanyahu. And those are not my words. Those are the words of Haim Rubinstein, the former spokesperson for the hostage's family, who told the Israeli press last week that Netanyahu’s been the obstacle. He says that they found out there was a deal on the table back on October 9th, 10th to get hostages released, but Netanyahu hid it from them. Those are the words of the spokesperson for the Israeli families of the hostages. And he hid it from them because he knows that if he agrees to a hostage deal, his fascist colleagues and his coalition government will collapse his government. This is Israeli domestic politics. PHILLIP: Lieutenant Colonel, what about that? I mean, if the hostages are all released, shouldn't Israel seriously consider ending hostilities in Gaza and allowing for a political settlement that leads to the future? JONATHAN CONRICUS: Yeah, I'm listening to the second edition of Mehdi Hasan's monologue that I saw earlier and it's not surprising that you're parroting Hamas' talking points. Really, let's put things here in perspective. We have a terrorist organization that abducted civilians and soldiers. They're the ones for the last four months have been refusing any deal that Israel, the U.S., Qatar, Egypt and others have put forward. And now, when push comes to shove and when they see Israeli tanks lined up on their way to Rafah, all of a sudden they are agreeing. They're agreeing to something that wasn't on the table. And it's quite absurd that this is even how it's covered. And it's classic deception 101 by an organization that is very savvy in deception and unfortunately has figureheads and mouthpieces all over western media doing their work, whether it's Al Jazeera or other places, and getting that message that out that Israel is the problem, when Israeli civilians and soldiers are the ones that have been abducted.

Biden’s Lapdog: Emails Expose YouTube as White House’s Gold Standard of Censorship

YouTube, the famous video-sharing platform, was shockingly co-opted by the Biden White House to become the gold standard of censorship.  On May 1, the House Judiciary Committee’s Select Weaponization of Government Subcommittee released a voluminous report exposing lengthy correspondence between the White House and Facebook, YouTube and Amazon.  YouTube’s team was particularly receptive to the demands of the administration and was touted by Biden officials as an exemplar to prod other companies, specifically Facebook.  Meta Director of Global Engagement Nick Clegg stated that Senior White House Coronavirus Advisor Andy Slavitt informed him about attending a “misinfo” meeting where “the consensus was that FB [Facebook] is a ‘disinformation factory.’” In contrast to Meta, Slavitt claimed that YouTube “has made significant advances to remove content leading to vaccine hesitancy whilst” the Mark Zuckerberg-owned platforms “lagged behind.” Leaked emails show that YouTube’s relationship with the Biden administration began in January 2021. Early on, Biden officials like White House Digital Director Rob Flaherty expressed an interest in YouTube’s content moderation policies, specifically around vaccine hesitancy. On April 12, 2021, Flaherty sent an email to YouTube to inquire about the company’s acts to stifle dissenting opinions on vaccines. “Heya – A while ago, I met with folks from Google about misinformation and COVID-19,” Flaherty wrote. “Was hoping to connect again with folks from your side about the work you’re doing to combat vaccine hesitancy, but also crack down on vaccine misinformation.”     The following day, on April 13, a Google employee communicated to a coworker instructions to add to the “Feb COVID19 Misinformation Deck” and referenced a meeting with Flaherty in which the White House official expressed a keen interest in “borderline content.” A Google calendar invite sent to Flaherty references a meeting with YouTube on April 21 titled “YouTube Vaccine Misinfo Meeting.” The topic of the briefing was “general trends seen around vaccine misinformation” and “the empirical effects of YouTube’s efforts to combat misinfo, what interventions YouTube is currently trying, and ways the White House (and our COVID experts) can partner in product work.” According to Flaherty, the concerns about vaccine hesitancy were a matter of nationwide policy concern and reflected the personal desires of President Biden himself.  “But we want to make sure that you have a handle on vaccine hesitancy generally and are working towards making the problem better,” Flaherty wrote in an April 21 email. “This is a concern that is shared at the highest (and I mean highest) levels of the WH, so we’d like to continue a good-faith dialogue about what is going on under the hood here. I’m on the hook for reporting out.” Internal emails from Google’s team reveal that Flaherty was very hands-on with YouTube’s censorship activities and was prodding them to go even further to eliminate dissenting views. “It’s worth noting this quote from WH Digital Director Rob Flaherty (Who, as this group knows, has been tough on us at times)...” a Google employee mentioned.   Occasionally, the YouTube team would be actively threatened by Flaherty and had their motives called into question, other emails show. In a July 20, 2021 email, Flaherty demanded accountability from YouTube after a CNN fact-checker tweeted a screenshot that showed “anti-vaccine” content. One of the suggested videos was a debate on vaccines between legal scholar Alan Dershowitz and environmentalist attorney (now Independent presidential candidate) Robert F. Kennedy Jr.  “We had a pretty extensive back and forth about the degree to which you all are recommending anti-vaccination content,” Flaherty said. “You were pretty emphatic that you are not. This seems to indicate that you are. What is going on here?” In one instance, Flaherty also requested that YouTube actively propagandize by promoting the FDA’s approval of the Pfizer vaccine. “Now that the FDA has approved Pfizer, I’m making the rounds to get a sense from the various platforms how (or if) folks are planning to promote it in any way,” Flaherty wrote. “We’d appreciate a push here, given the fact that this is an oft-cited blocker for many folks,” he added.  The influence of the Biden White House was so pervasive at YouTube that its Trust and Safety Team actually sent a draft of its new content moderation policies for vaccine content to the White House for final approval. “Our YouTube Trust and Safety Team is working to finalize a new policy to remove content that could mislead people on the safety and efficacy of vaccines,” said an email sent from a Google employee to Flaherty. “We would like to preview our policy proposal for you and get any feedback you may have. Are you available to meet this Friday (9/24) or Monday (9/27)?”  Coordination between the White House and YouTube was not limited to vaccines, however. Other subjects that the White House pushed to be censored included “Russian misinformation,” “climate misinformation” and “reproductive health misinformation” (abortion). The May 1 report also uncovered that the Biden administration exerted similar pressure on Facebook and Amazon. Like YouTube, Facebook changed its content moderation policies as a result of applied pressure from the Biden White House. Amazon, while not a social media platform, changed its usual practices to suppress books on its website that questioned vaccines or other COVID narratives.   Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable

Is Soros Buying Universities’ Silence on Anti-Semitic Agitators?

First on MRC Business: George Soros’ Open Society Foundations sunk massive amounts of cash into several universities—most of which have been a breeding ground for radical anti-Israel students and whose administrations responded poorly to protestors, agitators and rioters trespassing, breaking into and occupying buildings and harassing Jewish students. Both the New York Post and Politico have reported on Soros’ connections to the groups leading the anti-Israel protests. And now, an MRC Business investigation exposed how Soros has also given at least $34,638,060 to the nine universities that have made headlines for their slow response to anti-Semitic protests and riots, as well as their ineffectual or possibly even sympathetic administrators. Among the recipients of Soros funding connections were Columbia University, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania (UPenn), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), University of North Carolina (UNC), University of Southern California (USC), City University of New York (CUNY), the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and, of course, the University of California Berkeley from 2016 to 2022. Soros also poured money into media and journalism-related initiatives at several of these schools, including $2,399,360 to Harvard, $1,827,560 to Columbia, $366,369 to UNC and $125,000 to CUNY.  The accusations of anti-Semitic sentiments at Harvard, MIT, UPenn and Columbia were so severe that all four presidents of these universities have been called to testify before Congress. The presidents of UPenn and Harvard resigned in disgrace due to their failure to address campus anti-Semitism. Former Harvard President Claudine Gay also failed to clearly condemn the anti-Semitic phrase “From the River to the Sea,” which calls for the genocide of the Jewish people. The president of Columbia only allowed police to clear out trespassing anti-Israel agitators after they barricaded themselves inside a building, trashed it and prevented people from going in or out.  At CUNY and UNC, anti-Israel hecklers tore down the American flag while raising the Palestinian flag above the campus. Students have occupied and attempted to occupy buildings, trashed their campuses with garbage and graffiti, and acted with basic impunity due to a lack of decisive actions from their university administrations.  Other universities have taken anti-Semitism more seriously. University of Florida president Ben Sasse famously stood his ground against violations of campus policy on campus and in the pages of The Wall Street Journal.   At Florida State, the administration cleared out a prohibited encampment in five minutes, faster than former President Harry Truman recognized the restoration of Israel. The University of Notre Dame chose to have anti-Israel protestors arrested after their event continued after its allotted time. The University of South Florida has also enforced its policies against anti-Israel protesters.  Princeton University took action against students occupying a campus building, having 13 arrested for this incident while having two other students arrested to enforce a policy against tents.   Of five universities that acted swiftly to condemn unlawful behavior by anti-Israel agitators, Soros gave a total of $1,685,040 from 2016 to 2022. That’s a lot less than $34 million.  MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider asked why these universities have tolerated this behavior for so long. “This draws into question whether the Hamas nine are allowing these agitators to run amok so as to keep the gravy train flowing. Columbia seems addicted to the Soros cash. Will the Hamas nine universities do anything to keep the money flowing?” Schneider asked.  Not all the anti-Israel agitators have been students, according to the New York Post. The Post, citing law enforcement sources, stated that 134 of 282 people arrested during recent violent protests at New York universities had no connection to the schools they were arrested at. New York City Mayor Eric Adams (D) backed the idea that campus protests were being inflated or even led by “outside agitators” during a May 1 press conference.  The Post also reported in an April 27 article that some of “the protests are being encouraged by paid radicals who are ‘fellows’ of a Soros-funded group called the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights (USCPR),” which pays them up to $7,800 and trains them to organize pro-Palestinian campaigns.  Disturbingly, Soros has a long record of funding anti-Israel groups. Soros gave $525,000 to Jewish Voice for Peace between 2017 and 2022, a group that has figured prominently in campus protests.  Even POLITICO, far from a conservative media outlet, recently reported that Soros has funded three anti-Israel groups involved in the campus protests: Jewish Voice for Peace, IfNotNow and the Adalah Justice Project. As noted by the New York Post, all three of these radical groups have been involved in anti-Israel protests since Hamas launched a terror attack against Israel last fall.  During the aftermath of the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attack, MRC President Brent Bozell and Schneider pointed out that Soros had heavily funded seven of the groups that spoke up in defense of acts of Hamas terrorism. This included $550,000 in donations for the pro-Hamas group Al-Shabaka, which issued a horrifying statement papering over murder and rape with the phrase “decolonization is not a metaphor.” The leftist billionaire also made an absurd comment about the terrorist group, saying that America and Israel “must open the door to Hamas.” The president of Soros’ Open Society Foundations Lord Mark Malloch-Brown has also advocated in favor of Hamas, arguing that “Hamas must be a party to a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian problem.” Conservatives are under attack! Contact ABC News (818) 460-7477, CBS News (212) 975-3247 and NBC News (212) 664-6192 and demand they report on Soros’s funding of anti-Israel causes. Note: The author of this article graduated from the University of Notre Dame. 

Oliver Doubles Down On Attempt To Bribe Thomas Off The Court

HBO’s host of Last Week Tonight, John Oliver, traveled to NBC’s Late Night with Seth Meyers on Monday for one of his periodic visits to his network-based cohorts. During his visit, Oliver and Meyers reminisced about the time Oliver promised Justice Clarence Thomas $1 million to “get the fuck off the Supreme Court,” with Oliver doubling down, “Honestly, I'd open it up again.” Meyers recalled that “there is something that has not happened yet that you threw out into the universe. You basically offered Clarence Thomas a million dollars a year—not just a million dollars, a million dollars a year if he resigned from the Supreme Court.”     Amid cheering from the audience, Oliver also remembered that it is “so easy to feel that way when you didn't make the offer and I felt exactly like you until the offer went out on TV. I was so excited. "Oh, that was fun. That show went really well. Oh [bleep], it's about to happen now, isn't it?" After a bit about how Oliver’s wife was not as thrilled as the audience with the idea, he declared, “It was both a huge relief and massively disappointing that he didn't take it.” Meyers then wondered, “What was the window of time you gave him?” Oliver then doubled down, “It was—we gave him 30 days. Honestly, I'd open it up again. If— ahead of — As long as—As long as he gets out before the—before they're doing the June decisions. I would be willing to open discussions again.” After a bit of self-revelation that Thomas probably wasn’t watching, Meyers joked that Thomas’s wife Ginni was, which led Oliver to continue, “Yeah, if you want to get in touch and open up the negotiations again, I still have the contract in the drawer in my desk, and I'd be willing to do that. Again, until one of us dies, and hopefully that will be you.” For Meyers, that last bit was “just self-preservation” to avoid having to make large amounts of million-dollar payments, but Oliver doesn't have to worry because Thomas isn't the corrupt vote-seller the bit pretends that he is. Here is a transcript for the May 6-taped show: NBC Late Night with Seth Meyers 5/7/2024 1:08 AM ET SETH MEYERS: There is something that has not happened yet that you threw out into the universe. You basically offered Clarence Thomas a million dollars a year -- not just a million dollars – JOHN OLIVER: Yeah. MEYERS: -- a million dollars a year if he resigned from the Supreme Court. OLIVER: I did do that. I did, yeah. Yeah. Easy. MEYERS: Easy. OLIVER: Easy -- so easy to feel that way when you didn't make the offer and I felt exactly like you until the offer went out on TV. I was so excited. "Oh, that was fun. That show went really well. Oh [bleep], it's about to happen now, isn't it?" MEYERS: Now, I imagine there's multiple people you just – OLIVER: Oh, yeah. Yes. MEYERS: -- Have to talk to about that. People, lawyers – OLIVER: For sure. MEYERS: Your wife. OLIVER: Definitely. MEYERS: Were they as applaud-y as this group? OLIVER: I would say my wife was on the low side of the applaud-y. It was more, "What did you just tell me?" I did say to her, it's until one of us dies. And I think that if he takes the offer -- MEYERS: Not you or your wife, you or Clarence Thomas. OLIVER: No, yeah, that's what I'm -- no, no. Yeah. Well, you diagnosed the awkwardness in that room really well. “Why would you put that in the offer, you sociopath?”  Until I or Clarence Thomas die. And I did feel like if he took the deal that there were going to be some people so angry with me that they were going to kill me. Therefore, my wife wouldn't be on the hook for the money. But she didn't take that as the reassuring statement that I hoped. “Oh, I won't be around for that. Don't worry. It's fine.”  But it would have -- if he said -- it was both a huge relief and massively disappointing that he didn't take it. MEYERS: What was the window of time you gave him? OLIVER: It was -- we gave him 30 days. Honestly, I'd open it up again. If-- ahead of -- As long as -- MEYERS: Yeah. OLIVER: As long as he gets out before the -- before they're doing the June decisions.  MEYERS: Yeah. OLIVER: I would be willing to open discussions again. So Clarence, I know I keep -- every time I'm talking to Clarence through the camera here. MEYERS: Sure, yeah, yeah. Of course. OLIVER: Clarence, I know you're a big fan of Seth. MEYERS: Yeah. I think he -- I think he's not, but Ginni has it on. OLIVER: Ginni-- Ginni is just a fan of just the canon of Late Night. MEYERS: Oh, just loves it, yeah. OLIVER: Yeah, if you want to get in touch and open up the negotiations again, I still have the contract in the drawer in my desk, and I'd be willing to do that. MEYERS: That's really cool. OLIVER: Again, until one of us dies, and hopefully that will be you. MEYERS: More than fair. OLIVER: You know, like -- MEYERS: That's just self-preservation.

MRC Announces Third Annual Bulldog Award Winners: Hanson, Shapiro, Dillon, Zito, Schweizer, Akiva and Prager

With our third annual Bulldog Awards in six categories announced today, the Media Research Center is honoring conservatives in the media who truly deserve accolades yet will never receive them from the news media establishment. The winners of the MRC’s 2024 Bulldog Awards: Victor Davis Hanson, Ben Shapiro, Seth Dillon, Salena Zito, Peter Schweizer, Kassy Akiva and Dennis Prager. The biggest journalism awards, the Pulitzer Prizes, were announced on Monday, May 6. Inevitably, they honored journalists who pushed liberal agenda topics. (See the bottom of this post for some examples.) In announcing this year’s winners, Media Research Center President Brent Bozell III said: “Like everything else the left controls, major journalism awards are rigged to reward people who advance their most radical agenda priorities. If you want to win a Pulitzer, write about 'climate change' or 'systemic racism' or 'reproductive health' or promote ‘Russian collusion.’ If you want to win a Bulldog Award, tell the truth. This year's winners are great American truth-tellers.” Bozell added, “I applaud Victor’s wise insights, Ben’s savage podcasts, Seth’s mockery of the left and defense of free speech, Salena giving voice to Middle-America, Peter’s damning investigations, Kassy’s war coverage and exposing anti-Semitism and Dennis’s can’t-miss radio show and work at PragerU. Congratulations to this year’s winners!” Previous: 2022 and 2023 Bulldog winners Details on the seven winners of the MRC’s 2024 Bulldog Awards announced Tuesday, May 7: ♦ 2024 MRC Bulldog Award for Lifetime Achievement: Victor Davis Hanson The leading conservative thinker and author of our age, Victor Davis Hanson has for decades offered wise guidance on a wide range of issues, providing intellectual fuel for conservatives battling the latest liberal schemes to undermine traditional American values.   A man of many skills and passions, he’s a farmer, university professor, historian and prolific author. In 2007, President George W. Bush awarded him the National Humanities Medal. He’s written or edited 25 books, and is probably best known for his 2002 treatise, ‘Carnage and Culture: Landmark Battles in the Rise to Western Power.’ His latest book, the much-anticipated ‘The End of Everything: How Wars Descend into Annihilation,’ is being published this week. For years his articles were must-reads in the pages of National Review. Today, cable news viewers who are privileged to catch one of his appearances always come away with a broader and deeper understanding of the issue at hand. He’s now the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, where his focus is on classics and military history. He also teaches in the School of Public Policy at Pepperdine University.     ♦ 2024 MRC Bulldog Award for Outstanding Podcast: Ben Shapiro Ben Shapiro is a super-star of podcasters, his popular podcast rightly touted as “the hardest hitting, most insightful, and savagely irreverent conservative podcast on the web.” In a sign of his popularity and desire of so many to hear his takes on the latest news, radio stations across the country air his daily podcast as a radio show. A whole generation of young conservatives considers Shapiro an inspiration and point to him when asked who is the conservative voice they trust the most. He is also a leading speaker on college campuses where he’s willing to confront liberal assumptions and “woke” students on the most contentious issues. Shapiro’s podcast and radio show are part of a much larger media empire he has been a key player in building. He’s the founding editor-in-chief and editor emeritus of The Daily Wire, a profitable media company producing a wide-array of original products which push conservative values into the wider hostile culture, including a popular news web site, video shows and audio productions, and a pioneering move into original production documentaries and entertainment films from a conservative perspective.   ♦ 2024 MRC Bulldog Award for Outstanding Social Media Personality: Seth Dillon Seth Dillon, a battler for free speech and producer of much-needed mockery of cancel culture, has been CEO of The Babylon Bee since 2018. He’s grown the site into a national treasure, a compelling daily creator of articles and videos decimating, through satire, the Left and “woke” culture. Dillon observes that “jokes are funny because of their proximity to the truth” and “the problem now isn’t that our satire is too close to reality, it’s that reality is too close to satire.” As “Your Trusted Source for Christian News Satire,” the Babylon Bee drives liberals crazy as conservatives laugh at how the site skewers liberals with their own hypocrisy. So-called “fact check” and social media sites have embarrassed themselves by deplatforming and canceling Dillon and the Babylon Bee for supposed disinformation, unable to recognize satire or tolerate any ridicule of themselves. In on the joke, the X page for the Babylon Bee, restored by new X owner Elon Musk, dubs itself: “Fake news you can trust.” Indeed it is. ♦ 2024 MRC Bulldog Award for Outstanding Columnist: Salena Zito Salena Zito is the “Middle America”-whisperer, relaying the views and passions of the heartland to those on the coasts. As she best explains herself: “In my estimation, there is no patch of geography in this country that is the ‘middle of nowhere.’ This is America; everywhere is the middle of somewhere.” Based in Western Pennsylvania, she joined the Washington Examiner in 2016 as a political reporter and columnist, just in time to chronicle Donald Trump’s popularity in her region. Her columns also appear in the New York Post and she appears as a guest on the Fox News Channel and Newsmax. In 2018, she co-authored, ‘The Great Revolt: Inside the Populist Coalition Reshaping American Politics.’ Amongst her unique 2023 column takes: “Community colleges and trade schools are largely void of Israel-Hamas protests”; “What the ‘Great Trucking Recession’ is warning us about the economy”; “The general store that cultivated a community one Friday at a time”; “Faith groups come together in Youngstown to ‘Stop the Violence’”; “Democrats abandon the blue-collar worker in favor of ‘social justice’ warriors” and “Mike Rowe is on a mission to reverse the ‘unspeakable stupidity’ of devaluing work.” ♦ 2024 MRC Bulldog Award for Outstanding Investigative Journalism: Peter Schweizer Anyone who watches the Fox News Channel or Newsmax knows Peter Schweizer as the go-to expert on all things China, particularly of late, the Chinese payment scandals involving Joe and Hunter Biden. But he’s first and foremost a driven investigative book author, uncovering topics ignored by the liberal media. An impressive eight of his books have made it onto the New York Times’ best-seller list. He hit #1 earlier this year with his latest, ‘Blood Money: Why the Powerful Turn a Blind Eye While China Kills Americans.’ Previous ground-breaking books include 2022’s ‘Red-Handed: How American Elites Get Rich Helping China Win’; in 2018, ‘Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends’; and in 2015, ‘Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.’   An earlier book, ‘Throw Them All Out: How Politicians and Their Friends Get Rich Off Insider Stock Tips, Land Deals, and Cronyism That Would Send the Rest of Us to Prison,’ was so compelling that even the liberals at CBS’s 60 Minutes considered it worth featuring on their program. He conducts his investigative journalism through the Florida-based Government Accountability Institute, which he founded in 2012 “to investigate and expose crony capitalism, misuse of taxpayer monies, and other governmental corruption or malfeasance.” ♦ 2024 MRC Bulldog Award for Outstanding Blogger: Kassy Akiva A reporter and video journalist for The Daily Wire since October of 2023 after serving as a digital journalist for FoxNews.com, Kassy Akiva is a dedicated chronicler of the excesses of the left. Since October 7 and the start of the Israel/Hamas War, Akiva has been a force in covering the anti-Semitism festering on college campuses across the country. Since she calls Boston home, she has been able to shine a spotlight on the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hatred at Harvard in particular which contributed to national pressure on the university’s president, Claudine Gay, to resign. (“‘Can’t Fool Me’: Arab-Speaking Israeli Slams Rashida Tlaib For Lie About ‘From the River To The Sea’ Chant” and “‘Harvard Does Not Have Our Back’: Rabbi Slams University At Hanukkah Event Attended By Claudine Gay”). Akiva’s fearless reporting on the war even took her halfway around the world to the combat zone itself. While in Israel, she visited the Kfar Aza kibbutz to witness firsthand the carnage and evil Hamas terrorists unleashed on Israeli civilians. She also scored an exclusive with a Thai man who survived Hamas’s attack and who was able to identify his captured roommate on surveillance video from the Al Shifa hospital. (“EXCLUSIVE: Survivor of Hamas Attack Identifies Hostage From Al Shifa Hospital Footage As His Roommate”). She got the journalism itch earlier, taking the initiative, while still in college, to create the Lone Conservative, a blog to empower conservative students outnumbered on leftist campuses.   ♦ 2024 MRC Bulldog Award for Outstanding Radio Talk Show Host: Dennis Prager Radio talk show host, podcaster, author, columnist and business pioneer, Dennis Prager’s work ethic is the envy of many. Prager got his start in radio in 1982 at KABC in Los Angeles. He’s had a national show on the Salem Radio network since 2009 and now can also be watched via a simulcast on the Salem News Channel video streaming service. His noontime ET national radio show delivers sober takes on the news of the day, which Prager uses to launch deeper expositions on the conservative principles that inform his political stands based on ethical monotheism. He’s genuinely interested in the perspectives of his callers, engaging them in informative exchanges. Beyond radio, in 2009 he founded Prager University (PragerU), “the most viewed conservative video site in the world, with one billion views a year, more than half by people under the age of 35.” PragerU’s videos, with “the best ideas from the best minds distilled into five focused minutes,” extend the reach of conservative values to new audiences, particularly inquisitive high school and college-age students.   2024 Pulitzer Prizes. As noted above, the biggest journalism awards were announced on May 6. Inevitably, they honored journalists who pushed liberal agenda topics. Examples: > The New Yorker earned the “explanatory reporting” Pulitzer for “a searing indictment of our legal system’s reliance on the felony murder charge and its disparate consequences, often devastating for communities of color.” > The Washington Post won in “national reporting” for “its sobering examination of the AR 15 semiautomatic rifle which forced readers to reckon with the horrors wrought by the weapon often used for mass shootings.” > ProPublica was awarded the “public service” prize for trying to discredit conservative Supreme Court justices, particularly Clarence Thomas. The friendly framing from the Pulitzer board praised the “groundbreaking and ambitious reporting that pierced the thick wall of secrecy surrounding the Supreme Court to reveal how a small group of politically influential billionaires wooed justices with lavish gifts and travel.” > 2023 MRC Bulldog Award winners > 2023 MRC Bulldog Award for Lifetime Achievement: Brit Hume > 2022 MRC Bulldog Award winners > 2022 MRC Bulldog Award for Lifetime Achievement: Cal Thomas  

Will Noem-Focused Media Allow Gov. Hochul’s Casual Racism To Slide?

The corporate media, quick to characterize conservative reaction to the news of the day as “pouncing” and seizing”, are currently doing just that all over Gov. Kristi Noem’s latest book and the revelations therein. Which is their right. But in the interest of walking and chewing gum at the same time, there should be an equal focus on statements just made by New York Governor Kathy Hochul. Watch as Gov. Hochul demonstrates the left’s casual bigotry of low expectations, saying to WashPost editor and MSNBC/PBS host Jonathan Capehart’s face that there are “black kids growing up in The Bronx who don’t even know what the word ‘computer’ is”: KATHY HOCHUL: In fact, I talk to a lot of other people who say, “I wish my governor had thought of that first”, and I say, “No no, this is New York. We like to be first, with all due respect to people from other states. It's sort of- it's sort of our attitude. You know, “we will be the best- we will be the first”. And I want others to follow because right now we have, you know, young black kids growing up in The Bronx who don't even know what the word “computer” is. They- they don't know- they don't know these things, and I want the world to open up to all of them because when you have their diverse voices innovating solutions through technology, then you're really addressing society's broader challenges. Can you get away with casual racism so long as you wrap your casual racism around some woke word salad? Hochul certainly seems to think so. And Capehart offers no challenge or pushback against what Hochul is saying here. From a journalistic perspective, of course.  One immediately wonders what the fallout would be if it were a conservative saying such things. Where would media reaction fall on a scale of 1-Chernobyl? The more prominent the governor, the closer to Chernobyl. Just imagine the coverage if, say, Ron DeSantis had said something similar. There is literally no excuse for the media not covering Hochul’s statements. The lazy corporate media tend to turn New York stories into national stories. By extension, THIS is a national story. In this day and age, Hochul’s utterances warrant ceaseless A-block coverage up and down the dial. We’ll soon find out whether governor scandals draw equal coverage on the merits, or whether there in fact is a (D)ifference.  

NBC Only Evening Newscast To Cover Blocked U.S. Weapons Transfer To Israel

News broke yesterday of a blocked U.S. weapons transfer to Israel, as ceasefire negotiations appeared to be stalled and the invasion of Rafah appeared imminent. A full day later, no evening network newscast reported on this dramatic shift in U.S. policy towards Israel save for NBC Nightly News.  Even then, the report was sparse: an addendum tacked on to the end of Richard Engel’s dispatch on Hamas’s acceptance of a ceasefire deal negotiated between Hamas and Hamas. Watch all 28 seconds of genre-leading coverage, as aired on NBC Nightly News on Monday, May 6th, 2024: LESTER HOLT: Richard, meanwhile we've learned The White House has stopped a U.S. shipment of military aid to Israel. RICHARD ENGEL: This is a rare move, Lester. The White House blocking a large shipment of offensive weapons including 2,000-pound bombs, just as Israel's intensifying military operations in Rafah. Two administration officials confirming it, but say that it does not reflect a shift in overall policy. The White House isn't commenting. Lester. HOLT: Richard Engel, thank you. That 28 seconds was more than ABC or CBS mustered on their respective evening newscasts, which is surprising given the magnitude of such a story breaking over the weekend, and especially so within the context of an impending (or ongoing, depending on who you ask) IDF invasion of Rafah. As Axios reported: The Biden administration last week put a hold on a shipment of U.S.-made ammunition to Israel, two Israeli officials told Axios. Why it matters: It is the first time since the Oct. 7 attack that the U.S. has stopped a weapons shipment intended for the Israeli military. The incident raised serious concerns inside the Israeli government and sent officials scrambling to understand why the shipment was held, Israeli officials said.   President Biden is facing sharp criticism among Americans who oppose his support of Israel. The administration in February asked Israel to provide assurances that U.S.-made weapons were being used by Israel Defense Forces in Gaza in accordance with international law. Israel provided a signed letter of assurances in March. Axios goes on to report that the shipment was blocked last week. Perhaps this is what prompted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to say the following as part of his statement on Holocaust Remembrance Day: From here in Jerusalem, I am sending a very clear-cut message: you will not chain our hands and even if Israel has to stand alone, it will stand alone and will continue to fight our enemies until victory. None of this was reported to the American people, who got all of 28 seconds across three network prime-time newscasts. It seems important, too, this shift in U.S. policy towards a significant ally. One is ultimately left wondering whether coverage of the war in Gaza is driven by facts on the ground of poll numbers coming out of Michigan. The handling of this story suggests the latter.  

NewsBusters Podcast: 'SNL' Thinks Dumb Trumpers Get Their News from T-Shirts

We witnessed another mediocre edition of Saturday Night Live on NBC, but one snippet of the "Weekend Update" fake-news caught my attention. It came from fake anchor Michael Che, blink and you’ll miss it. He joked Biden supporters are "more likely to get their news from newspapers and mainstream media, while Trump supporters get their news from T-SHIRTS!" The T-shirt on screen said “Joe Biden sucks.” Translation: Democrats read The New York Times for hours, then probably master the crossword puzzle in a half-hour. Republicans read T-shirts and maybe a bumper sticker or two. Yes the right-wingers are too stupid for news reports in complete sentences. SNL’s analysis of media consumption among conservatives are pretty much like the scribbles on the front of a T-shirt. SNL could be speaking for our media elites. If you fail to read them and trust them implicitly and follow all of their political marching orders, they assume you hate a free press and wish desperately for the End of Democracy. Also: A new poll from AP and the American Press Institute found only 14 percent of expressed a great deal of confidence in election-related information they receive from national media. By contrast, 52 percent have little or no confidence at all in the information they receive from national news organizations. 53 percent, say they are extremely or very concerned that news organizations will report inaccuracies or misinformation during the election. Imagine that! AP media reporter David Bauder turned to American Press Institute chief Michael Bolden, who said “Years of suspicion about journalists, much of it sown by politicians, is partly responsible, he said. People are also less familiar with how journalism works.” Reporters have sown “years of suspicion about politicians.” That’s how investigating politician performance could be described. So why would investigating journalist performance draw complaints of “sowing years of suspicion”? Why can they never be evaluated for how they serve the public? They want to run the country, and they don’t want you complaining about it, okay? Bolden is implying that politicians have swindled the public with this liberal-bias thing, because they’re not very bright. Then he lobbed another insult, that people aren’t familiar with “how journalism works.” Oh no, we know exactly how it works, and we know it's not working for us. Enjoy the podcast below, or whenever you listen to podcasts. 

MSNBC Airs Threat To Possible Trump Veeps: You Could End Up Being Executed!

The liberal media isn't waiting for Donald Trump to announce his running mate before going on the attack. MSNBC has aired a pre-emptive strike on all the potential VP candidates. And not only did it contain a vitriolic denunciation of them, but it also included a not-so-veiled threat of the most ominous sort. Tara Setmayer, a former Republican congressional staffer turned member of the disgraced Lincoln Project, was a guest on Sunday's edition of MSNBC's The Weekend. Here's how she vilified the people whose names are apparently in the running as Trump's running mate: "They're despicable hypocrites. These are the worst people, because Donald Trump couldn't become who he has become, the malignancy of Trump could not have spread like this without the enablers.  "Plain and simple: these are Vichy Republicans. And for the historians out there, they will appreciate what happened to the Vichys during World War II." "What happened to the Vichys?" Readers will recall that during WWII, the Vichys were established in France as a puppet government of Nazi Germany. They were a government of Hitler collaborators.  And, to answer Setmayer, "what happened" to the Vichys? When the war ended, more than 10,000 were executed. So Setmayer was sending a chilling threat to the potential VP candidates and anyone else who might "collaborate" with Trump: you might meet the same fate as the French collaborators with the Nazis! And the liberal media denounces Trump's alleged disregard for the rule of law and threats against opponents? Note: This wasn't the first time we've caught Setmayer jumping ugly against Republicans. Last year, when Ron DeSantis was riding high as a potential Republican presidential candidate, we noted Setmayer attacking his wife Casey as a "Serena Waterford wannabe." As we wrote at the time: "Waterford is the character from The Handmaid's Tale who has been described, in a website about screen villains, as "the cruel, fanatically religious wife of Fred Waterford, the dictator of Gilead." Setmayer did stop short of recommending Vichy-collaborator treatment for Casey DeSantis.

ABC Commiserates with Nathan Wade, Bemoan ‘Whirlwind of Distraction’ From Jailing Trump

On Sunday’s World News Tonight and Monday’s Good Morning America (GMA), ABC rolled out the first two segments on their flagship newscasts of their network exclusive interview with former Fulton County, Georgia special prosecutor Nathan Wade over losing his job nearly two months ago in the 2020 election case against former President Trump and 18 others because of his illicit romantic relationship with District Attorney Fani Willis. Correspondent, Sunday World News Tonight anchor, and ABC News Live host Linsey Davis didn’t lob one softball after another, but she largely let him off the hook by fretting Wade and Willis were caught and thus were a collective “whirlwind of distraction” from the fourth Trump indictment and letting Wade offer no serious apologies as he called their trysts “as American as apple pie.” On Sunday night, Davis opened with Wade’s soundbite that “[w]orkplace romances are as American as apple pie” and occur with “everyone” but bemoans the fact that they were caught. Asked if he regrets becoming involved with Willis, Wade replied he only “regret[s]” this “private matter became the focal point of this very important prosecution”. In the other Q&A, Davis only wondered if they had really grappled with the fact that “democracy is on the line, as has been described” and thought of putting the country above their relationship. Wade again displayed zero remorse, only saying he’d “concede that that could have been an approach, but...when you are in the middle of it, these feelings are developing, and you get to a point to where the feelings are — are — are so strong that, you know, you start to want to do things that really are none of the public’s concern.” While Wade won’t end up in prison, the guy belongs in some sort of dog house or horny jail for how shameless the man remains about his escapades. Monday’s GMA brought about just over six and a half additional minutes of this cringe. Davis boasted that “Wade had a lot to get off his chest” about losing the case he had “spen[t] 865 days” working on what would be yet another case of election interference.     Setting the tone this wouldn’t be grilling by starting with Wade telling her he “want[s] people to know the real me”, Davis reracked the first exchange that aired on Sunday night about office sex is “as American as apple pie” and he only regrets being caught. Davis then fretted “[t]he relationship created a whirlwind of distraction from the indictment of former President Trump and 18 others for alleged election interference” and put the brakes on their prosecutions. As a way to seem tough, she quoted far-left feminist Post columnist Monica Hesse and wondered why it took them 25 days to fight back (click “expand”): DAVIS [TO WADE]: A Washington Post columnist wrote, “what were they thinking? How would they start a romance, embroiled in the prosecution of a former President, start a romance and not see this trouble coming a mile away.” And so, what were you thinking in that moment? WADE: You know, again, you — you don’t plan to — to develop feelings. You don’t plan to — to fall in love. You don’t plan to — to — to have some relationship in the workplace that we — you don’t set out to do that and those things develop organically. They develop over — over time. And the — the minute we had that sobering moment, we discontinued it. DAVIS: For nearly one month after news of their relationship broke, neither prosecutor acknowledged it publicly. [TO WADE] So, for 25 days, we didn’t hear from — from you or District Attorney Willis. You’re a public servant — right — getting paid by the state of — of Georgia. Why not say, okay, we’ll — we’ll make a statement, get on top of this? WADE: Let me say this. My conversation here with you today is just that. It’s — it’s Nathan’s conversation. I — I do not speak for the district attorney’s office. I do not speak for their position. As a matter of fact, I am certain that they would rather me not be having this — this exchange with you. So, with that, I want to continue to protect the integrity of this prosecution. I don’t want to say or do anything that would jeopardize this case. After a comical aside with Wade claiming his relationship with Willis hasn’t had an effect on the case, Davis somewhat incredulously and somewhat sympathetically played along as he claimed he wasn’t ready for the public spotlight from having been named to the case and whined about Trump attacking him (click “expand”): DAVIS: One aspect Wade said he wasn’t prepared for was the intense public scrutiny and harassment he said he’s faced. [TO WADE] So, you didn’t realize when you took the case your life was going to be under a microscope? WADE: I did not realize that my life would be in danger. The microscope — I don’t have a problem with. The truth is I — you know, the worst that you could find was the fact that I had a relationship with someone or that I — I happened to be going through a divorce, that’s okay. That — that’s okay. I — I had nothing to — to hide. DAVIS: And some of the attacks have come from the former President himself. [TO WADE] Is there any part of you that regrets that you gave him any aspect to say, oh, you have to question the credibility of this case because of the relationship between Fani Willis and Nathan Wade? WADE: So, while — while I will concede, Miss Davis, that the relationship did not happen in ideal timing, I don’t think that anything that occurred during the course of the relationship should cause question as it would relate to the efficiency of the indictment, as it would relate to evidence that was uncovered and — and — and may or may not be presented at — at trial. Following one final clip of Wade expressing confidence the trial will happen, Davis told the GMA crew back live that “one thing Wade says he does regret is the impact the scandal has had on his adult children” and “[h]e wants people to know he was separated at the time of the relationship with Fani Willis”. To see the relevant ABC transcripts, click here (for May 5) and here (for May 6).

‘Come on The View!’ MSNBC Biden Flack Defends Him Refusing Pressers

You can take the press secretary out of the White House, but you can’t take the White House out of the press secretary. Despite now being a member of the press (after her ethically dubious hiring by NBC/MSNBC), former Biden Press Secretary Jen Psaki appeared on Monday’s edition of The View and defended President Biden’s refusal to do press conferences and his desire to only grant sit down interviews to friendly media outlets that give him a tongue bath. Psaki was teed up by faux-conservative co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, who framed her question about Biden’s lack of “press availabilities” as her providing free campaign advice: So Jen, you have been on both sides as working as a press secretary, but also now being in the media. And there's been a lot of criticism of Biden, most recently from The New York Times that he's held the fewest interviews and press availabilities of any president since Reagan. I personally think it would help dispel some of the concerns about his age if he did more. What would your advice be to the White House in terms of his accessibility to press? The former press secretary turned MSNBC host began by suggesting that it was so hard for Biden to pick which media outlets to give interviews to because, “the benefit of the media environment right now…is that there are so many choices” and the goal is “just trying to communicate with the American people.”     Played to her hosts’ massive egos, Psaki further advised Biden that “he should come on The View before he does a press conference.” Which got an excited “Thank you!” screech from Farah Griffin. Psaki argued that it was better for the American people to hear Biden take part in “real conversations” with hosts that love him (and shows The View co-hosts seemed to enjoy): PSAKI: He should because people want to have real conversations about issues that are happening. I think press conferences are important, but I also think him doing Howard Stern – SUNNY HOSTIN: Yes! PSAKI: -- that's an interview that reached a broader audience of people. Him talking to the guys from Smart List, which is a great podcast – SARA HAINES: Oh, I love that podcast. “So, I would say more Howard Stern. Come on The View. You know, more Smart List conversations where you’re having conversations about policy, but they're real ones that people have at their kitchen table,” she declared. Pretend-independent co-host Sara Haines even suggested that she rarely hears any important information distributed during a press conference, which she claimed were “just gotcha moments.” “Sometimes, as a citizen, when I watch I don't want just the same just like catching moment. I want to know what's going on and I don't always get that from a press conference,” she lamented. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 6, 2024 11:39:34 a.m. Eastern (…) ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: So Jen, you have been on both sides as working as a press secretary, but also now being in the media. And there's been a lot of criticism of Biden, most recently from The New York Times that he's held the fewest interviews and press availabilities of any president since Reagan. I personally think it would help dispel some of the concerns about his age if he did more. What would your advice be to the White House in terms of his accessibility to press? JEN PSAKI: Well, I think the benefit of the media environment right now – there's a lot of challenges, but I'll start at the optimistic side – is that there are so many choices. And when you’re communicating from the White House, I mean, respect for freedom of speech and freedom of the press is important, but you're also really just trying to communicate with the American people. So, my view is he should come on The View before he does a press conference. [Applause] FARAH GRIFFIN: Thank you! PSAKI: He should because people want to have real conversations about issues that are happening. I think press conferences are important, but I also think him doing Howard Stern – SUNNY HOSTIN: Yes! PSAKI: -- that's an interview that reached a broader audience of people. Him talking to the guys from Smart List, which is a great podcast – SARA HAINES: Oh, I love that podcast. PSAKI: So, if you are in the White House, you're not thinking about, “Am I checking the box on doing the most interviews?” You're thinking about, “Am I doing the most I can to communicate my message to the American people?” That's who I represent. So, I would say more Howard Stern. Come on The View. You know, more Smart List conversations where you’re having conversations about policy, but they're real ones that people have at their kitchen table. HAINES: And they're also not just gotcha moments. PSAKI: Yeah. HAINES: Sometimes, as a citizen, when I watch I don't want just the same just like catching moment. I want to know what's going on and I don't always get that from a press conference. PSAKI: Yes. Exactly. (…)

Silly Us: Google Regurgitates Typical Excuse After Slashing MAGA Ad

Google is back to its old censorship tricks, leaving no room for MAGA sense of humor. Last Friday, Google made some waves on X when it was caught censoring an ad supporting former President Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign multiple times. Google reportedly restored the ad the following day, claiming it had flagged it “in error.” MRC President Brent Bozell decried this sorry excuse. “This is unacceptable,” he said. “Why did Google remove the ad from Trump's Super PAC in the first place? This is a continuation of a campaign against conservatives.” Bozell's reaction came after Google censored a Trump ad scheduled to run from May 1 to May 3, according to screenshots of Google’s Ad Library posted by Andrew Arenge, a director of operations for the Program on Opinion Research and Election Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. The ad depicted a fictional phone call between a Biden campaign aide and a voter. “Everything costs more. Food, gas, rent,” the voter complained. The campaign aide was piped back, touting Biden's disastrous immigration policy. “OK, but Biden’s helping pay rent for newcomers to America from around the world,” the campaign aide responded.  The voter was not impressed, saying “You mean, illegal immigrants? I’m struggling to pay my bills, but Biden’s paying rent for illegals? They get handouts, and I’m paying for it.” The voter added, “Things were better before Biden. I’m voting for Trump!”  Trump’s Super PAC is running this ad in rural Georgia counties targeting Black men. pic.twitter.com/mcRMkGsqLN — Alex Thompson (@AlexThomp) May 3, 2024 Google’s recent bout of censorship should come as no surprise and must be called out for what it is. “This is election interference, pure and simple. Congress must investigate @Google for this and the other 41 cases of election interference we found since 20[0]8,”  Bozell posted on X Friday.  This is election interference, pure and simple. Congress must investigate @Google for this and the other 41 cases of election interference we found since 2018. https://t.co/Gd1hEF1xJA — Brent Bozell (@BrentBozell) May 3, 2024 MRC Free Speech America released a study in March detailing 41 times Google was caught interfering in U.S. elections, beginning in 2008, intensifying in 2016 and continuing into 2024. The platform has repeatedly demonstrated its willingness to engage in election-interfering tactics including creating AI that has a bias against certain candidates, launching autofill manipulation and burying candidates' campaign websites in their search results.  But Google always seems to either ignore the problem or frame it as an unfortunate, albeit unintentional, “error.” As Bozell described it, “When Google gets caught interfering in elections, they reverse themselves claiming an 'error' occurred.” This happened in 2020 when the platforms suspended then-Rep. Tulsi Gabbard’s (D-HI) ad account during the height of her popularity, and in 2008 when Google’s blogging platform flagged then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) supporters.  And the censorship always seems to impact candidates who step in the way of the most extreme leftist candidate, regardless of party—and Google has yet to answer for its ongoing election interference.  Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

24-Year-Old Teacher Arrested After Allegedly ‘Making Out’ With 5th Grader

Another week, another teacher sexually assaulting a student. Maddison Bergmann, a 24-year-old Wisconsin elementary school teacher, was arrested recently after allegedly making out with one of her 5th grade students. Screenshots from numerous text message conversations between the victim and Bergmann suggest that the sexual abuse took place during lunch or after school, CBS News reported. Apparently, the victim’s mother overheard a phone call between Bergmann and her son which prompted the mother to go through her 11-year-old's cellphone. The victim then told investigators that he spoke with Bergmann “almost daily.” When the child’s father found out about the alleged relationship, he marched to River Crest Elementary with the printed conversations from his son's phone, leading to police being called “regarding inappropriate conduct between a current teacher and a 5th grade student.” Additionally, court documents indicate that Bergmann’s bag had a folder in it with handwritten notes from the victim. The victim noted that the boy and his teacher would write notes to one another talking about “kissing each other” throughout the day. Related: Church Volunteer Accused of Sexual Assaulting 15-Year-Old Boy “One of my cousins is in the 5th grade and I can't imagine a man talking to her how we talk. I know we have a special relationship and I do love you more than anyone in the world but I have to be the adult here and stop,” one of the notes, allegedly from Bergmann, said. Documents also report that Bergmann told the victim how much she enjoyed “him touching her” and “making out” with him, the New York Post reported. After being arrested and released on a $25,000 bond, Bergmann has been placed on administrative leave and faces one count of first-degree child sexual assault. Her fiancé has since reportedly called off their July wedding, shocking no one. Sadly, stories like this one are becoming way too common. It’s essentially weekly that we here at MRCTV report on another teacher sexually assaulting one or more of her students, often repeatedly. If you were considering homeschooling and needed something to push you in one direction or the other, this is it. Follow us on Twitter/X: Woke of The Weak: The Left Needs Therapy & You Might Too After Watching This The people featured in this video really need therapy & our prayers too. pic.twitter.com/zLbJcivOW3 — MRCTV (@mrctv) April 30, 2024

ABC, CBS Ignore Frat Bros Who Saved American Flag from Pro-Hamas Mob

Last week, a group of heroic Pi Kappa Phi fraternity brothers from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill saved an American flag from being torn down a desecrated by a mob of anti-Semitic/pro-Hamas student extremists. But in the week since the incident occurred, the flagship morning and evening newscasts of ABC and CBS ignored the incident, while NBC only gave their heroism in the face of evil anti-Americanism a fleeting eight seconds on NBC Nightly News two nights later. To be fair, the broadcast networks were too busy whining about the pro-Hamas encampment at Columbia University being busted by the NYPD. ABC in particular was also busy lying about the UCLA encampment being “largely peaceful.” And CBS was busy worrying that the protests could hurt President Biden’s reelection chances. ABC and CBS might argue that they thought that the flag-saving incident didn’t rise to a level that would allow it to be considered a national story, but that’s debunked by the fact that at least NBC gave it a few seconds. NBC correspondent Liz Kreutz tucked the frat bros into a much larger report on the college encampments generally. “This American flag at UNC put back in place and protected in part by a group of fraternity brothers after protesters had replaced it with a Palestinian flag,” she said.   This 8-seconds from NBC Nightly News (May 2) was all the Big Three broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) could muster for the heroic frat bros at UNC who saved an American flag from the anti-Semitic/pro-Hamas extremists who gathered on campus. It's been a week. pic.twitter.com/kxtQtVnTMi — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 6, 2024   On Thursday’s edition of NewsNation’s On Balance, host Leland Vittert spoke with three of the brothers to get a sense of what it was like in the moment and what it’s been like since the video of them saving the flag went viral. “When we saw our brothers there defending that flag, there was no doubt in any of our minds that we're going to go and join them,” Zachary Serinsky explained. “I'm glad that it was able to be put to an end. And the way that it did eventually. But yeah, we were there defending our brothers and there wasn't going to be anything that was going to stop us from going to that flag.” When asked about the GoFundMe campaign set up on their behalf to pay for a party (which at the time of the interview had raised over $400,000) and the John Rich concert they were getting as a reward, Trevor Lan stated: I mean, I think that we can all agree that we didn't anticipate that that part of it would occur, but we did know that it's important to stand strong on our beliefs and to be a representation of what we hope to see for Jewish students and for students who believe in our flag and democracy across the country.     Brendan Rosenblum said that people have reached out to them about job opportunities, “But again, like, that's not what this was about. It was just to bring attention to the issue we believe in.” He was also hopeful about how their actions changed the conversation on campus. “People are talking to both sides about it and trying to have constructive dialogue because they realize that what happened on our campus is not okay and we have to figure out a way to move forward together,” he said. “And that's the biggest, the most positive thing that came out of this. And I think that's something that we both, and everyone there can be proud of.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: NewsNation’s On Balance May 2, 2024 7:07:54 p.m. Eastern (…) LELAND VITTERT: I want to bring in the boys here in a second. Zachary Serinsky, Brendan Rosenblum, Trevor Lan. The guys who are in that video. Brendan, we had you we had you yesterday. Start with Zachary, real quick. You guys just did what you thought was the right thing. All of a sudden. Are you surprised by the result? ZACHARY SERINSKY: I'm not. first of all, thank you for having us. We’re all happy to be here. When we saw our brothers there defending that flag, there was no doubt in any of our minds that we're going to go and join them. I'm glad that it was able to be put to an end. And the way that it did eventually. But yeah, we were there defending our brothers and there wasn't going to be anything that was going to stop us from going to that flag. VITTERT: All right. But Trevor, I think about this. Right, okay. A couple days ago, you guys did the right thing. You weren’t doing it for fame or for glory. You were doing it because you thought it was the right thing to do. You were there with your brothers who were taking a stand and now you're on TV with John Rich, who is going to play you a concert with $400,000 worth of free beer. That's pretty cool. TREVOR LAN: Yeah. I mean, I think that we can all agree that we didn't anticipate that that part of it would occur, but we did know that it's important to stand strong on our beliefs and to be a representation of what we hope to see for Jewish students and for students who believe in our flag and democracy across the country. VITTERT: Brendan, tell me what's happened in the past 24 hours and the conversations you've had. BRENDAN ROSENBLUM: Yeah, I think first of all, we've definitely got a lot more media attention. And for us, it's not about fame, it's not about coolness. It's about bringing attention to our message. Stand up for what you believe in, don't let anyone tell you otherwise. For me, it’s when your values are questioned that’s when it matters. It's easy to believe in something when no one – it’s easy – But when people question that, that's when it's important to stand by them. (…) 1:12:57 p.m. Eastern ROSENBLUM: I think there's been a lot of outreach, there's definitely been job opportunities. But again, like, that's not what this was about. It was just to bring attention to the issue we believe in. And I think the biggest thing we saw from this is people are talking about it. People are talking to both sides about it and trying to have constructive dialogue because they realize that what happened on our campus is not okay and we have to figure out a way to move forward together. And that's the biggest, the most positive thing that came out of this. And I think that's something that we both, and everyone there can be proud of. (…)

NBC's Kristen Welker Presses Tim Scott SIX Times to Accept 2024 Election Results

Does anyone remember Kristen Welker -- in her short tenure at the helm of NBC's Meet the Press -- pushing around a Democrat to answer a question SIX times? Last December, Welker pressed Ron DeSantis six times to condemn Trump calling radical leftists "vermin." On Sunday, she was back on the anti-Trump train, demanding SIX times that Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) pledge to accept the election results of 2024 long before we know what they are.  The first answer could be "I don't know, Kristen. Has NBC accepted the 2016 election results yet? Because that's not what it looked like through the whole Russian-collusion fiasco."  You can say this is a fair question, since Trump hasn't accepted the results of the last election. But this question certainly implies "will the Republicans accept their inevitable defeat?" “You voted to certify the election results of 2020,” Welker said. Trump said “the exact opposite of what you said and did after 2020. Why would you want to be on a ticket with someone where there’s such a fundamental difference?” “President Trump himself said he expects this election to be fair,” Scott replied. “He expects it to be honest, and he expects to win. That’s what the presidential candidate should expect. And I expect the exact same thing. And frankly, the American people agree with him.” Then Welker began pressing Scott on his willingness to accept the 2024 results. “Will you commit to accepting the election results of 2024: Bottom line?” Welker asked. “At the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump,” Scott said. “Wait Senator,” Welker said, “Yes or no? Will you accept the election results of 2024 no matter who wins?” Scott just said, “That is my statement." After demanding Tim Scott accept the unknown 2024 election results SIX times, NBC host Kristen Welker hops on her NARAL hobby horse again, yelling at Scott that he can't say Democrats support abortion up until birth. Welker refuses to accept the 2020 DNC platform! pic.twitter.com/6LTzoJzxTv — Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) May 6, 2024 Welker robotically repeated: “Just yes or no: Will you accept the election results of 2024?” Welker said. The senator repeated: “I look forward to President Trump being the 47th president. Kristen, you can ask him multiple times—” “Sir,” Welker pressed on. “Just a yes or no answer.” “The American people will make the decision,” Scott replied. “And the decision will be for President Trump.” Welker wouldn't let up, like she had a Jeff Zucker yelling into her earpiece. “I don’t hear you committing to the election results,” she said. “Will you commit to the election results?” Then Scott called out her Democrat tilt. “This is why so many Americans believe that NBC is an extension of the Democrat Party. At the end of the day, I’ve said what I’ve said, and I know that the American people, their voices will be heard. And I believe that President Trump will be our next president.” Welker fanatically tried a sixth time: “The hallmark of our democracy is that both candidates agree to a peaceful transfer of power,” she said. “So I’m asking you, as a potential VP nominee, will you accept to commit to the election results in this election cycle, no matter who wins? Just simply yes or no.” “I expect President Trump to win the next election. Listen, I’m not going to ask to answer your hypothetical question,” Scott said. In the same show, Welker interviewed Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) and she didn't ask him anything six times. But Welker also returned to quibbling with Sen. Scott when he said Democrats support abortion up to birth. That's a fact, NBC! NBC’s @kwelkernbc obsesses with @SenatorTimScott, asking SIX times variations of “Senator, yes or no? Will you accept the election results of 2024 no matter who wins?” Scott: “This is why so many Americans believe NBC is an extension of the Democratic Party” #MTP pic.twitter.com/IgoJLQXpZI — Brent Baker 🇺🇦 🇮🇱 (@BrentHBaker) May 5, 2024

Top New York Times Editor Joe Kahn: We Don't Want to Be Biden's Pravda!

Current New York Times executive editor Joe Kahn granted an interview to former Times media columnist Ben Smith at his new venture Semafor.com. Kahn surely infuriated leftists like former Times ombudsman Margaret Sullivan, who want to shred any notion of objectivity against those horribly lying authoritarian Republicans. He said don't skew the news!?  BEN SMITH: Dan Pfeiffer, who used to work for Barack Obama, recently wrote of the Times, “They do not see their job as saving democracy or stopping an authoritarian from taking power.” Why don’t you see your job as: “We’ve got to stop Trump?” What about your job doesn’t let you think that way? JOE KAHN: ...One of the absolute necessities of democracy is having a free and fair and open election where people can compete for votes, andthe role of the news media in that environment is not to skew your coverage towards one candidate or the other, but just to provide very good, hard-hitting, well-rounded coverage of both candidates, and informing voters. If you believe in democracy, I don’t see how we get past the essential role of quality media in informing people about their choice in a presidential election. To say that the threats of democracy are so great that the media is going to abandon its central role as a source of impartial information to help people vote — that’s essentially saying that the news media should become a propaganda arm for a single candidate, because we prefer that candidate’s agenda. It is true that Biden’s agenda is more in sync with traditional establishment parties and candidates. And we’re reporting on that and making it very clear. Kahn said Trump could possibly win the popular vote in November. "It is not the job of the news media to prevent that from happening. It’s the job of Biden and the people around Biden to prevent that from happening." It’s our job to cover the full range of issues that people have. At the moment, democracy is one of them. But it’s not the top one — immigration happens to be the top, and the economy and inflation is the second. Should we stop covering those things because they’re favorable to Trump and minimize them? I don’t even know how it’s supposed to work. We become an instrument of the Biden campaign? We turn ourselves into Xinhua News Agency or Pravda and put out a stream of stuff that’s very, very favorable to them and only write negative stories about the other side? And that would accomplish — what? I think editors like Kahn are trying to maintain this pose that their media outlets are independent and fact-based and not a partisan machine. The pose fails when you actually read them. But it’s like he’s lecturing his troops that this is who they want to Appear. They want to be seen as independent. They want a little finesse in their editorializing. Trump drove them to an excess, Kahn implied, into an explicit Stop Trump mentality, especially in 2020, with the whole Tom Cotton op-ed fiasco. Smith asked "Do you think the Times let the inmates run the asylum for too long?" KAHN: I wouldn’t use those words. I do think that there was a period of peak cultural angst at this organization, with the combination of the intensity of the Trump era, COVID, and then George Floyd. The summer of 2020 was a crazy period where the world felt threatened, people’s individual safety was threatened, we had a murder of an innocent black man by police suffocation. And we have the tail end of the most divisive presidency that anyone alive today has experienced. And those things just frayed nerves everywhere. Kahn said "the newsroom is not a safe space." KAHN: It’s a space where you’re being exposed to lots of journalism, some of which you are not going to like. Don’t you feel like there was a generation of students who came out of school saying you should only work at places that align completely with your values? SMITH: Don’t you think we all sort of said that to them? KAHN: I don’t think we said it explicitly. I think there was a period [where] we implied it. And I think that the early days of Trump in particular, were, “join us for the mission.” SMITH: Was it a mistake to say that — even to think it? KAHN: I think it went too far. It was overly simplistic. And I think the big push that you’re seeing us make and reestablish our norms and emphasize independent journalism and build a more resilient culture comes out of some of the excesses of that period.

Miraculous Gun Jam Saves Pastor During Pennsylvania Church Service

Psalm 23:4 reads, "Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me." And that verse has never rung more true than this past Sunday when, during a church service in Braddock, Pennsylvania, a man pulled a gun on the pastor mid-sermon and pulled the trigger. In what can only be a sign of the Lord’s protection, the gun miraculously jammed, saving the pastor's life. The gunman, Bernard Polite, entered Jesus’ Dwelling Place Church on Sunday morning during Pastor Glenn Germany’s weekly address. Polite walked to the altar, pulled out his gun and aimed it directly at Germany.  “I was like, this is not happening,” Germany recalled, according to CBSNews. But when Polite pulled the trigger, no shot was fired thanks to his jammed gun. “Only God stopped and jammed this gun,” Germany said. Miracle! A pastor survives shooting attempt after handgun jams and doesn’t fire.pic.twitter.com/YIKwSliq3h — MRCTV (@mrctv) May 6, 2024 The whole incident was caught on video, which showed church Deacon Clarence McCallister leaping up and tackling Polite to the ground while Pastor Germany worked to get the gun out of Polite’s hands. Germany called McCallister a “hero” and said they were able to keep Polite “subdued until police arrived” to take him into custody. Related: Tennessee Bill Allows Teachers to Possess Concealed Handguns in Class The pastor also indicated that what brought him to tears the most was that his 14-year-old daughter was sitting in the pews while this whole situation played out.  “I still had to be strong, because I had to be strong for her, but I couldn't take it, and just seeing her, that's the part that's hard for me to digest," he said. Germany, in speaking with police, noted that Polite “was just dealing with spirits” and he “came in and wanted to shoot somebody.” Germany confessed that he believed Polite was suffering with a form of mental illness and noted that he had “voices in his mind,” CBS News wrote. Germany, being the man of faith that he is, said he has already forgiven Polite after the gunman apologized to him.  The pastor hopes to use the story to stress that mental illness is real and to point to the ultimate protector: God. Follow us on Twitter/X: How Columbia University Would Advertise If They Were Honest Don't worry; this ad is satire, even if everything we said here is true. pic.twitter.com/dpqScHiODl — MRCTV (@mrctv) May 1, 2024

ICYMI: Hamill Derails WH Briefing, Doocy Battles Inept KJP Over Her Alma Mater

Friday’s White House press briefing began with a distinct 2016 vibe as the Biden administration demanded it be taken seriously on the reelection front with Star Wars actor Mark Hamill surprising reporters ahead of May 4 (aka May the Fourth Be With You!) and a few dutifully complied by asking him questions despite the fact that, as we’d later learn, one hasn’t seen any of the movies. Elsewhere, the ever-inept Karine Jean-Pierre faced her usual hardballs from the like of Fox colleagues Edward Lawrence on tax cuts and basic respect for laws on the books and then Peter Doocy on both-sides-ing anti-Semitism and Islamphobia, Jean-Pierre’s alma mater, and the now-famous UNC fraternity brothers.     Hamill led off with his surprise appearance and donning a pair of aviators to match the President before saying he “was honored to be asked to come to the White House to meet the President, the most legislatively successful president in my lifetime” and listing off standard party talking points. He then opened it up to questions after thanking The New York Times’s Peter Baker in the second row for his most recent book which was, naturally, an anti-Trump tome with wife Susan Glasser. ABC’s Selina Wang seized the opportunity: “Thank you, Mark Hamill, for being here. What did you ask? What did you talk about with the President?” After Hamill replied this was his first time visiting a White House on his own in the Oval and thus more special (as opposed to going in a group), CBS’s Weijia Jiang had the other question:  JIANG: Did President Biden bring up Star Wars to you, sir? HAMILL: Well, you know, I called him Mr President. He said, you can call me Joe and I said, “can I call you Joe-Bi-Wan Kenobi?” Jiang returned to this topic during her Q&A with a genuine question about why Hamill came to the White House, but Jean-Pierre didn’t like her tone and it quickly devolved into a mini-roast of the CBS correspondent for admitting she’s never watched the movies (click “expand”): JIANG: And then just to close the loop. What was Mark Hamill doing here today? JEAN-PIERRE: I think he said. He said he was meeting with — he was having a meeting. Did you not like having him in? JIANG: No, I mean, that’s not — we all loved meeting him, but —  JEAN-PIERRE: It sounded — it sounded — it sounded very kind of like, why? Why here? Um, he was no, He said it himself. I — we — we wanted to make sure that he provided — which is one of the reasons he spoke to — why he was here himself. He wanted to meet with the President. They had a meeting, and — JIANG: About what? JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, you guys asked him questions. Uh — uh — uh — uh, they had a meeting about — um — what the President has been able to do on behalf of the American people. Mark Hamill was in town. They met. I think it was — it was important as someone — you all — you all know Mark Hamill. He is someone who has who is very much invested in our country — very much invested in — um — in the direction of this country. And so — uh — they had a — you know, they had a meeting. It was — he — he went into that meeting, and I thought — we thought it would be fun for him to come out here and lighten up — and lighten up the room a little bit on a Friday. We also believe that you guys are — so — there are some Star Wars fans in here. Uh — but, you know, the President — I mean, the President meets with a lot of people. There’s a lot of people that come through the White House that the President has an opportunity to sit down and talk with. You just happen to — you just happen to see Mark Hamill today because we thought it would be a nice gesture to have him come out and say hello, but I wouldn’t put too much. I really wouldn’t put too much into it. He meets with a lot of people here.  JIANG: Thank you. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. All right. Jeez. Weijia is not happy about Mark Hamill being here. [REPORTERS LAUGH] That’s okay. I’m not gonna tell him. He’s not watching probably. I won’t tell him. REPORTER: Have you [inaudible] JIANG: I don’t — I haven’t seen the movies. JEAN-PIERRE: Do you — do you not like Star Wars? You have not seen Star Wars. What? JIANG: I will now. I will now. [REPORTERS BOO] JEAN-PIERRE: That’s why that happened, folks. That’s why I got the question. Yeah. JIANG: I’m gonna watch. I’m going to watch. REPORTER: She’s not alone. JEAN-PIERRE: Oh, there’s more.  REPORTER: What? JEAN-PIERRE: Well, All right. I’m gonna let that go. Fast-forwarding to the back end of the briefing, Lawrence fact-checked the administration on tax cuts: “So, the President says that he wants to let the tax cuts — the Trump tax cuts expire. If that law expires, it does raise taxes on almost every American. So, does he still support that expiring without anything else in place?”     Jean-Pierre deflected by claiming while Biden will “let the Trump tax cut expire....he will not raise taxes on anyone less than $400,000” and he’s “been very clear about that.” Lawrence doubled down: “[T]he President can’t pick and choose which part of the law sunsets. The entire law will sunset and the Tax Foundation says that someone who’s married, two kids, making 85,000 would pay $1,700 more in taxes. That’s somebody under $400,000”. Jean-Pierre didn’t budge on any of her talking points, including the irrelevant claim about Republicans “want[ing] to cut Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security” Doocy Time began with this both-sidesism that, if it were done by a Republican president, would trigger liberal media-wide excoriations: “So, in the President’s remarks yesterday, he’s talking about Islamophobia on campuses. Lately, we’ve been seeing a lot of vile, anti-Semitic rhetoric on campuses. Does he think Islamophobia is just as big of a problem on campus as anti-Semitism?” Jean-Pierre shamelessly wouldn’t fully rebut that and instead remained in neutral with a standard word salad about Bide being able “to call out all forms of hate, always” and opposing protests that aren’t “within the law”.     Doocy next used Jean-Pierre’s own words against her when noting no one had asked her about the fact that anti-Semitic protest hotbed Columbia University is Jean-Pierre’s alma mater. Pathetically, Jean-Pierre mocked Doocy for having done “some research” (click “expand”): DOOCY: Something else that it somehow slipped my mind. JEAN-PIERRE: How is that — DOOCY: — over the last couple of weeks. JEAN-PIERRE: Oh, goodness. DOOCY: You are an alumna of Columbia — OTHER REPORTERS: Ooooo! DOOCY: — University. JEAN-PIERRE: Wow, that’s a shocker. DOOCY: You, in all the talking about it — JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. DOOCY: — you haven’t brought it up. Uh, you told Columbia students a few years back. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. DOOCY: “Don’t” — JEAN-PIERRE: Oh! DOOCY: — “lose the idealism that you have.” So what do you tell them now? JEAN-PIERRE: You did — you did some research. Oh, my God! DOOCY: All I do is research and just hope that you call me. JEAN-PIERRE: [LAUGHS] You did some —” DOOCY: But no! What do you tell, the — JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look —“ DOOCY: — the students who are following in your footsteps? JEAN-PIERRE: — look — I mean, look, going to be — oh, and that’s actually gonna be a great segue to — uh — to the student — student journalist that we have in the room, Danny — um — after I answer this question. DOOCY: I do have one more, though. [REPORTERS LAUGH] JEAN-PIERRE: Ah! DOOCY: Sorry, Danny. JEAN-PIERRE: It’s okay. Uh — so, look — I’m not speaking on behalf of me. I’m not. I speak on behalf of this President. That’s my job, and I believe in this president. I believe in the work that we do. It is an honor and a privilege to stand at this lectern every day to speak to you and all your colleagues and to take your questions. It is not about me — uh — and really your question and what you’re asking me and — and what I have said to students is pretty much what the President has said. All Americans have the right to peacefully protest within the law. They have to — we have the right. That’s what makes this country so great, right? That’s what makes what — when we’re talking about our freedoms, our democracy. That’s what’s so important — to have the opportunity to agree and disagree and do it in a peaceful way in a peaceful way. That’s important, and the President also called out — if you’re — if you are breaking and entering and you are taking over buildings, that is not peacefully protesting, and the President was very clear about calling that out as well and also anti-Semitism and calling it what it is. It is hate speech. Doocy closed by being the first reporter to bring up in the briefing the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill fraternity brothers who “saved an American flag from an angry mob of protesters” and there was “a GoFundMe where people can donate to throw them a rager.” Amazingly, Doocy asked if Biden “would...donate” to which Jean-Pierre was incredulous: “You never disappoint, my friend.” She then gave a standard answer about how ripping down the American flag as anti-Israel students was not an example of peaceful protest”. When Doocy asked if Biden would even give them a call, Jean-Pierre only said “protecting the American flag is admirable.” To see the relevant transcript from the May 3 briefing (including a question from the left by the AP on anti-Semitic campus protests and a long back-and-forth with April Ryan directly lobbying for a pardon of former Baltimore prosecutor Marilyn Mosby), click here.

Jon Meacham On Morning Joe: No 'Buts' About It—You MUST Vote For Biden!

You might think of a presidential election as a choice among candidates. Not to historian and occasional Biden speechwriter Jon Meacham. He will brook no dissent. There is no choice. You MUST vote for Joe Biden! On today's Morning Joe, Meacham told to Biden phone buddy and informal adviser Joe Scarborough the election prospects are "thrilling and terrifying. It's thrilling because it's up to all of us.... What's terrifying is that it's up to us, and it's up to the voters in the swing states." Meacham doesn't really trust the people, and that's why he's going to keep telling you the "stakes" are too high, you can't vote Republican: "I think it's going to be impossible for people to vote in the fall and not understand what's at stake." He knows many voters aren't spending this whole year in a fetal position for the survival of democracy, but gosh, voting for Biden is really, really important! "What I would say to anyone who says, 'Yeah but. Yeah, Trump is awful but, whatever," is there is no but. It's got to be, "Yeah, Trump is that, and, I'm going to vote against him." There is no but? It's "got to be" a vote against Trump, i.e., for Biden?  And the liberal media accuses MAGA of disrespecting democracy? Win or lose, Trump is sure to get tens of millions of votes. But Meacham doesn't even try to understand what motivates people who say, "yeah, but" -- not to mention the millions who outright like Trump and everything he is and stands for.  Such is the arrogance and condescension of the liberal media.  Question: When it was disclosed that Meacham was an occasional Biden speechwriter, MSNBC announced that "per network policy," he would no longer be employed as a paid contributor.  So what about Joe Scarborough? As mentioned, it's been disclosed that not only is Scarborough a frequent Biden phone buddy, but also serves as an informal adviser, offering his "take" on issues of the day.  What's the MSNBC "network policy" that permits Scarborough to continue in his multi-million-dollar MSNBC gig? Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 5/6/24 6:37 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: Jon Meacham, there is simply, we won't even ask. And we stopped asking some time ago for historical parallels. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: There just simply aren't. SCARBOROUGH: There are no historical parallels in this country. But, my gosh, as you said before, what is at stake is so massive this fall. I'm curious your thoughts when you see this testimony, and the Time magazine article. The continued threats of an authoritarian regime coming directly from Donald Trump . . . And so, I'm just curious about your take on where we are right now. JON MEACHAM: I think, my answer is, at once, to me, thrilling and terrifying. It's thrilling because it's up to all of us. It's up to the voters in the seven or eight states. It's up to those of us who have strong feelings about the continuance of the constitution order, to make this case. And that's great, right? That's we the people. What's terrifying is that it's up to us, and it's up to the voters in the swing states. And it's up to those of us who have to make the case to people around the country.  If -- there's no mystery here, right? It's going to be -- I think it's going to be impossible for people to vote in the fall and not understand what's at stake. And if, and maybe that's part of what those of us who, you know, want to make this case have to keep doing, is making sure we say it. And it may seem repetitive to the political-industrial class, but that doesn't matter. I think as Ed would say, you know, there are normal people who are better adjusted than we are and don't worry about this all the time. But it's really, really important. And I don't think, again. What I would say to anyone who says, "Yeah but. Yeah, Trump is awful but, whatever," is there is no but. It's got to be, "Yeah, Trump is that, IIand, I'm going to vote against him.

Bombshell Judiciary Report Reveals Biden’s White House Threatened These Companies to Censor

New details have emerged in a congressional investigation into the Biden administration censorship enterprise that has curtailed free speech on a level unprecedented in American history. A new House Judiciary Committee report uncovered more of the Biden administration’s collusion with Facebook, YouTube and Amazon to silence constitutionally protected speech. The administration in some cases threatened these companies, pushing them to censor content or change their moderation guidelines, specifically with regards to fighting “vaccine hesitancy” during the COVID-19 pandemic.  “By the end of 2021, Facebook, YouTube, and Amazon changed their content moderation policies in ways that were directly responsive to criticism from the Biden Administration,” wrote the House Judiciary Committee and its Select Weaponization Committee in a May 1 press release. “While the Biden White House's pressure campaign largely succeeded, its effects were devastating. By suppressing free speech and intentionally distorting public debate in the modern town square, ideas and policies were no longer fairly tested and debated on their merits.” Here are some highlights of the bombshell report: Facebook In February 2021, Facebook began coordinating with the Biden White House to censor disfavored opinions relating to COVID-19. According to an internal email from Facebook, these topics included the theory that COVID-19 was a man-made virus; that the virus leaked from a lab in China; and other “false claims on Facebook and Instagram about COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccines, and vaccines in general.” In an email to Mark Zuckerberg, a Facebook employee revealed that Facebook's censorship of these opinions was prompted by pressure from the Biden administration. “In February 2021, in response to continued public pressure and tense conversations with the new administration, we started removing the five Covid claims that had been repeatedly debunked by 3PFCs and the eight claims that we had identified … before COVID as widely debunked vaccine misinformation,” the email said, according to the House Judiciary Committee. Zuckerberg concluded that Facebook had made the wrong decision to “compromise our standards due to pressure from an administration.”  However, officials like Rob Flaherty, Digital Director of the White House, and Andy Slavitt, a senior White House coronavirus advisor, were not content with this level of censorship. They even wanted memes and other humorous content about the vaccines to be censored.  On April 18, 2021, Slavitt was particularly incensed by a meme that was featured in Facebook’s data set shared with the White House team and demanded its removal. According to Nick Clegg, head of Meta’s Global Affairs, Slavitt “‘was outraged – not too strong a word to describe his reaction – that [Facebook] did not remove’ a particular post—a Leonardo DiCaprio meme— ‘which was third most highly ranked post in the data set [Facebook] sent to him.’”  On April 14, 2021, Facebook held a meeting with the White House to discuss the effectiveness of Facebook’s censorship.  During the meeting, Flaherty even floated the idea that Facebook could “change the algorithm so that people were more likely to see NYT, WSJ, any authoritative news source over Daily Wire, Tomi Lahren, other polarizing people.”  The administration also specifically targeted American journalists who were skeptical about the safety of the vaccines, such as Tucker Carlson.  Flaherty emailed Facebook demanding why a video of Carlson questioning vaccine safety was still widely visible on the platform and questioned its commitment to “reduction” of harmful content. Flaherty wrote, “This is exactly why I want to know what ‘Reduction’ actually looks like – if ‘reduction’ means ‘pumping our most vaccine hesitant audience with tucker [sic] Carlson saying it doesn’t work’ then . . . I’m not sure it’s reduction!”       According to other emails, the administration not only pressured Facebook to target wrongful opinions but also demanded the censorship of true information on vaccine-related injuries, which caused some consternation on the part of Facebook employees. On July 21, 2021, a Facebook employee sent a memo to Clegg in which they expressed that employees faced pressure from administration officials to ramp up censorship more than they would like.  “There is likely a significant gap between what the WH would like us to remove and what we are comfortable removing,” the memo said. “There are some policy mitigations that could get the two parties closer, but Content Policy does not recommend pursuing them.” Included in this “delta” of content was true, documented information or personal experiences discussing harmful vaccine side effects. The memo read, “The Surgeon General wants us to remove true information about side effects if the user does not provide complete information about whether the side effect is rare and treatable.”  Also included were opinions that concluded that the adverse effects of the vaccines were worse than the benefits as well as “humorous or satirical content that suggests the vaccine isn’t safe.”   Ultimately, the unyielding pressure of the Biden administration resulted in Facebook changing its moderation policies. An internal email sent on Aug. 2, 2021, expressed that Facebook was making the changes because of the Biden administration. The email said, “Leadership asked Misinfo Policy and a couple of teams on Product Policy to brainstorm some additional policy levers we can pull to be more aggressive against Covid and vaccine misinformation. This is stemming from the continued criticism of our approach from the US administration.”    Youtube The Biden administration also actively worked with YouTube to censor similar content with notably less pushback from the video-hosting platform. In fact, Biden officials disturbingly referenced YouTube as a gold standard for censorship. According to Clegg, during the April 18 meeting with Facebook, Slavitt expressed that he had attended a “misinfo” meeting with Flaherty and that “the consensus was that FB [Facebook] is a ‘disinformation factory’, and that YT [YouTube] has made significant advances to remove content leading to vaccine hesitancy whilst we [Facebook] have lagged behind.” On April 21, 2021, YouTube and the White House held another meeting. After the meeting, Flaherty emailed YouTube, requesting more information on “borderline content,” that is, content that didn’t violate YouTube’s policies. Flaherty expressed that the White House wanted “to be sure that you have a handle on vaccine hesitancy generally and are working toward making the problem better.” He also implied that this concern was shared by Biden himself. Flaherty said, “This is a concern that is shared at the highest (and I mean highest) levels of the WH, so we’d like to continue a good-faith dialogue about what’s going on under the hood here.” On July 20, 2021, Flaherty emailed the YouTube public policy team a tweet from a CNN fact checker Daniel Dale that showed his algorithm was presenting him with “anti-vaccine content.” One video was from a Senate hearing featuring Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and the other was a debate on vaccines between attorney (now presidential candidate) Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and legal scholar Alan Dershowitz. Flaherty then appeared to get confrontational with YouTube and implied they were not upholding their end of the bargain. “We had a pretty extensive back and forth about the degree to which you all are recommending anti-vaccination content,” Flaherty said. “You were pretty emphatic that you are not. This seems to indicate that you are. What is going on here?” On Aug. 23, 2021, Flaherty pushed YouTube to act as a propaganda arm for the Biden White House to “push” the FDA’s approval of the Pfizer vaccine.  Flaherty’s email said, “We’d appreciate a push here, given the fact that this is an oft-cited blocker for many people.” In September 2021, YouTube worked with the White House to change its policies to remove content that questioned vaccines.  According to the House Judiciary Committee’s report, YouTube has continued to work with the Biden White House to censor other subjects, including “Russian disinformation,” climate change and even abortion. Amazon The Biden administration also worked with Amazon to demote or remove “anti-vaccine” books on its website. In response to “feeling pressure from the White House,” Amazon started tagging anti-vaccine books with the same labels designated for “extremist” content. As previously reported by MRC, Amazon held a meeting on March 9, 2021, with Biden officials to determine if “‘the Admin is asking us to remove books, or are they more concerned about search results/order (or both)?’”    On the same day, Amazon unveiled a new “‘AntiVax’ [Do Not Promote]” tag to be applied to all vaccine skeptic books. On March 12, 2024, an internal email announced the online retailer was going to hold another meeting to “take a closer look at books related to vaccine misinformation and debat[e] additional steps Amazon might want to take to reduce the visibility of these titles.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

CBS’s Norah O’Donnell Is MAD That Hakeem Jeffries is Insufficiently Critical Of Israel

During an otherwise fawning interview on CBS for 60 Minutes, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) was sharply questioned for his refusal to be overtly critical of Israel over their conduct of the war against Hamas in the aftermath of the medieval and horrific attack of October 7th. Watch this exchange, in which CBS Evening News anchor Norah O’Donnell pokes Jeffries time and again, as aired on 60 Minutes on Sunday, May 5th, 2024: NORAH O’DONNELL: But isn't it also true that, while retaliating and going after Hamas terrorists, that Israel has been indiscriminate in its bombing? HAKEEM JEFFRIES: I would not say that they've been indiscriminate. I do think what we'd like to see moving forward is the execution of the new phases of this conflict with surgical precision. O’DONNELL: You could still be a strong supporter of Israel and Americans' defense of Israel and be critical of their approach about how they wage this war in Gaza. JEFFRIES: That's correct. O’DONNELL: But you seem reluctant to criticize Israel at all? JEFFRIES: I'm dealing with the facts on the ground. O’DONNELL: The facts are, according to the U.N.- half of Gaza's 2.2 million people are on the verge of famine. Has Israel done enough to get food and aid into Gaza? JEFFRIES: Israel clearly needs to do more, as they have recently acknowledged through their actions, to surge humanitarian assistance into Gaza. The other thing that I think is important… O’DONNELL: Only after they killed seven aid workers from World Central Kitchen. JEFFRIES: Correct. And that was horrific, including one American. Now, in terms of the loss of innocent Palestinian life in this tough theater of war, that is deeply disturbing, tragic, and should be painful for anyone who has a shred of humanity in their body. In this exchange, O’Donnell sounded more like a Biden White House official trying to get Jeffries to fall in line than like a journalist on 60 Minutes. We often use the term “Regime Media”, but here the media acted as part of the regime. Zero daylight between them both, which put Jeffries on the defensive and exposed him, even, as a leader seemingly out of step with the anti-Israel forces within the highest echelons of his own party. O’Donnell even attempted to use Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s floor speech calling for the removal of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as an appeal to authority with which to get Jeffries to criticize Israel. Jeffries refused the bait. The interview was otherwise intended to be a fawn job- a mechanism with which to cast Jeffries in a most favorable light ahead of the 2024 election. Topics ranged from basic biography- fitting for an introductory interview- to immigration and abortion, the defense of which he equates to the defense of Democracy itself.  WATCH: House Dem Leader Hakeem Jeffries equates abortion to DEMOCRACY itself pic.twitter.com/V98w3PRUo5 — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) May 6, 2024 The interview closes with a brutal exchange on the economy, in which Jeffries dismisses voter perceptions of the economy being better under former President Donald Trump, and admits that Democrats have not made that case to the American voter. "Well, that's just not the case", says Hakeem Jeffries when confronted with 2/3 of voters believing the economy was better under Trump. Brutal exchange on the economy to close his interview with Norah O'Donnell on 60 Minutes pic.twitter.com/dIb0eQ1j75 — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) May 6, 2024 Jeffries received infinitesimal to no pushback on these points as he struggled to make them, which tells you everything you need to know about how the Regime Media will cover this election. Buckle up.

Sen. Tom Cotton SCHOOLS ABC’s Jon Karl on Campus Protesters, ‘Little Gazas’

During a wide-ranging interview on ABC’s This Week, Sen, Tom Cotton (R-AR) took a blowtorch to the antisemitic protesters on college campuses, brutally mocked them as establishing “little Gazas”, and schooled host Jon Karl when he tried to twist mockery of the encampments into mockery of Gaza itself. Watch the exchange, as aired on ABC This Week on Sunday, May 5th, 2024: TOM COTTON: They're spray painting buildings with vile, antisemitic hate. (Biden) said, well, we shouldn't have antisemitism or hate speech in the abstract, or Islamophobia. Where are the encampments, Jon, on campuses spreading Islamophobia? Why is Joe Biden so equivocal? Why does he have to draw moral equivalence between thousands of students who are setting up Little Gazas all across America…  JON KARL: Can I…can I ask you… COTTON: …engaging in hate speech- engaging in hate speech against Jews, assaulting Jews, disobeying the law, and some fictional encampment that’s spreading Islamophobia? KARL: Can I ask you, you just three or four times now just used the phrase “little Gazas”. What do you mean by that? COTTON: Well, they call themselves the Gaza Solidarity Encampment. They’re little. They’re little Gazas. KARL: I mean, are you…? It seems like you're mocking the situation in Gaza. This is a place that the World F--- COTTON: A lot of these people do -- these people do deserve to be mocked. KARL: No, no, no. Gaza. I'm talking about, you know, Gaza, you know… COTTON: With… No. On college campuses. KARL: We had the World Food Program has just now said that there is an outright famine in parts of Gaza. Tens of thousands of people have died. You're using this phrase “little Gazas” -- COTTON: Which is 100% the fault of Hamas. Just like every civilian casualty in Gaza is 100% the fault of Hamas. Yet Joe Biden for seven months has leaned on Israel, has pressured Benjamin Netanyahu, has told him to stand down when they get attacked by Iran, has said they can't go into the last holdout where Hamas has its final terrorist battalions. But no. These students on campuses? They deserve our contempt. They also deserve our mockery. I mean, they're out there in their N95 masks in the open air. With their gluten allergies, demanding that Uber Eats get delivered to them. They should not have been allowed to fester on campus for two weeks when these liberal administrators and liberal politicians refuse to send in the police to clear them out the very first day they set up their tents.  As soon as Cotton began mocking the protesters living within their “little Gazas”, one could see Jon Karl’s brow begin to furrow. One imagines a similar strained expression over at The New York Times, as staff got wind of Cotton’s op-ed calling for a military response to the violent protests raging throughout America’s cities. When Karl finally found his angle, the asinine suggestion that Cotton’s mockery of the protester tent cities was a mockery of Gaza itself, it got quickly shot down with even more mockery, forcing Karl to move off the subject and on to speculation over the 2024 Republican presidential ticket. The interview covered such subjects as funding for Ukraine, the campus protests, the 2024 presidential campaign and January 6th. On each of these issues, Karl’s hysterics were quickly and promptly shut down. There was ample opportunity here to have a broad-ranging discussion of multiple issues. Instead and surprising no one, Jon Karl chose to perform Regime Media.

ABC’s Jon Karl Follows Stephanopoulos With HYSTERICAL Editorial To Open ‘This Week’

It appears that there is now an editorial requirement at ABC News in place, mandating that whoever is hosting that Sunday’s This Week must now open the show with a screeching editorial about “the stakes” of the 2024 presidential election. There is no other explanation for Jon Karl’s editorial today, a week after George Stephanopoulos’ screeching hysterics. Watch the opening editorial in its entirety, as aired on ABC This Week on Sunday, May 5th, 2024: ANNOUNCER: From ABC News it’s This Week. Here now, Jonathan Karl. JON KARL: Good morning. Welcome to This Week. For as long as I've covered politics, politicians have said, “this will be the most important election of our lifetimes.” They said that, no matter how high or low the stakes actually were. Election Day 2024 is exactly six months from today and this time, the divisions in our country are so vast and the choice so stark there's little doubt this really is the most important election of our time. No more crying wolf. This. Is it. Karl takes a different tack here. He almost comes across as more subtle, what with his vague references to stark choices. This departs a bit from Stephanopoulos’ lengthy recitation of the various charges against former President Donald Trump. But such a departure is only one of style. On substance, Karl’s editorial is every bit as hysterical as Stephanopoulos’, and equally as arrogant. These editorials are in many ways reflective of the messianic complex displayed by those throughout the media. Inspired by equal parts unreformed partisanship and elite arrogance, they seek to impose their ideology upon the American people, as opposed to simply reporting on the facts and stories as they occur on the ground.  It is not enough to report on the presidential race as an ongoing event- they now seek to lecture the public on “the stakes” of the election and argue the strongest possible case in support of the reelection of Joe Biden. This is what Karl’s breathless proclamation of this being “the most important election of our time” seeks to achieve. Call it whatever you want so long as you don’t call it journalism.  

FLASHBACK: Lefties Frowned As America Cheered bin Laden’s Demise

Thirteen years ago, nearly all Americans were united in celebrating the death of Osama bin Laden, the terrorist leader behind the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Yet one group stood on the sidelines and scowled: the Sourpuss Left, which fretted the “mindless jubilation” and “jingoistic hubris” of those cheering the elimination of the evil al Qaeda leader, an avowed enemy who had ordered the deaths of thousands of innocent people. “It felt a little crazy, a bit much. Almost vulgar,” one Washington Post columnist huffed about the late night crowds celebrating outside the White House gates on May 1, 2011. “I think that this kind of jumping up and down, chanting ‘USA, USA,’ send a message of almost, sort of, blood lust,” another commentator mourned on PBS that week. There was also the morally-inverted griping that Big Bad America was worse than al Qaeda. “This was not justice,” fumed journalist Allan Nairn on Democracy Now. “This was one killer killing another — a big killer, the United States government, killing another, someone who’s actually a smaller one, bin Laden.” Mainstream liberal journalists avoided such hateful nonsense, instead touting the “heroics” of President Barack Obama, as if he had actually participated in the dangerous military operation. “Professor Obama turned into General Obama and ran this incredible, incredible raid,” gushed Bloomberg’s Margaret Carlson. “That took a lot of guts, the kind of thing you do see in a Hollywood movie.” To his credit, however, Obama didn’t listen to his then-Vice President. “Mr. President, my suggestion is: Don’t go. We have to do two more things to see if he’s there,” Joe Biden counseled his boss, as he himself related in a speech to House Democrats the following year. (Video here.) Thirteen years later, Biden’s “don’t go” advice seems as terrible as ever (especially now that he’s handed Afghanistan back to the abhorrent Taliban), while the anti-American Left has moved on to condemning Israel’s necessary fight against similarly implacable and deadly terrorist enemy. Here’s a rundown of the worst quotes from that week, when (nearly) every citizen recognized and celebrated an American victory in the War on Terror: ■ “Some Americans celebrated the killing of Osama bin Laden loudly, with chanting and frat-party revelry in the streets. Others were appalled — not by the killing, but by the celebrations.... ‘The worst kind of jingoistic hubris,’ a University of Virginia student wrote in the college newspaper, The Cavalier Daily. In blogs and online forums, some people asked: Doesn’t taking revenge and glorying in it make us look just like the terrorists?”— New York Times reporter Benedict Carey in a May 6, 2011 news story, “Celebrating a Death: Ugly, Maybe, but Only Human.” ■ “It is just and necessary that this evil man was finally punished for the mass murders he engineered on September 11, 2001. But I am repelled by the scenes of mindless jubilation, from Times Square to the park in front of the White House, that erupted after President Obama delivered the news in a properly sober tone Sunday night.”— The Washington Post’s “Spirited Atheist” blogger Susan Jacoby in a May 2, 2011 posting. ■ “At the news of Osama bin Laden’s death, thousands of people — most of them college-aged and in requisite flip-floppy collegiate gear — whipped up a raucous celebration right outside the White House gates that was one part Mardi Gras and two parts Bon Jovi concert....It felt a little crazy, a bit much. Almost vulgar....When I saw that folks were celebrating in the streets at the news of bin Laden’s death, my first reaction was a cringe. Remember how we all felt watching videos of those al-Qaeda guys dancing on Sept. 11?”— Washington Post “Metro” section columnist Petula Dvorak, May 3, 2011. ■ “It’s idiotic to treat these kinds of international events like sporting events, like it’s the World Cup that we’re cheering for here....I think that this kind of jumping up and down, chanting ‘USA, USA,’ sends a message of almost sort of blood lust. I think we need to be really careful about that.”— Correspondent Jeremy Scahill of the left-wing The Nation magazine, on PBS’s Tavis Smiley, May 2. ■ “When you watch these people celebrating, how does it make us any better than those in the Mid East who celebrate when America falls?”— ABC News religion correspondent Father Edward Beck on FNC’s The O’Reilly Factor, May 3, 2011. ■ “People cheer because they thought they saw justice, but this was not justice....This was one killer killing another — a big killer, the United States government, killing another, someone who’s actually a smaller one, bin Laden....We have to stop these people, these powerful people like Obama, like Bush, like those who run the Pentagon, and who think it’s OK to take civilian life.”— Journalist Allan Nairn on the far-left Democracy Now radio program, May 2, 2011. ■ “I’m glad he’s gone. But I just feel something has — we’ve lost something of our soul here in this country. And maybe I’m just an old school American who believes in our American judicial system.... [Snarls] ‘What do we need a trial for, just get rid of him.’ The second you say that, you’re saying that you hate being an American. You hate what we stand for, you hate what our Constitution stands for.”— Left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore on CNN’s Piers Morgan Tonight, May 5, 2011. ■ “So when does SEAL Unit 6, or whatever it’s called, drop in on George Bush? Bush was responsible for a lot more death, innocent death, than bin Laden.”— Left-wing radio host and former CNN producer Mike Malloy on The Mike Malloy Show, May 2, 2011. For more examples from our flashback series, which we call the NewsBusters Time Machine, go here.                            

Keith Olbermann RAGES with Mob on Twitter Against Peggy Noonan's Columbia Column

Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan, who was once a Reagan speechwriter and is now a dyspeptic critic of Donald Trump, infuriated leftists on Twitter this weekend with a column about her visit to the Columbia University campus to observe the pro-Hamas protests and attempt to interview some young protesters.  Noonan wrote she understood the youthful passion to protest, but these protesters all wore masks and didn't want to engage with largely supportive media. She found this carried an air of menace...and cowardice. This was the passage that New York Times reporter Peter Baker passed around that fanned the fury:  I was at Columbia hours before the police came in and liberated Hamilton Hall from its occupiers. Unlike protesters of the past, who were usually eager to share with others what they thought and why, these demonstrators would generally not speak or make eye contact with members of the press, or, as they say, “corporate media.” I was on a bench taking notes as a group of young women, all in sunglasses, masks, and kaffiyehs, walked by. “Friends, please come say hello and tell me what you think,” I called. They marched past, not making eye contact, save one, a beautiful girl of about 20. “I’m not trained,” she said. Which is what they’re instructed to say to corporate-media representatives who will twist your words. “I’m barely trained, you’re safe,” I called, and she laughed and half-halted. But her friends gave her a look and she conformed. Raging kook Keith Olbermann, the man so unbalanced that he tweeted the Supreme Court majority that overturned Roe vs. Wade were "domestic terrorists," argued Baker and Noonan were not journalists: Is there a point at which Peter Baker and Peggy Noonan will understand that vast swaths of America do not recognize them as journalists? Hell, if I knew about the "I'm not trained" line I could've gotten Noonan off my back and off my shows in 2004 instead of 2006 https://t.co/2P2OvlX3rt — Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) May 4, 2024 The Left could certainly argue that college kids might be smart not to sit down with a journalist they don't know, and Noonan could be characterized as an establishment Republican, who wouldn't naturally love radical disorder. Noonan noted they were yelling “Israel bombs, Columbia pays! How many kids did you kill today?” Lefties were probably angrier at Noonan for suggesting that even liberals in Manhattan were pleased the cops shut this encampment down:  The Vietnam demonstrations came to a country at relative peace with itself and said: Wake up! The Hamas demonstrations come to a country that hasn’t been at peace with itself in a long time. It watched, and thought: More jarring hell from kids with blood in their eyes making demands. The people of my liberal-left town were relieved to see the NYPD come in, drag the protesters away, restore order, and let people clean things up.

Ugh: PBS Hails ‘Gender-Affirming Care’ Court Win for Minors, Including Mastectomy

The PBS NewsHour was back to its old rhetorical tricks this week on the LGBTQ front. Lately the outlet has been reacting with pro-transgender alarm when yet another state restricts transgender surgery for minors. But it had cause to celebrate on Tuesday, covering a “groundbreaking ruling” that somehow didn’t shake up the other media outlets enough to cover. PBS teamed up with its fellow taxpayer-funded outlet National Public Radio to bring the joyful news that a federal appellate court in Richmond had ruled that so-called “gender-affirming care” must be covered by state health care plans in West Virginia and North Carolina. They used that Orwellian term no less than ten times in the segment. including in the supportive introduction from host Amna Nawaz: “A federal appeals court issued a groundbreaking ruling last night ensuring that gender-affirming surgery is covered by state-run health insurance programs.” The entire exchange took place in a liberal bubble, with zero mention of conservative counterpoints -- no  inconvenient questions about gender transition, or how a biological man can become a woman, or if the government should be obligated to pay for such a change. NPR health reporter Selena Simmons-Duffin -- who provided a similar bubble of an interview to transgender Biden appointee Adm. Rachel Levine two years ago, that there was "no scientific debate" on these surgeries -- only cared about how the "trans community" greeted the news. Reporter Stephanie Sy explained: ...this decision centered around two lawsuits, with trans people in West Virginia and North Carolina suing to secure insurance coverage for gender-affirming care, such as hormone therapy and surgery." Sy crowed, "It is a win for the trans community, but it may not be the final word on the issue." Selena Simmons-Duffin, health-policy reporter, NPR: I think this is a really significant ruling. The Fourth Circuit's majority opinion was really strong and called discrimination against trans patients on these plans to be -- quote -- "obviously discriminatory." I think that the big takeaway is that insurers are not going to be able to say that they're going to cover this care for some patients with some diagnoses and not for others. If they're going to be covering things like sex hormones and mastectomies for some patients, they're going to have to cover it for trans patients as well. And I do think that it's really seen in the trans community as a major win, and it cuts against some of the trends of more litigation and more restrictions that we have seen in statehouses across the country. Sy: Selena, how far-reaching is this ruling? Does this mean trans people with state medical plans are now covered for gender-affirming care where they couldn't or where they weren't before? Simmons-Duffin explained that the ruling was a signal that “trans people are protected under the law,” as if they weren’t protected by law before. Both reporters ignored the traumatic effects of gender surgery (including hormone replacement theory and even chemical and physical castration) on children in their eagerness over the medical insurance decision, while continuing their happy talk about “gender-affirming care.” Sy: We have seen in the last few years some two dozen states pass restrictive laws on gender-affirming care specifically for minors. Does this decision, Selena, apply to minors covered by state medical plans, even in states where legislatures have banned care? Simmons-Duffin: ….it is important to differentiate this from some of the other cases around gender-affirming care for minors, because this is really about insurance coverage and whether insurers can make the distinction that they're going to cover hormones and mastectomies with certain conditions, but not for people with gender dysphoria. In this case, they said that's not going to fly and that needs to stop…. A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS NewsHour 4/30/24 7:13:54 p.m. (ET) Amna Nawaz: A federal appeals court issued a groundbreaking ruling last night ensuring that gender-affirming surgery is covered by state-run health insurance programs. Stephanie Sy has that report. Stephanie Sy: Amna, this decision centered around two lawsuits, with trans people in West Virginia and North Carolina suing to secure insurance coverage for gender-affirming care, such as hormone therapy and surgery. The federal appellate court in Richmond, split 8-6, ordered that the state health care plans — quote — "reinstate coverage for medically necessary services for the treatment of gender dysphoria." The American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics wrote briefs in support of the trans plaintiffs. It is a win for the trans community, but it may not be the final word on the issue. For more on all of this, I'm joined by NPR's Selena Simmons-Duffin, who covers health policy for NPR. Selena, it's good to see you on the "NewsHour." So, as you know, there are numerous court cases around the country about transgender rights and access to gender-affirming care. How significant was this ruling, and what are the big takeaways to you? Selena Simmons-Duffin, NPR: I think this is a really significant ruling. The Fourth Circuit's majority opinion was really strong and called discrimination against trans patients on these plans to be — quote — "obviously discriminatory." I think that the big takeaway is that insurers are not going to be able to say that they're going to cover this care for some patients with some diagnoses and not for others. If they're going to be covering things like sex hormones and mastectomies for some patients, they're going to have to cover it for trans patients as well. And I do think that it's really seen in the trans community as a major win, and it cuts against some of the trends of more litigation and more restrictions that we have seen in statehouses across the country. Stephanie Sy: Selena, how far-reaching is this ruling? Does this mean trans people with state medical plans are now covered for gender-affirming care where they couldn't or where they weren't before? Selena Simmons-Duffin: Well, actually, in both of these cases, the state plan in North Carolina and Medicaid's — Medicaid in West Virginia, they already had to start covering this care after the district court ruled in the plaintiff's favor in 2022. So people have been able to bill for this and get coverage for this in the last two years, but what the appellate ruling does is really solidify that coverage. And as I said, it also signals to other plans in other states around the country that this is care that needs to be covered and that trans people are protected under the law. Stephanie Sy: We have seen in the last few years some two dozen states pass restrictive laws on gender-affirming care specifically for minors. Does this decision, Selena, apply to minors covered by state medical plans, even in states where legislatures have banned care? Selena Simmons-Duffin: I should say that there were plaintiffs in these cases that were minors. So, for example, in North Carolina, there were some members of the plan who joined the case on behalf of their dependent minor child who was transgender. And so they were seeking coverage for the care of that child. But I think it is important to differentiate this from some of the other cases around gender-affirming care for minors, because this is really about insurance coverage and whether insurers can make the distinction that they're going to cover hormones and mastectomies with certain conditions, but not for people with gender dysphoria. In this case, they said that's not going to fly and that needs to stop. But one thing I also wanted to mention is that, in the realm of bans across the country in different states for gender-affirming care for youth, just today, in Kansas, the Statehouse was unable to override the veto of the governor who had vetoed the ban on gender-affirming care for youth in that state. So I think advocates are really hoping that this does — even beyond the realm of its actual reach, it does send a signal to different places, to governors, to statehouses to say, this isn't a winning issue and the courts are starting to fall in their favor, although it has been a mixed bag in the courts. Stephanie Sy: Yes, absolutely. In this particular case — and you quoted it — the majority wrote that, when it comes to the state's exclusion of gender-affirming care for medical plans — quote — "We hold that the coverage exclusions facially discriminate on the basis of sex and gender identity." It said the exclusions, in essence, violate the 14th Amendment and provisions in the Affordable Care Act. There are so many transgender rights issues mired in the courts right now. Selena, do you see the Supreme Court taking all this up any time soon? I know, in this case, West Virginia's attorney general has already said he is appealing. Selena Simmons-Duffin: Yes, I mean, court watchers and policy watchers that I have talked to really think that a case is going to reach the Supreme Court at some point, and probably soon. But the Supreme Court has been sending some mixed messages on this. So there was a gender-affirming caravan in Idaho that the Supreme Court allowed to take effect. But then there are other cases, including one from the Fourth Circuit that was related to transgender students participating in sports, that the Supreme Court declined to take. And that was a win for the transgender plaintiff in that case. Court watchers suggest that it seems like the Supreme Court is maybe reluctant to jump into the fray, but there has been so much litigation in this area and so many laws being passed that it just seems inevitable that the Supreme Court will have to weigh in and give some clarity.

Spitting on Graves? MSNBC Lets Dems Smear Tennessee GOP on Arming Teachers

Over the last few weeks as a bill made its way through the Republican-dominated Tennessee legislature to permit local areas to decide whether to let teachers concealed carry firearms to deter mass shooters, several MSNBC hosts found it "shocking" and brought on "The Tennessee Three," their favorite far-left Democrats from the state's House of Representatives -- Justin Jones, Justin Pearson, and Gloria Johnson -- to smear Republicans and push conspiracy theories. MSNBC host Ali Velshi claimed that the new law was "worse than doing nothing," and, on the April 28 edition of his eponymous weekend show, went along with State Representative Justin Jones's theory that Republicans hope arming teachers will scare parents away from sending their children to public schools. Velshi responded: "I don't want my kids going to a place where there's yet more guns in the school. I'd like zero guns in the schools." A bit after Jones declared that Republican Governor Bill Lee "has no conscience and no courage," weekend host Alex Witt concluded the segment on her April 27 show by gushing: "I'm really glad you were voted back in office." A few minutes earlier, among his substantial trashing of Republicans, Jones further declared: "the governor just spit on the face of all these people and spit on the graves of the six people killed by signing this law. Nothing to reign in gun violence like common sense gun laws that would expand universal background checks, ban assault weapons, red flag laws. Instead, he's putting a law to arm teachers -- something that no teachers want in our state." Stephanie Ruhle found the push to arm teachers "almost too much to believe," and Katie Phang labeled the move "really flawed and dangerous policies." MSNBC also allowed Democrat guests to claim that no one except pro-gun lobbyists asked for the new law. By contrast, CNN hosts at least had right-leaning guests on to explain why they support the move. CNN This Morning Weekend host Victor Blackwell had a surprisingly sober reaction on April 28 as he allowed CNN contributor and MRC alum Stephen Gutowski on as a guest so he could explain that some rural schools had difficulty finding qualified resource officers and wanted to open up the possibility of school staff stepping in to fill the void. A few weeks earlier, CNN weekday host Sara Sidner provocatively quoted left-wing protesters who chanted, "Kill the bill, not the kids" as they opposed guns in schools, and her voice cracked as she discussed the issue, but, unlike MSNBC, at least she did allow State Senator Paul Bailey (R) to appear as a guest. He recalled that the legislature had already supplied funding to hire more resource officers, but some schools had failed to find qualified candidates, making other options necessary: "We provided over $140 million to go directly to those school districts for them to be able to hire school resource officers. ... But the situation is there's not enough qualified individuals to be able to fill those positions." While some of the liberal guests invoked the Covenant school shooting that occurred in the state in 2023, it was not mentioned that that school was a gun-free zone or that nearly all mass shooters who target public places choose gun-free zones to make it less likely they will face resistance, thus pointing to a deterrence value of armed teachers. And while Democrat guests fretted that armed teachers would lead to more violence, MSNBC hosts ignored research finding that schools with armed teachers tend to be safer. Transcripts follow: CNN News Central April 10, 2024 8:02 a.m. Eastern JOHN BERMAN (in opening plug): Backlash in Tennessee after lawmakers pass a law that would allow teachers to carry concealed guns in their classrooms. (...) 8:42 p.m. SARA SIDNER (before commercial break): All right, up next, some teachers and parents up in arms over a bill in Tennessee that could allow teachers and staff members to carry a gun on school grounds. We'll talk to the bill's co-sponsor coming up. (...) 8:49 p.m. SIDNER: "Kill the bill, not the kids." That's what some parents and teachers are chanting about a bill in Tennessee that allows teachers and school staff to carry guns at school. The bill just passed by the senate -- state senate in a 26-5 vote, and now it goes to the house. It allows Tennessee teachers to carry concealed handguns in K-12 schools. The bill also puts the debate over arming educators right back in the spotlight. Currently, 34 states ban teachers and the general public from carrying guns onto public school property according to Every Town for Gun Safety. Let's discuss this now with Tennessee State Senator Paul Bailey. You are the sponsor of this bill. First of all, why do you think this will make schools safer for children and staff? (STATE SENATOR PAUL BAILEY (R-TN)) You know, you said the sheriff's association is sort of at the forefront of pushing this bill and influenced you certainly -- we saw what happened in Uvalde, though, with people who are trained with weapons -- police officers who did not respond in a quick matter. What makes you think that teachers  under this kind of stress would be able to handle this with all that they already have to do? (BAILEY) All right, I want to play for you what Lauren Shipman-Dorrance has to say about the bill. She is a teacher in Nashville. Here's what she said. LAUREN SHIPMAN-DORRANCE, NASHVILLE TEACHER: I really thought the lieutenant governor would listen to the voice of the people. You know, we know overwhelmingly so many Tennesseeans do not support legislation like this. I don't know if I'd feel safe to stay in a teaching role, to be honest with you. SIDNER: There is already a shortage of teachers. What do you say to her, that she doesn't think she'll feel safe with other folks, staff members, potentially other teachers, walking around armed in a school? (BAILEY) I'm curious if any of the schools talked to you about this and asked for this? (BAILEY) So, sir, why not -- why not pass legislation -- why not pass legislation to fund more school resource officers instead of putting this on the teachers or the staff members there who, as you know, are overtaxed? They have to do so many things in classrooms now from being counselors to teaching, you know, math and science and English. Why not just say, "Okay, let's -- let's fund the resource officers who are trained"? STATE SENATOR BAILEY: Well, I'm glad you brought that up because we had a special session last year and dealt with that. We provided over $140 million to go directly to those school districts for them to be able to hire school resource officers. And, as of just the beginning of this legislative session at the end of January, $98 million of that had been drawn down into those local school districts for them to be able to provide SRO officers. But the situation is there's not enough qualified individuals to be able to fill those positions. I'm also carrying legislation that would allow any retired law enforcement officer that would like to go back for at least two years and be a school resource officer to be able to do so without losing their retirement benefits. So we've been working in many ways to try to make sure that our schools are as safe as possible here in Tennessee. SIDNER: State Senator Paul Bailey, thank you so much for coming on and asking -- and answering the questions. Appreciate it. (...) MSNBC's The 11th Hour April 11, 2024 11:24 p.m. Eastern STEPHANIE RUHLE: Meanwhile, this week, the Tennessee State Senate advanced a bill there to arm their teachers and school staff in the face of local protests. If passed, the move would mark one of the state's biggest expansions of gun access since the deadly Covenant school shooting that took place in Nashville last year. Here to discuss, Tennessee State Representative Justin Jones. You know him as one of the Tennessee Three. He was reinstated to his position one year ago yesterday after he was peacefully protesting gun violence. And Rachel Wegner joins us -- a children's reporter at The Tennessean and USA Today network. Rachel, what should we know about this bill? Because it's almost too much to believe. (WEGNER) But once they do that, a teacher could have a gun on their belt while teaching the third grade? WEGNER: Yeah, and another thing that has raised a lot of concerns is that they won't need to disclose which staff members are carrying weapons in the schools to teachers, parents, and possibly even other teachers around them. RUHLE: Representative Jones, what is your reaction to this? What are people in your district telling you? STATE REPRESENTATIVE JUSTIN JONES (D-TN): I mean, so many people are outraged, you know. The Tennessee Republican supermajority continues to hold our state at gunpoint and put more guns on our streets, and now they're trying to force guns into our classrooms. I think the most asinine thing about this, Stephanie, is that we live in a state where we've passed laws saying we don't trust teachers to pick the books in their classrooms. We don't trust teachers to pick their own curriculum about history. But now we want to say we want teachers to carry guns in our schools when every parent we saw show up in our committees, said, "Please don't do this -- more guns are not the solution, and they'll make out children and our schools more unsafe." RUHLE: We don't even provide those teachers with the school supplies they need to do their jobs. Rachel, what are parents and teachers saying about this? WEGNER: So I would say fairly wide outcry against the passage of the bill now in our state senate has been rolling this week. It is yet to be taken up by our house, but, as we've got into that potential hearing, lots of folks are planning to continue their protests and speaking out against this over their concerns for all the ways things could go wrong. Supporters of the bill have, you know, a different viewpoint on that, but teachers, parents, students, I've almost unanimously heard them say they're opposed to it, and they're worried about what it means. RUHLE: Representative, what do you say to people who argue, "Well, schools have the option to opt out." Is that good enough? (...) JONES: And so what we're hearing in our state is people saying that our legislature is morally insane. We have a Republican supermajority that has just lost their mind and, you know, passing laws just last week to honor the Tennessee Rifle the same week that we are recognizing the Covenant tragedy here in our state -- a mass shooting that took the lives of three nine-year-olds and three adults, and, you know, we're going to honor a gun? And the only law that we passed after the Covenant mass shooting was to protect firearms manufacturers. So what we're seeing is a Republican supermajority that is beholden to the gun industry -- that is beholden to gun extremists -- that is beholden to the NRA, and that is not listening to the people of Tennessee. (...) MSNBC's The Last Word April 12, 2024 10:37 a.m. Eastern STATE SENATOR LONDON LAMAR (D-TN): This is irresponsible! The public school teachers don't even want the bill! They're not even asking you for this! We just passed legislation to have SROs in every school -- can we see if that works yet?! I'm upset not out of -- because I don't like you all individually -- because I'm mad because this bill puts my child at risk and all the mothers I hear that just got put out! They're saying their children at risk! Look at that gallery! They're asking you not to do this! (editing jump) Put partisan politics aside -- I ask you this all the time, but this bill is dangerous. Don't do it. (editing jump) Teachers don't want it, the school districts don't want it, nobody doesn't want it, it's not going to work! It's going to cause more school shootings. (editing jump) What happened today is a gallery full of mothers who are concerned, and we put them out because you're trying to put guns in teachers' hands! We ought to be ashamed, Mr. Speaker. KATIE PHANG: That was the scene in the Tennessee Senate this week. State Senator London Lamar with her eight-month-old baby and a microphone in her hands begging Republicans not to vote to put more guns in schools. Yes, more guns, not less. This week, Republican lawmakers in Tennessee advanced legislation that would allow some teachers to carry concealed guns. Last April, just days after three children and three staff members were killed in a mass shooting at the Covenant school in Nashville, Donald Trump gave a speech pushing for armed teachers. And so a year later Tennessee Republicans have decided that their solution to gun violence in schools is more guns in schools. (...) Representative Pearson, I know that you're familiar with the being silenced when you're trying to speak out in that hall, but what is the justification that is coming from your colleagues on the other side of the aisle to vote on a bill and approve it that is not wanted by anyone? It's been tried before in some other counties in Tennessee -- hasn't worked -- and I understand there's an opt out in this legislation, but -- and I understand maybe that the voices in support of this say, "Well, there's training, and there's, you know, a certain component of it, but how is it possible that they're so tone deaf about what's really wanted to protect the children in these schools? STATE REPRESENATATIVE JUSTIN J. PEARSON (D-TN): This is a dangerous piece of legislation that puts at risk every child in our schools, including putting our teachers at risk as well. You don't have a single teacher in our district or in this state who are asking the legislature to pass this type of legislation. And they certainly aren't asking for us to do it by kicking out mothers from the galleries and those who are advocating on behalf of their kids in the process. What we are seeing is the cowardice of the Republican party in our state, refusing to address the epidemic of gun violence, which is the number one killer of our children, and instead of ending the epidemic by doing something about the guns that are being proliferated in our communities and doing something that would stand up to the National Rifle Association and the Tennessee Firearms Association, and they're attacking parents, and they're actually making our schools less safe. They're bringing guns into gun-free zones, and this is only going to have horrendous ramifications for children who will access these weapons and these guns -- for teachers who might accidentally shoot or harm their students. These are the real challenges that are going to come from this terrible legislation. (...) PHANG: I want to harp on this for our viewers to understand. Mothers like Beth Gebhard who talk about this experience, they're being silenced. These are not politicians, right? These are not -- these are not lobbyists for anti-gun or anti-2nd Amendment kind of propositions, These are parents that only want to keep their kids safe. And yet they're being silenced. They're being removed from a public forum because they just want to share their concerns about really flawed and dangerous policies and legislation that's getting passed in your state? STATE REPRESENTATIVE PEARSON: This is the way that the Tennessee Republican party works. They silence the voices of dissent in order that they can corrupt, be corrupt and use their power and corrupted absolutely using it. And they wield it against anybody that they believe is going to stand up against them. This is why Representative Jones and I were expelled. This is why the mothers are consistently being kicked out of the gallery and kicked out of committee rooms even during our special session to address public safety. They're not interested in the safety of our kids -- they're not interested in the safety of our teachers. They do not want to end the gun violence epidemic -- they only want to proliferate it with bad policies and legislation that is supported by the Tennessee Firearms Association and supported by the National Rifle Association. They are not interested in making our communities safer (...) MSNBC's The Last Word April 26, 2024 10:43 p.m. Eastern ALI VELSHI: That was the scene at the Tennessee house chamber this week after Republican lawmakers passed a bill that would allow some teachers to carry concealed guns. There were vocal protests inside the gallery against putting more guns in schools. State troopers once again removed folks for protesting. Inside the chamber, Democratic legislators pleaded with their colleagues not to pass the bill. They argued that in the year since the Nashville Covenant mass shooting, more should have been accomplished by this legislative body. (...) Joining us now is the Tennessee Democratic State Representative, Justin J. Pearson. ... The country came to know you because of the stand that you and some of your colleagues in the legislature took about having government take a stronger hand in trying to deal with the disasters that you faced in Tennessee -- the disaster that repeats itself across this country -- and yet here we are today. STATE REPRESENTATIVE JUSTIN J. PEARSON (D-TN): Yeah, I mean, the gun violence epidemic in our state is the leading cause of death for our children. We have a responsibility and an obligation to do everything possible to actually make our schools and our communities safer, and the Republican party of Tennessee led by Cameron Sexton and William Lamberth refuse to do that. Unfortunately, they view arming teachers, increasing the amount of gun violence in schools and in our communities as some form of a solution. No one would have ever imagined that after we experienced the tragedy that we did in the wake of the Covenant shooting, nor the hundreds of lives that we've lost due to gun violence just a year ago where 500 people in our state, that our resolution would be: "Let's try and increase the probability of having more gun violence." We didn't pass any red flag laws or extreme risk protection orders. We haven't addressed anything as relates to gun safety storage, and this is the signature piece of legislation the Republicans have pushed, which is antithetical to anything that anyone in the state of Tennessee that I talked to have wanted to see or for us to get to make our communities safer. VELSHI: I'm curious as to how it even came to be because if you were going to just not bother, then just don't bother. This seems to be possibly one worse than not bothering. (...) MSNBC's The Katie Phang Show April 27, 2024 12:33 p.m. Eastern KATIE PHANG: So another important issue I know is very near and dear to you is gun violence and the prevention of it. It's also something that's been a very important part of my ability to use my platform to spread awareness. In Tennessee, as you know, passing a law that now allows teachers in schools to have concealed firearms. The Republicans there saying that it's for school safety and to improve the safety of students in schools. What are your thoughts, Congressman, about the fact that Tennessee now allows this? CONGRESSMAN MAXWELL ALEJANDRO FROST (D-FL): Well, this is people legislating without looking at the facts and without looking at data and just simply doing the bidding of the gun lobby, which seeks to pass legislation that will sell more guns. That's all the gun lobby and the NRA cares about -- selling more guns to teachers, to kids, whoever. And so, unfortunately, they're not looking at the data that shows us that when there's more guns in the equation, guess what. It doesn't make you safer -- it makes you less safe. Not just that, but our teachers are already drastically underpaid, especially in the South. We already have a huge teacher shortage, and, on top of that, to add insult to injury, you want to add to the job description: "Carry a firearm and protect your students that way"? Come on, give me a damn break. So this is just politicians doing the bidding of the NRA and not actually doing what we need to do to save lives and keep people safe. And we're so happy and lucky we have great progressive advocates like Justin Jones, Justin Pearson, Gloria Johnson -- they are fighting in Tennessee. But it just goes to show that this fight in the South is real, but we're not doing it alone. (...) MSNBC's Alex Witt Reports April 27, 2024 3:49 p.m. ALEX WITT: Starting now in Tennessee, teachers and other school administrators are now officially allowed to carry concealed handguns on school grounds. Governor Bill Lee signing the bill one year after six people were killed, including three children, when a gunman opened fire at a private Christian school in Nashville. Joining me now is Democratic State Representative Justin Jones, who was expelled from the state house after joining a protest supporting gun reform in the wake of that shooting. He was then voted back in back to office in a special election. Welcome, Justin, I'm glad to have you here. Um, look, there was significant tension as this bill was approved, and I know you were banned from speaking on that floor for two days, and you say you were physically shoved by one of your Republican colleagues. It stemmed from you filming these chants from the gallery. Let's play this up. (clip of protesters in capitol chanting, "Blood on your hands") What happened there? STATE REPRESENTATIVE JUSTIN JONES (D-TN): Yes, well, Alex, it is a terrible time in Tennessee because the governor has signed this horrific law that's going to allow teachers to carry guns. This is the largest expansion of gun laws in our state since the mass shooting at Covenant, and in that gallery, you see my constituents. You see mothers, you see grandmothers, and parents and teachers and students telling my Republican colleagues that they will have blood on their hands. For over a year now, Tennesseans have been showing up to our capital week after week, begging for common sense gun laws, and the governor just spit on the face of all these people and spit on the graves of the six people killed by signing this law. Nothing to reign in gun violence like common sense gun laws that would expand universal background checks, ban assault weapons, red flag laws. Instead, he's putting a law to arm teachers -- something that no teachers want in our state. WITT: Wow. STATE REPRESENTATIVE: JONES: And it's an insult to Tennesseans. WITT: Justin, I want to talk about the bill specifically because, as we understand it, a staff member would have to complete 40 hours of training, get a background check and a psychological evaluation. They would then also need the approval of school officials and local law enforcement. But, to your point, parents would not be notified because of confidentiality, meaning parents won't have any idea at all if their child's teacher has a gun in the classroom. So here's the question: Would teachers with guns have made a difference in the Covenant school shooting when the killer had an AR-15 assault rifle and a pistol caliber carbine with 30 rounds in it? STATE REPRESENTATIVE JONES: I mean, that is the insanity, Alex, is that, "What is one handgun going to do against a military grade assault weapon? Nothing. The Covenant school had armed security. I mean, you saw in Uvalde officers were afraid to go in a building with these assault weapons. So this is just a false solution. And really what it's about -- it's about this idea of trying to proliferate guns in our state. The number one cause of death for children right now is gun violence, and so it's about proliferating guns and not doing anything to reign in the issue of this uniquely American problem of gun violence. WITT: Let me ask you this in regards to that. Is this putting too much responsibility on teachers? If, let's say, they are paralyzed by fear during a school shooting and they can't shoot, or they accidentally shoot a student or anybody else, could they be blamed for what happens? STATE REPRESENTATIVE JONES: That's the point we got no clarity about, is who has liability. They refuse to answer that because the real liability is on the governor and my Republican colleagues, and let me just -- I want to say this, too, that this is really also about -- I've been thinking about this in my head about trying to make parents afraid to send their kids to public schools because so many parents I've talked to in my district have emailed me in my office saying, "We don't know if we can send our kids to schools anymore because we're scared." And it's really about this idea of trying to destroy public education, which the governor has been trying to do, and in pushing guns in our communities. And now they're in tandem. And so teachers are not asking for this -- they're asking for more supplies -- they're asking for psychologists and counselors, better pay. No teachers in Tennessee are asking to have this law to allow them to carry guns. It's insanity, and it's morally inexcusable. WITT: And -- and Governor Lee, couldn't he have allowed the bill to become law even without his signature. I mean, the fact that he signed it -- he wanted to put his name on this bill -- what does it tell you? STATE REPRESENTATIVE JONES: I mean, it tell us that our governor has no conscience and no courage. He lost a friend in the Covenant mass shooting -- one of his wife's friends -- and he told us he was going to do something to, you know, to reign in gun violence, and he's failed Tennesseans -- he's bowed down to the extremists. And he's really about arming these extreme elements in our community because not only are we talking about arming teachers, but the governor has allowed the Proud Boys to come to our capitol armed -- they've allowed neo-Nazis to march three blocks away from the capitol where I am right now to march armed. And it's about arming these extreme elements in our community that are leaving us with trauma and terror. And it's at the expense of our children's lives, so he should be ashamed of himself, and it is a dereliction of duty and a dereliction of his oath of office that each of us take as elected officials on Tennessee. WITT: Democratic State Representative Justin Jones, let's just put it this way. I'm really glad you were voted back in office. Thank you so much for our conversation. (...) CNN This Morning Weekend April 28, 2024 7:37 a.m. Eastern VICTOR BLACKWELL: What informs the decision for arming the teachers instead of hiring more law enforcement to patrol these schools? STEPHEN GUTOWSKI, CNN FIREARMS ANALYST: Well, I think there's two reasons that advocates go this path. One is that it is actually quite difficult to get enough school resource officers to fill every school on a consistent basis, especially in more rural areas. And the second is that advocates of armed teachers believe that having several people armed in a school will increase the reaction time in case there is some sort of shooting. So those tend to be the main selling points. (...)  MSNBC's Velshi April 28, 2024 10:40 a.m. ALI VELSHI: Despite resounding pushback from parents and Democratic lawmakers in Tennessee, on Friday the Republican governor, Bill Lee, signed a shocking bill into law that gives counties the ability to decide whether some educators can legally carry guns in public schools. Republicans in the state house and senate pushed this bill through, claiming that it would reduce gun violence in schools and bolster safety. (...) Under the new legislation, some faculty and staff will be able to carry concealed handguns on school grounds but first need to complete 40 hours of training and pass criminal and mental health background checks. But Democrats have continually argued that the state would better served by, among other measures, employing background checks and requiring safe storage of firearms. As legislative debate ensued, leading up to the passage and signing of the bill, Democrats in the house signed off. (clips of Democrat legislators complaining about the bill) You'll probably remember the two people whom you just saw -- they are the Tennessee state representatives Justin Jones and Gloria Johnson. Two of them -- along with Representative Justin J. Pearson whom I spoke to on Friday night -- became the faces of the anti-gun movement in the state last year following the shooting at Nashville's Covenant school. Three children and three adults were killed in that attack. In the wake of the shooting, the Tennessee Three -- as these three have come to be called -- joined thousands in protest of the state's gun laws on the state's house floor. The decision to fight back -- small acts of courage -- were not met without consequence. Both Jones and Pearson --= who are black -- were booted from the Republican-controlled state house for their actions. Meanwhile, Johnson -- who is white -- dodged expulsion by one vote. However, both men returned to their seats last fall after their local governments voted to reinstate them. In light of the passage of this new gun law, it's abundantly clear that the Tennessee Three's fight for more sensible gun laws is far from over. On the other side of the break, both Justin Jones and Gloria Johnson join me to explain why this new law threatens the safety of classrooms in Tennessee. (...) Friends, thank you for being with us this morning and for your continued fight for the safety of our students and our citizens. Representative Jones, you posted on X that (Tennessee) House Speaker Cameron Sexton is growing "drunk with power" and that we are, quote, "witnessing the death of democracy in light of what happened with this vote. Talk to me about what you see happening here. Your state surprised me again in that there were lots of options between doing nothing and doing something, and they seem to have skipped through all of the more productive possibilities and went for the fairly absurd one. STATE REPRESENTATIVE JUSTIN JONES (D-TN): Yes, Ali, well, this is a very sad time for Tennessee. The trauma of our community is once again coming to the surface because at the end of the session my Republican colleagues decided to push forward and push through this asinine, insane bill to arm teachers as the gallery was full of Tennesseans -- teachers, mothers, students, clergy -- begging them not to, including families whose children are at the Covenant school, including families who have lost loved ones in shootings here in Nashville. And rather than hear them, Republicans pushed this bill forward by cutting off debate and then having the gallery cleared of the public and media when the people in the gallery chanted, "Shame on you," and that "there's blood on your hands." They had me censured for recording my constituents being drug out the gallery by state troopers. And so I said online that this is fascism -- this is a step against democracy -- against -- and toward authoritarianism and toward this, no, just shameful trajectory of arming our schools more and more -- putting more guns in schools -- when people have been begging for a year for common sense gun laws that protect kids and not guns. And the governor, by signing that bill, has spit in the face of these families.  He is a coward, and he is somebody who is going to be on the wrong side of history here in Tennessee. (...) STATE REPRESENTATIVE GLORIA JOHNSON (D-TN): ...And they need to start listening to teachers, and I can tell you that teachers did not come to them with the legislation. Every major county has already said, "No, since this is permissive, we are not arming teachers." They've already said no. No one asked them for this bill. VELSHI: Yeah. Somebody -- (cross talk) -- the question is, no one or is it lobbies that continue to cause these legislators to do things that are completely not in the interests of -- don't have the support of their voters. (...) STATE REPRESENTATIVE JONES: What I think this is really about is that the governor is mad that his privatization of public schools bill failed this session, and so this is a way to further undermine education. So I want to connect the dots between this proliferation of guns and their attack on public schools. Because what we're hearing is that people are afraid to send their kids to schools. So what was the thing they did after the voucher bill died to try and privatize our schools? The coward Ryan Williams -- my colleague from Cookeville -- said we're going to push through this bill to arm teachers, and now parents are scared to send their kids -- VELSHI: Yeah, up. STATE REPRESENTATIVE JONES: -- to public schools. That's really what the goal is, I think, Ali. I really -- VELSHI: Yeah. STATE REPRESENTATIVE JONES: -- think that's the purpose of this legislation. VELSHI: I don't want my kids going to a place where there's yet more guns in the school. I'd like zero guns in the schools. Thanks to both of you. It is remarkable what you have both done and your other colleagues have done for democracy and for standing up for it. When they tell me, "You know, there's not enough younger people getting involved in politics and it's all -- it's all corporatized," and all that, I point to you Tennessee Three to remind people that there are a lot of people fighting the battle right out there all the time, and we should be proud of that. Thank you.

Bloomberg Columnist Claims Trump Trial Doesn't 'Get Much Attention' From Media

Bloomberg Businessweek columnist Joshua Green mourned on Friday’s Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO that the media has been covering the demonstrations on college campuses across the country and not Donald Trump’s hush money trial. Not only is surging anti-Semitism among college students a newsworthy topic, but it is simply not true that Trump’s trial has been removed from newscasts. Green’s fellow panelist was former Trump strategist Kellyanne Conway and the trio were discussing what voters care about when Maher quipped, “People do care about democracy also, they do, maybe not the circles you run in.”     Conway pushed back, “I came on your show five days after that, we know what—nine days after that, you know what I think of January 6, that will never change. But if we are looking backward, elections are always about the future, not the past. That's the way America needs to look at them and right now they feel cost of living in everyday quality of life is diminishing.” That led Green, who is the author of The Rebels: Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and the Struggle for a New American Politics and Devil's Bargain: Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, and the Storming of the Presidency, to chime in, “But as a pollster you've got to worry, I mean, you've seen polls that say if Donald Trump is convicted of a crime, he's currently on trial, though, it doesn't get much attention in the news that support for Trump will ebb.” A stunned Conway replied, “Trump doesn't get attention in the news? It’s all they talk about.” Green clung to his claim, “No, the criminal trial, no, it’s nothing but protests. It’s like the D block.” At the same time, Maher tried to offer an explanation, “Well, that criminal really—we’re treating it like it's like the Gwyneth Paltrow skiing trial. People just don’t care.” Back in the real world, the media, and especially cable, has obsessed over the trial. They cover it pretty much all day, relay what is going on inside the courtroom, and then have their legal analysts discuss. CNN has tried to analyze the profound meanings of photographs and court sketches of Trump to such a comical degree, even Jon Stewart couldn’t pass on the opportunity to mock them for it. Here is a transcript for the May 3 show: HBO Real Time with Bill Maher 5/3/2024 10:27 PM ET BILL MAHER: People do care about democracy also, they do, maybe not the circles you run in. KELLYANNE CONWAY: Of course, we all do. No, no, we all do. You know what I think of January 6. JOSHUA GREEN: But as a pollster. CONWAY: I came on your show five days after that, we know what—nine days after that, you know what I think of January 6, that will never change. But if we are looking backward, elections are always about the future, not the past. That's the way America needs to look at them and right now they feel cost of living in everyday quality of life is diminishing. GREEN: But as a pollster you've got to worry, I mean, you've seen polls that say if Donald Trump is convicted of a crime, he's currently on trial, though, it doesn't get much attention in the news that support for Trump will ebb. CONWAY: Trump doesn't get attention in the news? It’s all they talk about. GREEN: No, the criminal trial, no it’s nothing but protests —. CONWAY: Oh, okay. Well— MAHER: Well, that criminal really—we’re treating it like it's— GREEN: It’s like the D Block. MAHER: -- like the Gwyneth Paltrow skiing trial. People just don’t care.

The Onion and Ben Collins: A Perfect Fake News Marriage

It’s hard to remember a time when The Onion was synonymous with “funny.” The humor site once had the field all to itself, creating Fake News stories that made us laugh and think. The Onion came out in printed form, and its attacks on the political class could be withering. That was then. Today’s online-only Onion is comedic in name only. The outlet’s hard-Left politics have all but stripped away its comic potential, from the woke handcuffs placed on liberal satire to how it protects Democrats… …much like today’s late-night TV landscape. So if you want to read something funny about President Joe Biden, for example, you’d never type “the onion” into a search engine. You go to The Babylon Bee.   To Save Time, The Babylon Bee Will Now Just Republish Everything Biden Says Verbatim https://t.co/KDHEZAjgU7 pic.twitter.com/O4ZfgGrc8P — The Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) January 18, 2024   That site leans to the Right, but it’s unrelenting in its humor and ability to smite both sides. It’s everything The Onion isn’t – topical, fast, bold and hilarious. And, sadly, The Onion might soon be even worse. The site just got picked up by new owners, and former NBC journalist Ben Collins is the platform’s CEO moving forward. Ostensibly charged by the Peacock network with overseeing so-called “disinformation,” Collins proved inept at the gig. We’re still waiting for him to weigh in on the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, the “Very Fine People” hoax and more. Here’s how Collins described Libs of TikTok, the social media journalist who exposes the far-Left’s extremes. “Fox News’ favorite aggregator of LGBTQ teachers they don’t like the look of.” The latter part of the sentence feels slanderous, no? What’s his proof that Libs of TikTok is bigoted. Does he share any? Collins, formerly with the far-Left Daily Beast, also got exposed by The Federalist for carrying water for the hard-Left. Consider: NBC’s leftist reporter Ben Collins, meanwhile, arguably offered the most laughable response to Soros backing Bragg. Quoting a CNBC story, Collins says Soros can’t back Bragg because the two never met. Journalist Steve Krakauer slammed Collins for his social media-heavy methods that often occur without actual journalism. Collins seems to spend his days endlessly opining on social media about the state of journalism – like his frequent attacks on the New York Times. But one thing Collins does not appear to be doing very much anymore is journalism. Collins hasn’t written an article for NBC News in more than 100 days. His last one, published in early October, was on one of his favorite targets, X owner Elon Musk. Before that, you have to go back to May 22 to find his previous byline, a short piece about a “fake picture of an explosion” at the Pentagon that had gone semi-viral. He’s also wary of transparency. I asked Collins and NBC News if he was still a full-time employee of the media outlet, and neither responded to multiple requests for comment.  Does this sound like the person to shake The Onion from its hard-left shackles? It gets worse. Collins was one of many mainstream news reporters who got the infamous Gaza hospital story wrong. Collins is treated as an expert in the burgeoning field of countering the spread of misinformation. Yet his error rate is noteworthy…. Did Collins soberly wait for these facts to come in? Nope. The award-winning disinformation expert helped circulate the inaccurate claims of the Palestinian authorities. When other voices on social media recommended caution, Collins chimed in to assert that any delay in reporting the horrific casualty numbers represented a profound moral failing. It’s Disinformation 101, and he fell for it. That he recently won a Walter Cronkite Award for journalism speaks volumes about today’s Fourth Estate. Collins’ rage against free speech advocate Elon Musk found him making more mistakes, according to Reason. Collins’ reporting often contains basic errors that suggest he doesn’t particularly understand the right-wing forces he’s denouncing. His most recent article alleges that Musk’s plans for Twitter were shaped by a far-right former Trump administration staffer, even though it’s fairly clear the staffer wasn’t actually telling Musk what to do, but rather warning about what would happen to Musk if he offended “the regime.” Collins even raged against the release of The Twitter Files, which exposed the platform’s extensive censorship regime against right-leaning voices. He did so without calling out any errors in Matt Taibbi’s reportage. He just used ad hominem attacks on the left-leaning Taibbi. So The Onion’s return to its funny, bipartisan roots is even more unlikely today. Still, the two parties may be perfect for one another.

CBS Claims Human Smuggling At Border 'Is More Complex'

On CBS Saturday Morning, host Dana Jacobson sat down to discuss the border crisis with anthropology Prof. Jason De Leon, where the duo also hyped his new book on human smuggling. Both host and author claimed the issue “is more complex” than simply viewing the smugglers as bad guys who take advantage of people. Jacobson reported, “The business of human smuggling, according to the Department of Homeland Security, is a multibillion dollar industry, run by criminal organizations intent on taking advantage of vulnerable people. The story de Leon tells is more complex.”     De Leon differentiates between smugglers and traffickers. For him, a smuggler is working within a consensual agreement with the person seeking to cross the border, whereas a trafficker is not. He therefore claimed, “I can write a story about how they're the bad guys in this whole scenario and all they do is brutalize migrants, but if you think about the realities, if smugglers only brutalized migrants, the system wouldn't function, and so I went into it telling myself that, you know, what can I find that's relatable, it's not trying to humanize smugglers, it's working from the assumption that they are human first and that they just happen to be in this brutal occupation.” Jacobson then claimed that smugglers and migrants face the same set of challenges, “The low-level smugglers de Leon met said issues like poverty and gang violence had driven them out of Honduras. The same issues many migrants also face.”  She then asked, “You talk about smuggling and think what you write, it's violent, it exploits people, but that it's also a symptom of a larger problem. What is that larger problem?” That does not sound complex at all. In fact, de Leon would spend much of the rest of the time portraying smuggling as a get-rich-quick scheme. He also blamed things such as climate change for the crisis, “We need to think about why are people migrating in the first place, and you know, why does the United States have an insatiable appetite for cheap, undocumented labor that we rarely acknowledge, and as long as you need the labor and as long as climate is changing and making places unlivable, those smugglers are going to stay in business and just make more money off of this whole process.” After de Leon warned the crisis is not going to end any time soon, Jacobson added, “A future de Leon hopes can be made easier by considering different perspectives and the humanity of everyone involved.” De Leon concluded by lamenting, “The approaches that we've been using to deal with these problems have clearly been ineffective for decades and yet we just don't seem to want to get smarter about this stuff… You can build whatever border wall you want. There are desperate people on the other side who are willing to die to save themselves, to save their family, and then there are smugglers who are willing to make a buck on that in all kinds of different ways, so that will just keep the system, kind of, going forever.” You can’t have a policy that claims the weather being too hot is a legitimate asylum claim and as CBS itself admitted, the smugglers exploit people and subject them to possible death, so why is this complex? Here is a transcript for the May 4 show: CBS Saturday Mornings 5/4/2024 8:54 AM ET DANA JACOBSON: The business of human smuggling, according to the Department of Homeland Security, is a multibillion dollar industry, run by criminal organizations intent on taking advantage of vulnerable people. The story de Leon tells is more complex. JASON DE LEON: I can write a story about how they're the bad guys in this whole scenario and all they do is brutalize migrants, but if you think about the realities, if smugglers only brutalized migrants, the system wouldn't function, and so I went into it telling myself that, you know, what can I find that's relatable, it's not trying to humanize smugglers, it's working from the assumption that they are human first and that they just happen to be in this brutal occupation. JACOBSON: The low-level smugglers de Leon met said issues like poverty and gang violence had driven them out of Honduras. The same issues many migrants also face.  You talk about smuggling and think what you write, it's violent, it exploits people, but that it's also a symptom of a larger problem. What is that larger problem? DE LEON: We need to think about why are people migrating in the first place, and you know, why does the United States have an insatiable appetite for cheap, undocumented labor that we rarely acknowledge, and as long as you need the labor and as long as climate is changing and making places unlivable, those smugglers are going to stay in business and just make more money off of this whole process. JACOBSON: It's an industry that continues to grow as migrant encounters at the U.S.-Mexico border hit record highs with people coming from as far away as Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. DE LEON: People are coming from around the globe. They're coming up from South America, through the Darien Gap. It's a window into the future as all those places become unlivable for different reasons. We're going to continue to see that mix of people coming up from the south to our doorstep. JACOBSON: A future de Leon hopes can be made easier by considering different perspectives and the humanity of everyone involved. DE LEON: The approaches that we've been using to deal with these problems have clearly been ineffective for decades and yet we just don't seem to want to get smarter about this stuff. I hope with this book that it's a way to undermine the simplistic framings of what the problem actually is. You can build whatever border wall you want. There are desperate people on the other side who are willing to die to save themselves, to save their family, and then there are smugglers who are willing to make a buck on that in all kinds of different ways, so that will just keep the system, kind of, going forever.

PBS Wonders Why College Protests Are Labeled Anti-Semitic

The cast of Friday’s PBS NewsHour was greatly confused. Host William Brangham didn’t understand why the anti-Israel college demonstrators, on the whole, have been branded as anti-Semitic, while Washington Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart didn’t know why it is so hard for the demonstrators to protest Israel without degenerating into anti-Semitism. Brangham’s remarks came on the heels of New York Times columnist David Brooks warning that the protests are toxic for Democrats, “I think if the protests continue to veer in the direction they're veering, you could see some pretty serious repercussions, which is why Biden is speaking, which is why Chuck Schumer is speaking, trying to distance themselves from what the protesters are doing.”     Claiming his first-hand look at the protests disproved the idea that they are rampant with anti-Semitism, Brangham wondered, “I mean, Jonathan, a lot of the critics of these protests like to say that it's all anti-Semitism, just a hot stew of anti-Israeli bias. I was at one of the NYU protests earlier this week, and there is some of that, for sure. But it's mostly young people, as you were describing, who are despairing over what is happening in Gaza. How is it that people who care deeply about this issue can't — can somehow protest and not be risked being branded as anti-Semities?” Capehart began by correcting him, “So, there's anti-Semitism, but then you anti — you said anti-Israeli,” to which Brangham apologized, “I'm even conflating it myself here.” That settled, Capehart proceeded, “Exactly. And that is the issue. It is possible to criticize the government of Israel, the state of Israel, the prime minister of Israel, the policies, what he says, his actions, without veering into ugly anti-Semitism. If you don't like what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is doing in Gaza, not allowing enough humanitarian aid to go through, that is a legitimate criticism.” He then added, “But to then go into all the ugliness, some of the ugliness that we have heard, that's not okay. I don't understand how — why it's so hard to state your objections without being bigoted about it.” Perhaps we can help both Brangham and Capehart out. If you listen to what the leaders of the movement say, they talk about defeating Zionism which is simply the belief that Israel should exist. That is not criticism of Netanyahu and is an anti-Semitic position, according to President Barack Obama’s State Department. As your typical liberal, Capehart believes that there should be a ceasefire leading to two states for two peoples and that Netanyahu is an obstacle to this, but he and his fellow liberals keep projecting their liberalism onto Marxists and others who do not want such an outcome by refusing to acknowledge that the problem is with the group’s leaders and professors, not a handful of bad actors who corrupted a genuine anti-war, pro-peace movement.  Here is a transcript for the May 3 show: PBS NewsHour 5/3/2024 7:36 PM ET DAVID BROOKS: And, so I think if the protests continue to veer in the direction they're veering, you could see some pretty serious repercussions, which is why Biden is speaking, which is why Chuck Schumer is speaking, trying to distance themselves from what the protesters are doing. WILLIAM BRANGHAM: I mean, Jonathan, a lot of the critics of these protests like to say that it's all anti-Semitism, just a hot stew of anti-Israeli bias. I was at one of the NYU protests earlier this week, and there is some of that, for sure. But it's mostly young people, as you were describing, who are despairing over what is happening in Gaza. How is it that people who care deeply about this issue can't — can somehow protest and not be risked being branded as anti-Semities? JONATHAN CAPEHART: Okay, what — excuse me. So, there's anti-Semitism, but then you anti — you said anti-Israeli. BRANGHAM: I'm even conflating it myself here. CAPHEART: Exactly. And that is the issue. It is possible to criticize the government of Israel, the state of Israel, the prime minister of Israel, the policies, what he says, his actions, without veering into ugly anti-Semitism. If you don't like what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is doing in Gaza, not allowing enough humanitarian aid to go through, that is a legitimate criticism. But to then go into all the ugliness, some of the ugliness that we have heard, that's not okay. I don't understand how — why it's so hard to state your objections without being bigoted about it.

Leftist Journos and Hollywood Celebs Trash Trump But Praise Pro-Hamas Protests

It’s an odd state of affairs when a former President of the United States is called a threat to the “bedrock tenets of democracy,” the “rule of law itself” and is compared to Adolf Hitler but pro-Hamas/anti-Semitic protestors are praised for “singing prayers of peace.” Yet that is where the leftist press and their Hollywood friends are right now. Yikes! This past month saw ABC’s Good Morning America co-host and This Week moderator George Stephanopoulos warning his audience that Donald Trump was testing the “bedrock tenets of our democracy” in a way “we haven’t seen since the Civil War.”  MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace feared she would be out of a job after a Trump victory because of his “outward disdain” for a “free press.” Meanwhile Wallace’s MSNBC colleague Joy Reid came out spinning for the pro-Hamas protestors who took over college campuses as she claimed they weren’t hurling anti-Semitic slurs but rather “singing words of peace.”  Over on CNN, podcaster Kara Swisher waved her finger at the critics of the college kids: “Not to support them, is sort of anti-American.” Hollywood celebrities spouted crazy exaggerations about Trump too. ABC’s Black-ish actress Jenifer Lewis feared that “Hitler” Trump “will punish everybody that didn’t vote for him,” put “us in camps.” While actress and talk show host Drew Barrymore begged Vice President Kamala Harris to be the “Momala of the country.” The following are the most obnoxious outbursts by leftist journalists and celebrities during the month of April:  [LANGUAGE WARNING]   Trump Is Testing the “Bedrock Tenets” of “Democracy”     “Until now, no American presidential race has been more defined on what’s happening in courtrooms than what is happening on the campaign trail. Until now. The scale of the abnormality is so staggering that it can actually become numbing. It’s all too easy to fall into reflective habits — to treat this as a normal campaign where both sides embrace the rule of law, where both sides are dedicated to a debate based on facts and the peaceful transfer of power. But that is not what’s happening this election year. Those bedrock tenets of our democracy are being tested in a way we haven’t seen since the Civil War. It’s a test for the candidates, for those of us in the media, and for all of us as citizens.”— Moderator George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s This Week, April 28.   A Trump Win Could Lead to the End of a “Free Press,” and “The Rule of Law Itself” “Depending what happens in November — seven months from right now — this time next year, I might not be sitting here. There might not be a White House Correspondents Dinner or a free press. While our democracy won’t exactly fall apart immediately without it, the real threat looms larger. A candidate with outward disdain not just for a free press but for all of our freedoms and the rule of law itself.” — Host Nicolle Wallace on MSNBC’s Deadline: White House, April 29.   Protesters Aren’t Hurling Anti-Semitic Insults, They’re “Singing Words of Peace”     “I saw….these students singing and singing about peace and singing salaam, singing words of peace. So, it just didn’t square with what I was even hearing on television and television commentators saying was shrieking anti-Semitism, I didn’t hear it.”— Host Joy Reid on MSNBC’s The ReidOut, April 22.    “Anti-American” To Oppose Young Pro-Hamas Protesters “The question is, are you for order and against chaos, or for protests and the right to free speech?...All the free-speech warriors are suddenly like, order, order, we must have order. And so there are heinous things that are said, but there is a line where you have to support also young people, especially when they do things that they do badly. Not to support them, is sort of anti-American in a way.”— Podcast host/former New York Magazine contributing editor Kara Swisher on CNN’s The Chris Wallace Show, April 27.   Netanyahu = Stalin     “It is increasingly looking like Benjamin Netanyahu had a plan to force famine on the Palestinian people, on the Gazan people, to amp up the pressure on Hamas….You’re starving women and children in Gaza….They’re now having to grind up dog food and cat food and….drink salt water….It’s savage conditions, and it’s calculated….It’s calculated just like Stalin’s starvation of Ukrainians was calculated.”   — Co-host Joe Scarborough on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, April 5.    If You Vote for Trump, You Are Not a “Patriot” “There’s a patriotic duty to support President Biden against Donald Trump, for this reason: Patriotism is allegiance to an idea. It’s not just an allegiance to your own kind. That’s nationalism. Trump is a nationalist. President Biden is a patriot.”— MSNBC contributor/presidential historian Jon Meacham on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, April 19.   Fretting That Trump’s Trials May Hurt Biden      “These legal cases have only helped him fundraising….energized his base….He’s risen in the polls with every indictment….The problem for Joe Biden and the Democrats is….the trial is crowding out everything else. So Joe Biden goes out and does policy things….But everything else is crowded out….That’s what happened in 2016 to Hillary Clinton and that could be replicated this year.”— NBC chief foreign correspondent and MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell on NBC’s Meet the Press, April 21.   “Wonderfully Poetic!” Joy Reid Cheers “My DEIs” for Prosecuting Trump     “The first person to actually criminally prosecute Donald Trump is a black Harvard grad....He came out and graduated and he’s prosecuting you, Donald. And a black woman is doing the same exact thing in Georgia. And a black woman forced you to pay a $175 million fine….Trump is being held to account by the very multicultural, multiracial democracy that he’s trying to dismantle. And for me, there’s something poetic and actually wonderful about that. It says something good about our country that we’re still capable of having that happen. Go, DEI! My DEIs are bringing it home.”— Host Joy Reid on MSNBC’s The ReidOut, April 15.   Katie Couric’s Condescending Take on Trump Voters     “The socio-economic disparities are a lot and class resentment is a lot and anti-intellectualism and elitism is what is driving many of these anti-establishment  — which are Trump voters — so, I think that is a huge problem that we have to address.”— Former NBC Today co-host and CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric on HBO Real Time host Bill Maher’s podcast Club Random with Bill Maher, April 14.    Immediately Tying Trump to Man Who Set Himself on Fire “It seems then, that the gravitational pull of the Trump melodrama that has gripped the nation since he came down the escalator has now, it appears, resulted in someone coming to that where protesters have gathered and lit himself on fire.”— Correspondent Terry Moran during ABC’s live coverage of the Donald Trump trial, April 19.    Trump = Cult Leader Like David Koresh, Jim Jones or Charles Manson     “What Donald Trump is doing….it’s kind of David Koresh. It’s kind of Jim Jones. Because those two men started by saying, ‘You need to come to Jesus.’ They started as Christian evangelizers. But eventually, their evangelism said, ‘No, I get to have your wife. No actually, I get to tell you to kill these federal agents that are outside. I’m asking you to pick up a machine gun and shoot them because I don’t want to go to jail.’...It’s making me lose my mind to watch people who call themselves Christians fall down on their knees and worship this man. This is [Charles] Manson stuff.”— Co-host Joy Reid on MSNBC’s The ReidOut, April 2.    It’s a Conspiracy! Blaming High Gas Prices on Donald’s Oil Business Buddies  “These prices are not the fault of President Biden….We’ve got the highest oil production in U.S. history and some overseas oil producers who would sure like to help DJT.”— Host Stephanie Ruhle on MSNBC’s The 11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle, April 17.   NBC’s Brief Hiring of Former RNC Chair Was a Blow to “Democracy”     “It was an unpleasant few days at our network….In mainstream media, we need to include an array of voices. But there’s a line, and the line is truth….You have to be someone upholding our democracy.”— NBC’s Today show co-host Savannah Guthrie on CBS’s The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, April 3.   America Ruled By a Bunch of “Grumpy Old Men” Like Afghanistan and Iran “[France] actually signed into law a constitutional amendment to guarantee a woman’s right to make choices about her own body….This was sort of a demonstration of will by….a country that’s very supportive of your revolution, to show that this is universal human rights and that women actually need to be treated like adults and whether it’s Afghanistan, Iran, or the United States, a bunch of grumpy old men shouldn't be making essential decisions.”— PBS/CNN host Christiane Amanpour on CBS’s The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, April 11.    “Handmaid’s Tale Come to Life” in Arizona “People say it may sound like a joke….A lot of people are saying, unfortunately, it is not a joke. And that is where we’re going to begin today….The [Arizona] Supreme Court reinstating a law from the 1800s — 1800s — that bans nearly all abortion in the state….I’ve heard people use the phrases like “Is this Handmaid’s Tale come to life, in real life?’”— Co-host Gayle King on CBS Mornings, April 10.   Republicans Are Making Women’s Lives “More Miserable”      “[Mike] Pence, Lindsey Graham, and [Donald] Trump are fighting to see who could make women’s lives more miserable. That’s like what they’re really fighting for. ‘How can we really destroy women in this country?’ That’s it.”— Co-host Joy Behar on ABC’s The View, April 9.   “Hitler” Trump “Will Punish Everybody That Didn’t Vote For Him,” Put “Us In Camps” “If that man [Donald Trump] gets in, as soon as he takes the oath, he will have generals walk down the steps of the Capitol….He will take a hammer and break the glass where the Constitution is, and he will tear it up in our faces and say, ‘Now I’m the king of the fucking world. You will bow down, bitches.’ He will punish everybody that didn’t vote for him….I know what mental illness looks like! That mania is unstoppable! See, this motherfucker is Hitler. He didn’t come to play….That motherfucker will have us in camps.” — ABC’s Black-ish actress Jenifer Lewis on the Sirius/XM radio show Mornings with Zerlina, April 4.   Joe Biden and Kamala Harris Are the “Father” and “Momala” of “Our Country”     “I keep thinking in my head that we all need a mom. I’ve been thinking that we really all need a tremendous hug in the world right now, but in our country, we need you to be Momala of the country.”— Actress/talk show host Drew Barrymore to Vice President Kamala Harris on the syndicated The Drew Barrymore Show, April 29.  “You’re the kind of leader I love, because we’re lucky to have you in the Oval Office. And serving as the father of the country because if you’re a good father to your family — which you are — I know you’ll be a good father to the country.” — Host Howard Stern to President Joe Biden on Sirius/XM’s The Howard Stern Show, April 26.    Trump Actually Benefiting From “Two-Tiered System of Justice”  “[Trump] is part of a two-tiered system of justice but not in the way he thinks he is. He is getting way more concessions than the average criminal defendant would get. He’s getting delays, he’s got access to all kinds of lawyers that are filing this and filing that, delaying every trial, and most people don’t have access to that kind of lawyering, don’t have access to the kind of concessions that the justice system will provide to you if you can afford it.”— Musician/actor John Legend on MSNBC’s Inside with Jen Psaki, April 15. 

Sister Barbara's Gone Rogue! NPR Touts Nuns for 'Enshrining Abortion Rights' in Missouri

Leftists love to believe that churches should be run like clubs -- the majority rules. So they'll make a big deal out of polls, like the Pew Research Center finding six of ten Catholics disagree with the church's opposition to abortion. They do not ask self-identified Catholics whether they actually go to church on Sundays, or if they stopped the minute they became an adult. You would get a more conservative result. On Tuesday, NPR's newscast All Things Considered brought on reporter Katia Riddle to channel the views of pro-abortion Catholics, but what made it more shocking is touting a pro-abortion nun -- someone who is financially supported by the Church, and who should be accepting of all the Church teachings. KATIA RIDDLE: Today, Missouri is replete with Catholic churches, iconography and people like Sister Barbara. SISTER BARBARA: I certainly did not intend to, you know, become a sister or a nun. RIDDLE: She's standing outside her modest apartment, wearing jeans and a sweatshirt. She grew up Catholic but wasn't all that religious. In her 20s, she describes a kind of love affair she fell into with Catholicism. SISTER BARBARA: An emphasis on serving the poor and getting involved in just, you know, the social justice issues of the day. And that was a whole new idea for me about what religious life was really about. Church officials might want to know who this nun is, and why she would publicly -- well, not all the way -- bite the hand that's feeding her. RIDDLE: NPR is not using Sister Barbara's last name. She fears retribution from her local archdiocese for publicly expressing her beliefs on reproductive rights. She doesn't agree with the church's position that abortion is a sin and should be illegal. SISTER BARBARA: I just don't see it in just real absolute terms. RIDDLE: She says she wouldn't personally choose to end a pregnancy. SISTER BARBARA: However, I have not been in the situation of a person who has - had suffered from incest or rape or all of those things. RIDDLE: The Bible, she points out, does not say anything explicit about abortion. She fell in love with Catholicism for its practice around compassion and service, not politics. SISTER BARBARA: I want to put a sticker on the car that says, don't like abortion? Don't have one. RIDDLE: That's why she's supporting an effort in Missouri to enshrine abortion rights in the state's Constitution. Several other nuns interviewed for this story said they feel the same. One was even collecting signatures to put the measure on the November ballot, though she didn't want to talk about it on the record. Over seven minutes, Riddle lined up the Catholic abortion advocates: ex-nun Alice Kitchen, retired reproductive endocrinologist Marilyn Richardson, Democrat state representative Ingrid Burnett, and college student Mary Helen Schaefer. The only surprise is a brief nod to Matt Lee, who runs a pro-life group called Missouri Stands with Women. He's a deacon in the church. RIDDLE: Lee says he's not surprised that many Catholics support abortion access. Some reproductive rights advocates say church leadership is scared of this diversity of opinion among its followers, but Lee disagrees. LEE: Could you say the Catholic Church is under attack or the church's beliefs are under attack or their institutions are? Sure, but that doesn't mean that the Catholic Church is scared. I mean, scared people tend to run away. The Catholic Church is not running away from this fight. Try not to laugh at NPR saying some other organization is scared of having a diversity of opinion inside its walls. Riddle concluded with the unsubtle hint that the Catholic hierarchy should be tethered to polls instead of their view of God's will: SISTER BARBARA: I think that the Catholic Church would not be here today if they didn't have a remarkable ability to turn corners when it's necessary - when things are about to collapse for it. RIDDLE: After all, she points out, Catholicism has been around for centuries. She's hoping this abortion debate is a relatively brief distraction from what she sees as the faith's fundamental aspirations. SISTER BARBARA: Reaching for some kind of ideals in the way we love and live with each other, with one another. RIDDLE: For Sister Barbara, one of those ideals would be for church leadership to value what a majority of Catholics believe.

NewsBusters Podcast: Biden Laughs at the New York Times Interview Request

President Biden and his team have been very reluctant to hold press conferences or grant interviews. He's much less accessible than other recent presidents. For the most part, the press doesn't care. But The New York Times put out a statement shortly before the White House Correspondents Dinner protesting how it was troubling that Biden has "so actively and effectively avoided questions from independent journalists during his term." What happened next? At the White House Correspondents Dinner, Biden JOKED about it, even suggesting The New York Times was inferior to the Howard Stern show in its influence. Mr. Butt Bongo Fiesta was a better forum. Journalists laughed along, underlining they have next to zero professional self-respect.  Washington Post media blogger Erik Wemple posted has a new piece on Friday headlined “The New York Times, alone in its outrage over access to Biden.” He noted the Times laid it all out for Biden:  For anyone who understands the role of the free press in a democracy, it should be troubling that President Biden has so actively and effectively avoided questions from independent journalists during his term. The president occupies the most important office in our nation, and the press plays a vital role in providing insights into his thinking and worldview, allowing the public to assess his record and hold him to account. Mr. Biden has granted far fewer press conferences and sit-down interviews with independent journalists than virtually all of his predecessors. It is true that The Times has sought an on-the-record interview with Mr. Biden, as it has done with all presidents going back more than a century. If the president chooses not to sit down with The Times because he dislikes our independent coverage, that is his right, and we will continue to cover him fully and fairly either way. However, in meetings with Vice President Harris and other administration officials, the publisher of The Times focused instead on a higher principle: That systematically avoiding interviews and questions from major news organizations doesn’t just undermine an important norm, it also establishes a dangerous precedent that future presidents can use to avoid scrutiny and accountability. Times Publisher Arthur Gregg Sulzberger, according to the Times statement, has “repeatedly urged the White House to have the president sit down with The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, Reuters, CNN and other major independent news organizations that millions of Americans rely on to understand their government.” It's not like Trump will act like Biden in a second term. As Wemple shows, with numbers from Martha Joynt Kumar, Trump had about three times as many pressers at this point in his presidency than Biden – 97 to 34. Same with interviews – 327 to 118. Trump will take on hostile interviews. Biden's talking to Stern, Drew Barrymore, and Ryan Seacrest.  Wemple wanted to point out the Times is standing alone with its outrage, without supporting words from other news organizations contending with Biden’s hard-to-get status. “I think this is a norm that matters,” said Sulzberger in a Tuesday interview with Wemple. “And all our experience shows that when norms like this erode, especially a norm as uncomfortable as the discipline of answering probing questions from independent journalists, they rarely return.” Wemple said he asked The Post, The Wall Street Journal and USA Today — as well as TV outlets that have interviewed the president (ABC News, NBC News/MSNBC, CBS News and CNN) — whether the situation merited a public statement along the lines of the Times’s. "Not a single outlet responded with an endorsement of the Times’s message," including Fox News. They're all holding out hope for an interview -- which can draw ratings.  Enjoy the podcast below -- or wherever you listen to podcasts.   

What Word the Media Refuses to Use For the College Riots: Insurrection

No one who's politically aware can be unaware of January 6, 2021. Tens of thousands of Americans descended on Washington to protest the counts and Covid-related conditions of the 2020 election. A riot took place at the US Capitol. The riot resulted in the charging, per ABC News three years later, of over 1,200 and “incarceration for more than 460 people.”  The coverage since then of that day in the mainstream media is typified by headlines like this from the New York Times:  Jan. 6 Panel Accuses Trump of Insurrection and Refers Him to Justice Dept. Or like this from Forbes:  Jan. 6 Insurrection 2 Years Later: How Many Arrested, Convicted And What Price Donald Trump May Still Pay The Washington Post has an ongoing section titled:  THE JAN. 6 INSURRECTION There’s more of this kind of thing out there. And that’s before you get to Democrats like Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden. Here’s NPR on Pelosi:  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Launches Select Committee To Probe Jan. 6 Insurrection And CNN on Biden:  The big lie being told by the former president, and many Republicans who fear his wrath, is that the insurrection in this country actually took place on Election Day. There’s more like this out there in the media, but you get the drift. When the subject of the riot at the Capitol on January 6th comes up, the “I word” is always nearby. So let’s take a moment to check the definition of “insurrection” and move on to the events of our current day and what is curiously missing in the coverage of these multiple upon multiple anti-Israel, anti-Semitic riots on one college or university campus after another. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “insurrection” as follows:“…an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government.” As of today, America is awash in multiple upon multiple “acts or instances revolting against civil authority” - the civil authority of one American college or university after another. And the mainstream media coverage is curious indeed.  Here’s a sample headline from the Washington Post:  Riot police and over 2,000 arrests: A look at 2 weeks of campus protests CNN headlined:  What we know about the protests erupting on college campuses across America The CNN story said:   New York CNN  —  College campuses across the United States have erupted with pro-Palestinian protests, and school administrators are trying — and largely failing — to defuse the situation. And on…and on and on…went the media coverage of these riots on multiple college campuses, the resulting arrests and financial damage. Good for them.  But the missing word in all this coverage? The missing word used routinely in the media and by progressive politicians to describe one solitary -- and admittedly decidedly wrong -- riot on January 6, 2021? That would be, of course, “insurrection.” All one has to do is turn on the television or start streaming current network coverage and there is decided violence on display. At Columbia University in New York the insurrectionists smashed windows and occupied the university’s Hamilton Hall. The Los Angeles Times headlined:  Nationwide, police make almost 2,000 arrests at college campuses since protests started All of which is to say that what’s happening collectively on some 70 college campuses across the country - riots, vandalism, violent clashes with police -is decidedly an insurrection against the “civil authority” and “governing” of those colleges and universities.  Yet mysteriously, silence on that fact from the media. Which in turn suggests that because the culprits of January 6 were Trump supporters the media says they were all about insurrection. But when the culprits of infinitely larger riots, replete with violence and attacks on police, involve far-left, anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas students and “outside agitators” - oh well, no big deal. If ever there were a naked example of how liberal media bias operates, there it is. Relentless coverage of “insurrection” for January 6th, (and in fact, no one was ever charged with the actual crime of “insurrection”) shrugging off massive campus unrest as just mere good ole American protests. The good news? Americans are on to the game.  And in the hierarchy of the liberal media’s friends in the Democratic Party, word seeps out about concern on how all of this reflects on President Biden and his re-election chances. As headlined here in the Financial Times:  Campus protests become a political liability for Joe Biden and Democrats Exactly. Which says just why the liberal media is not eager to exacerbate Biden’s problem by describing these events as an “insurrection.” Things are bad enough as they are.

Matt Walsh on Debunked Pro-DEI Studies: ‘The Fraud Is Officially Exposed’

The Daily Wire host Matt Walsh reported on the immense damage caused by a recently discredited report used by many corporations to justify discriminatory Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives.  During the May 1 edition of The Matt Walsh Show, Walsh applauded UNC-Chapel Hill Professor of Accounting John R. M. Hand and Texas A&M Associate Professor of Accounting Jeremiah Green for their work exposing a series of studies by management consultancy firm McKinsey & Company that claimed to show the so-called benefits of DEI initiatives. "They simply lied and because they lied a lot of people in this country have lost job opportunities on the basis of characteristics that they can’t control,” Walsh said, referring to McKinsey and their debunked studies. “Many companies have become less efficient and now finally the fraud is officially exposed, thanks to the work of a couple of business school professors who were brave enough to do their jobs, which is extremely rare now in academia.”  In 2015, 2018, 2020 and 2023, McKinsey — where Transportation Secretary Pete ‘Racist Roads’ Buttigieg used to work — published several studies arguing for the financial benefits of DEI, which Walsh called “evil” during the podcast.  Despite McKinsey & Company’s claims, Hand and Green were unable to replicate McKinsey’s results. They wrote that “Despite the imprimatur given to McKinsey’s studies, they should not be relied on to support the view that US publicly traded firms can expect to deliver improved financial performance if they increase the racial/ethnic diversity of their executives.” What this DEI consulting firm lied about is actually evil: pic.twitter.com/MeGZTj02Ds — The Matt Walsh Show (@MattWalshShow) May 1, 2024 Earlier in the podcast, Walsh mentioned former Intel President Renée James and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban’s parroting of McKinsey’s propaganda. Walsh would go on to point out that the corporate world had been influenced by “bad data for nine years.” What this “bad data” promotes is racial discrimination. A report by Bloomberg News highlighted a disturbing trend in hiring throughout 2021. According to the media outlet, a mere 6% of jobs at major companies they analyzed went to white individuals in 2021. Simultaneously, white people made up 68.5% of layoffs at studied companies that shrank in 2021. Walsh mocked McKinsey’s silence in the face of this embarrassing revelation. “As of now, McKinsey hasn’t responded to this debunking, which tells you a lot, because if you have decades’ worth of research showing something and then some academics come along and they say that it’s all fraudulent, you’d think you would want to respond some way, but McKinsey hasn’t because of course all their research on this topic is fake.” Citing an American Conservative article, Walsh hammered the point that McKinsey shouldn’t be let off the hook for pushing discrimination. “What McKinsey pushed for was actually evil. It wasn’t some innocent lie,” he continued. “It wasn’t something where they had the best of intentions and it went wrong. It damaged the lives of a lot of people.” Conservatives are under attack! Contact ABC News (818) 460-7477, CBS News (212) 975-3247 and NBC News (212) 664-6192 and demand they report on the dangers of leftist DEI ideology infecting corporate America.

Austin Tex. Votes to Become ‘Sanctuary City’ For Transgender Minors

I think it may actually be time to "mess with Texas." The Austin City Council voted in favor of becoming a sanctuary city for transgender minors seeking “gender-affirming care” on Thursday. The city has plans to break Texas state law, which aims to protect kids against things like chemical castration, in order to mutilate innocent children to feed a delusion and push an agenda. In a vote of 10-1, the council passed a measure that will help it undermine state law by directing police to push any enforcement of the state's transgender child restrictions to their “lowest priority.” As noted in the resolution:  Except to the extent required by law, it is the policy of the City that no City personnel, funds, or resources shall be used to investigate, criminally prosecute, or impose administrative penalties upon: (1) a transgender or nonbinary individual for seeking healthcare, or (2) an individual or organization for providing or assisting with the provision of healthcare to a transgender or nonbinary individual; and further, the City shall not terminate or limit the eligibility for City funding, such as grants or contracts, to an individual or organization for seeking, providing, or assisting with the provision of healthcare to a transgender or nonbinary individual. Local news station KXAN said that the resolution would make sure that police aren’t “wasting their time” making sure kids aren’t getting mutilated and instead focus on other issues in the city. Numerous individuals gave testimonies both for and against the city’s push for skirting around the law. One included a de-transitioner who explained how she was adamantly against these “permanent” procedures. Related: South Carolina Senate Passes Ban on Transgender Treatments for Kids The woman, Aether Dixon, detailed the complications she faced after being coerced into starting transgender treatments as a teenager. After being on testosterone for just a few months, Dixon said she was diagnosed with a cardiovascular intolerance, “having constant issues with heart regulation and passing out.” While in agonizing pain, Dixon remembers asking herself why she was still unhappy even after following through with all the transgender procedures she could.  Now 21, Dixon said she is dealing with the complications of the treatments like “vaginal atrophy, extreme joint pain and discomfort from permanently changing my sex characteristics,” saying all of it is because she “identified and was affirmed in [her] trauma.” Dixon said she supports state laws restricting these kinds of procedures for children. “The legislation this item is against is not taking away rights or anatomy, it is regulating experimental medicine on children in a non-criminal way. Save every kid from the unnecessary hormone complication and lost body parts,” Dixon said, noting that kids need help and support to love themselves and their bodies, not procedures that will ruin them. Yesterday, I addressed #Austin City Council, sharing my journey as a queer and undocumented individual, advocating for agenda item #64: a #transgender protection resolution to combat #SB14.🏳️‍⚧️ It was a pivotal moment as I shed light on the mental health toll of homophobia and… pic.twitter.com/eiTtYagt4d — Christian Aguirre (@christianindc) May 3, 2024 A different woman, Michelle Evans, read a statement on behalf of state Representative Brian Harrison (R - Tex.) and said that the city of Austin shouldn’t be able to arbitrarily make up its own rules.  “Actions like the one being proposed today, if passed, make it abundantly clear that this council is unfit to manage the capital city of the greatest State in the country," Evans read. On the other hand, Christian Aguirre,  a “proud member of the LGBTQ community,” expressed his support of the resolution, claiming it would help people like him who grew up “queer and undocumented” and somehow prevent suicide...by mutilating kids before they're old enough to vote. Yesterday, I addressed #Austin City Council, sharing my journey as a queer and undocumented individual, advocating for agenda item #64: a #transgender protection resolution to combat #SB14.🏳️‍⚧️ It was a pivotal moment as I shed light on the mental health toll of homophobia and… pic.twitter.com/eiTtYagt4d — Christian Aguirre (@christianindc) May 3, 2024 Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued a statement on Austin’s resolution on Thursday evening: If the City of Austin refuses to follow the law and protect children, my office will consider every possible response to ensure compliance. Texas municipalities do not have the authority to pick and choose which state laws they will or will not abide by. The people of Texas have spoken, and Austin City Council must listen. Time will tell what actions Paxton makes regarding the Austin City Council’s resolution. Hopefully everyone puts politics aside and considers what is actually helpful and what is harmful for these young, confused minors. Follow us on Twitter/X: Woke of The Weak: The Left Needs Therapy & You Might Too After Watching This The people featured in this video really need therapy & our prayers too. pic.twitter.com/zLbJcivOW3 — MRCTV (@mrctv) April 30, 2024  

ABC, CBS Play White House Pravda Fawning Over State Dinner for Teachers

Less than week after President Biden used his White House Correspondents Dinner (WHCD) speech to order the liberal media to get to work on behalf of democracy (aka his reelection campaign), ABC’s Good Morning America and CBS Mornings took this to heart with puff ball pieces Friday on a White House state dinner held to celebrate teachers. This was especially par for the course on ABC. Co-host Michael Strahan even had a tease at the top of the second hour: “From the classroom to the White House. The historic event for teachers who help others make their dreams come true. We got ready with the national teacher of the year.”     “Going to turn now to the White House, honoring America’s top teachers last night, including the national teacher of the year. Senior White House correspondent Selina Wang was there and ABC got an exclusive behind the scenes access,” he added moments later. Wang did her best impression of colleague and chief Biden apple polisher Mary Bruce: [T]he White House, for the first time, hosting a state dinner for teachers. Now, these are lavish events for heads of state, but this time, teachers got to experience the glitz and glam and we got that exclusive look behind the scenes. Overnight, the White House hosting the first ever teachers of the year state dinner. First Lady Dr. Jill Biden toasting honorees from nearly every state and territory. Following soundbites from Jill and Joe Biden, Wang touted ABC’s exclusive look at national teacher of the year Mindy Testerman — an ESOL teacher in Tennessee — getting ready and as she made her grand entrance where celebrities and politicians often pose for photos upon rival for state dinners. “Testerman hoping to use her platform to encourage other teachers to advocate for students,” Wang added, asking her inside the White House, “[w]hy is teaching so important?” “Teaching is so important because as this country moves forward, educators make every other single profession possible,” Testerman replied. Wang concluded with a line from Testerman’s speech, which sounded like it was crafted by the Democratic National Committee as she talked about preserving “democracy”: And guys, Missy Testerman said in her speech last night that teachers make democracy possible by educating the next generation. And, look, the learning goes both ways. She told me that her students have taught her courage, calling them her heroes[.] Having been the ones to reveal both Testerman as the award recipient and there would be a state dinner for all state and national teachers, CBS Mornings was ebullient and made sure viewers knew it. “For the first time ever, America’s top teachers were invited to a special dinner at the White House to honor their work. First Lady Jill Biden hosted last night’s event, upgrading the usual White House reception for state and national teachers of the year,” fill-in co-host Jericka Duncan began, tossing to chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes. Cordes made sure to twice name-check the show (click “expand”): [V]ery glitzy. You might recall that the First Lady revealed right here on CBS Mornings last month that she was going to host a state dinner for the nation’s top teachers. And so, last night, the educators traded in their school clothes for gowns and suits as they were each announced individually at the event. Now, this is a big deal since White House state dinners are typically reserved for visiting heads of state, prime ministers, the Hollywood elite. It’s the toughest ticket in town. But this space, take a look, may look familiar. Missy Testerman joined CBS Mornings last month when we revealed that she was named the 2024 national teacher of the year. The English as a Second Language program director at Rogersville City School in Tennessee has been teaching for more than three decades. She was celebrated last night.  Like a Biden press secretary, Cordes added “[t]he nation’s top educators received an inspirational message from the First Lady, who has also been teaching for more than 30 years” and “thanked them for everything they do to change the world.” It grew even more pathetic and partisan when she complimented the President’s message: “Her other half, President Biden, also stopped by to honor the teachers. He told them, ‘you are the kite strings that hold our national ambitions aloft.’ Very poetic, guys. Maybe he has a teacher in the house.” Or, a speechwriter, but whatever. To see the relevant transcripts from May 3, click here (for ABC) and here (for CBS).

Hostin: You Can’t Send Police to Bust Camps, Kids Had ‘Fire Drills!’

On Friday’s edition of The View, ABC’s staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) decried that administrators and states sent the police in to bust many of the illegal, anti-Semitic/pro-Hamas encampments on college campuses across the country. According to her, it was unconscionable for the police to break up the encampments because the students “grew up” doing “fire drills” in school. Hostin, completely ignoring the fact that the students she was backing employed Nazi-style tactics against the Jews on campus (including taking a Jewish student hostage), whined that “anti-protesters that have coming in and caused violence to these encampments.” “Let's not forget that part of the story,” she bitterly declared as moderator Joy Behar shot back with: “You know what, there are a lot of parts to the story.” The shrill rambling continued with Hostin bizarrely proclaiming that the police should have considered the fact that the students had participated in “fire drills” before busting the encampment: Can I just also say this? Let's also remember that these kids that are protesting are kids that grew up with active fire drills and for them to be subjected to the type of police violence that we are seeing on the nightly news is something also something to recall.     It’s unclear what Hostin meant by this and she didn’t offer any further explanation as to why “fire drills” would make her fellow anti-Semites exempt from following the law. Co-host Sara Haines pushed back and noted that the encampments were harming other students through actions, not speech. “But there are students that can’t cross campus. The antithesis of freedom of speech is threatening someone, they have to say something you believe to cross the campus,” she told Hostin off. Interestingly, Behar, Haines, and co-host Ana Navarro actually called out the encampments for being funded by shady dark money groups. “You know, can I just say one thing? Somebody is behind that with money! I’m sorry. Who bought those tents, for example?” Behar exclaimed. “There are two Palestinian rights groups that are actually – until we end Israel we will not stop. There are two agitating groups that are problematic,” Haines explained. Meanwhile, Navarro noted that “professional protest consultant” Lisa Fithian had been spotted at the Columbia encampment. “But there is actually video footage that I've seen here in New York and Columbia of a woman I guess is like a protest consultant. A professional protester or something like that appears in the video in Columbia,” she noted. “She basically has shown up in many protests that have occurred, and she knows how to make them more effective.” They got into talking about the encampment - a topic they largely avoided most of the week - because visuals of lawless campuses were hurting Biden in the polls. “Do they not remember the visuals on January 6?! Do they not remember those visuals of chaos?!” an unhinged Hostin shouted. “January 6th is ingrained in my memory and should be ingrained in every single person's memory in the United States of America!” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 3, 2024 11:07:59 a.m. Eastern (…) SUNNY HOSTIN: Do they not remember the visuals on January 6?! Do they not remember those visuals of chaos?! SARA HAINES: I think visuals – literally humans look at the recent visions so nightly image right now matters more to them than January 6. HOSTIN: January 6th is ingrained in my memory and should be ingrained in every single person's memory in the United States of America! [Applause] ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: It should be but while they’re completely different, a lot of the imagery looks similar. And it was you're going to see Republicans seeing windows being smashed, things being defaced on college campuses and it evokes that same sense of lawlessness. HAINES: And the President had to speak to it. FARAH GRIFFIN: It was wise of Biden to get out and give a – JOY BEHAR: You know, can I just say one thing? Somebody is behind that with money! I’m sorry. Who bought those tents, for example? FARAH GRIFFIN: Oh, definitely. There's agitators who have infiltrated it for sure. [Crosstalk] HAINES: There are two Palestinian rights groups that are actually – until we end Israel we will not stop. There are two agitating groups that are a problematic. ANA NAVARRO: But there is actually video footage that I've seen here in New York and Columbia of a woman I guess is like a protest consultant. A professional protester or something like that appears in the video in Columbia – [Crosstalk] No, she basically has shown up in many protests that have occurred, and she knows how to make them more effective. She knows how to -- HOSTIN: But there are also anti-protesters that have coming in and caused violence to these encampments. Let's not forget that part of the story. That part – BEHAR: You know what, there are a lot of parts to the story. HAINES: Yeah. HOSTIN: Can I just also say this? Let's also remember that these kids that are protesting are kids that grew up with active fire drills and for them to be subjected to the type of police violence that we are seeing on the nightly news is something also something to recall. HAINES: But there are students that can’t cross campus. The antithesis of freedom of speech is threatening someone, they have to say something you believe to cross the campus. BEHAR: Okay, back to the vice president. (…)

'It's F****** Scary,' De Niro Compares Trump To Hitler On MSNBC

For some reason, MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle decided to interview actor Robert De Niro on the Thursday edition of The 11th Hour. On multiple occasions, De Niro would compare Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler and himself and his compatriots to Jews in Nazi Germany, claiming “it's [bleep] scary.” Ruhle wondered, “What do you say to those who say, ‘I don't like the guy, but I'm going to vote for him.’ What's your message to them?” De Niro claimed that “I don't understand it. I don't think they understand how dangerous it will be if he ever, God forbid, becomes president.”       He further claimed, “I don't think they really understand and historically, from what I see, even in Nazi Germany, they had it with Hitler. They don't take him seriously. He looks like a clown, acts like a clown, Mussolini, same thing. These guys, I don’t know why they look like clowns, they somehow, people, that element of society identifies in some ways with them, but it would be chaos beyond our imagination. There's no mystery about him. He’s right out front and what he says is what it will be if he becomes president.” Ruhle’s underwhelming response was to ask, “Do you think our democracy is at risk in this election?” After comparing Trump to Hitler and Mussolini, De Niro naturally thought it is, “The guy’s a monster, is beyond wrong. It’s almost like he wants to do the most horrible things that he can think of in order to get a rise out of us. I don't know what it is, but he has been doing it and doing it and it's [bleep] scary. Excuse my French.” Still playing along, Ruhle inquired, “Do you have any concerns for the future of the arts if he were to become president? He already said he wants to go after his enemies, he wants to go after journalists and the news media. What about your industry?” De Niro took a while to get to his answer before ultimately replying that there could be “civil strife because, yeah, but he will try it.” Ruhle then wondered about other celebrities, “What do you say to other celebrities who don't want to alienate part of their fan base, don't want to step in harm’s way, but they have similar megaphones that you do?” Returning to the Nazi analogy, De Niro agreed that “other people are going to have to stand up” because otherwise America is going to end up in a Hitlerian dystopia: Because it's either that or you’re going to find yourself in a situation that is so terrifying. We always hear about people from Eastern Europe. The Jews from other than parts of Eastern Europe, from Western Europe coming over. Look what happened in France and with the Nazis and so on. And they come over, and you hear these and when I was a kid, they would say ‘you don't really appreciate this country. You don't really. Well, we know from experience.’ De Niro further added, “I run into people who are close to my age, who are from Eastern Europe, European countries or even Nazi Germany and, you know, they, you understand it.” Of all the times to compare being a liberal in Trump’s America to being a Jew in Nazi Germany, the one that involves Jews being told by hard core leftists to go back to Poland is probably not the best one. Here is a transcript for the May 2 show: MSNBC The 11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle 5/2/2024 11:47 PM ET STEPHANIE RUHLE: What do you say to those who say "I don't like the guy, but I'm going to vote for him." What's your message to them? ROBERT DE NIRO: I don't understand it. I don't think they understand how dangerous it will be if he ever, God forbid, becomes president. I don't think they really understand and historically, from what I see, even in Nazi Germany, they had it with Hitler. They don't take him seriously. He looks like a clown, acts like a clown, Mussolini, same thing. These guys, I don’t know why they look like clowns, they somehow, people, that element of society identifies in some ways with them, but it would be chaos beyond our imagination. There's no mystery about him. He’s right out front and what he says is what it will be if he becomes president. RUHLE: Do you think our democracy is at risk in this election? DE NIRO: I think that it is. I always keep saying, democracy is great, of course, but democracy people take for granted. It is a word some people don't even understand. They take it for granted. It’s about right and wrong, period. The guy’s a monster, is beyond wrong. It’s almost like he wants to do the most horrible things that he can think of in order to get a rise out of us. I don't know what it is, but he has been doing it and doing it and it's [bleep] scary. Excuse my French. RUHLE:  Do you have any concerns for the future of the arts if he were to become president? He already said he wants to go after his enemies, he wants to go after journalists and the news media.  DE NIRO: Yes. RUHLE: What about your industry? DE NIRO: I believe he —   the only thing I can think is what will happen is that he’ll go after these things like he always —   impulsively and he’ll be stopped. There’ll be pushback, a lot of it, and there might be as much pushback as needed, like, in the streets. Conflict, that could happen. Civil strife because, yeah, but he will try it. RUHLE: You have no upside in having this conversation. In speaking out against Donald Trump. You are making yourself a target. The interview will air and he will immediately find a reason to talk bad about you in public. DE NIRO: Yeah. RUHLE: — but you’re choosing to use your platform to do so. What do you say to other celebrities who don't want to alienate part of their fan base, don't want to step in harm’s way, but they have similar megaphones that you do? DE NIRO: You know, the idea, to be bullied at my age by someone like this, is not happening. RUHLE: I’m pretty sure you were never bullied. DE NIRO: No, there was a kid sometime, but the point is not—and for the country, no, and I think other people are going to have to stand up and just—because it's either that or you’re going to find yourself in a situation that is so terrifying. We always hear about people from Eastern Europe. The Jews from other than parts of Eastern Europe, from Western Europe coming over. Look what happened in France and with the Nazis and so on. And they come over, and you hear these and when I was a kid, they would say “you don't really appreciate this country. You don't really. Well, we know from experience.” Imagine what those people went through. I'm just starting to see it. You know, as a kid, I said “Hitler, it’s a nightmare. That never would happen.” But now I see that it is possible and with those people, and sometimes I run into people who are close to my age, who are from Eastern Europe, European countries or even Nazi Germany and, you know, they, you understand it.

MRC VP Dan Schneider Reveals Which Corporations Are ‘Worst Among Al’ Reshaping America

MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider and podcast host Lou Dobbs discussed just how anti-American U.S. corporations and the Biden administration have become. The pair discussed the massive power that government and big corporations have amassed while each have also become more woke. “When you look at the centers of power in our society, it’s the federal government and corporate America,” said Dobbs on the Wednesday installment of his podcast, The Great America Show. Dobbs seemed to agree with Schneider's criticism of Big Tech companies as some of the worst corporations during the interview. “For so long the idea of for-profit corporations, conservatives saw corporations as allies as a good thing. And it used to be that these corporate CEOs usually were kind of right of center and pro-freedom, and that’s no longer the case,” Schneider lamented. “Now these big corporations are controlled by the left, and those resources are being used to attack the idea of America, the very founding principles of our democracy.” He added that “worst among all of them, of course, are the Big Tech platforms.” The Great America Show 5/1/24 - Corporate Power Threatens Freedom https://t.co/Kq5h0mKsnV — Lou Dobbs (@LouDobbs) May 1, 2024 Schneider went on to give examples of MRC Free Speech America’s recent studies on Google and Facebook’s election interference over the last 16 years. He noted Google has interfered in U.S. elections no fewer than 41 times during that period, burying the campaign websites of every Biden opponent this election cycle alone. Similar censorship that Google conducted in 2020 suppressed at least 6 million votes. Not to be left out, Facebook interfered in elections 39 times over the past 16 years, according to a recent MRC study. Schneider added that corporate censorship is not even the most disturbing form of curtailing the First Amendment. Rather, government collusion with Big Tech to censor Americans is alive and well as became clear during the Supreme Court-heard arguments for Netchoice v. Paxton and Netchoice v. Moody.  “Joe Biden, and his administration, just a month ago in the Supreme Court, was arguing that the government and Big Tech both have First Amendment free speech rights to censor Americans who disagree with the president,” he said. “I am not making this up. Joe Biden’s argument is that government has the right to control our speech.” The Netchoice cases challenge Florida and Texas’s free speech laws, which would limit Big Tech’s ability to censor users based on viewpoint discrimination as a publisher might. They would, however, keep liability protections that shield platforms from being sued for the speech of their users. During oral arguments, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar claimed that the laws violated Big Tech’s freedom of speech. “Congress specifically recognized the platforms are creating a speech product. They are literally, factually publishers, and Congress wanted to grant them immunity,” she alleged. “[Liability protection]  was for the purpose of encouraging this kind of editorial discretion.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Leguizamo Bashes 'Insidious' Univision For Lacking Hostility In Trump Interview

Actor, alleged comedian, and massive narcissist John Leguizamo stopped by CBS and The Late Show with Stephen Colbert on Thursday to hype his MSNBC miniseries about “Latinx lenses all across America.” Before that, however, Leguizamo blasted Univision for not bashing Donald Trump all the time and that, as a result, he trumpeted that he will no longer be appearing on the network. Colbert recalled that, “You also wrote this in the Los Angeles Times recently, this was in November. You wrote this opinion piece there. It says, ‘Cozying up to Trump, Univision is betraying its Spanish-speaking viewers.’ How so?”     It is hard to see how any network that employs Jorge Ramos could be considered soft on Trump, but Leguizamo tried, “Well, it's kind of insidious because Spanish-speaking only Latinos watch Univision and that's where they get all their news and information and so, you should be impartial. You should be non-partisan. And they're not. It's problematic to me.” Even Colbert suggested he wasn’t buying what Leguizamo was selling, “Are they right-wing in some way?” Leguizamo tried to claim that they were “I've spoken off the record with some of the newscasters and they said that they were leaning -- they were pushing them right way and they had Trump on and they softballed the whole questions. They wouldn't allow Biden commercials on and then they didn't have Biden on for a long, long time and so I had to call them out on it. I called them out and their marketing people called me back.” The interview with Biden wasn’t exactly hardball, but being a little bit to the right of the far-left does not make an outlet a right-wing network, but after Colbert asked what they said in response, Leguizamo proudly declared that the interview resulted in him banning himself from their airwaves, “They said 'it's not true. You know, we are not really -- we are doing everything we can to be nonpartisan,' but 'I'm like, yo, how are you doing all these things that are not -- that are leaning very MAGA? So, you need to be non-partial. Otherwise, I'm going to call you out again.' So I won't be on Univision. I won't be.” Earlier, Colbert and Leguizamo were discussing the latter’s time as temp host of The Daily Show in 2023. It should be noted that a NewsBusters study found that Leguizamo was the most partisan of the show's 2023 temp hosts which included former Democratic officials Al Franken and Kal Penn. Only one of his 66 political jokes targeted the left and that one was attacking Univision's Enrique Acevedo for the interview in November in a show co-hosted by Jordan Klepper and Desi Lydic from the left after his initial stint in March. During his time as host, Leguizamo played racial politics, delighted in Trump getting indicted, and accused Republicans of stealing elections. This year, he mauled a piñata while cursing the fact that polls show Latinos ignoring his political wisdom. Later, Colbert brought up the MSNBC miniseries, “What do you want to explore with the show? Like, what's it about?” The supposed champion Latinos and nonpartisanship in the news media teased, “I’m looking at Latinx lenses all across America and I find it an embarrassment of riches.” Ah, yes, the nonpartisan “Latinx.” Here is a transcript for the May 2-taped show: CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert 5/3/2024 12:07 AM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: You also wrote this in the Los Angeles Times recently, this was in November. You wrote this opinion piece there. It says "Cozying up to Trump, Univision is betraying its Spanish-speaking viewers." How so? JOHN LEGUIZAMO: Well, it's kind of insidious because Spanish-speaking only Latinos watch Univision and that's where they get all their news and information and so, you should be impartial. You should be non-partisan. And they're not. It's problematic to me. COLBERT: Are they right-wing in some way? LEGUIZAMO: I've spoken off the record with some of the newscasters and they said that they were leaning -- they were pushing them right way and they had Trump on and they softballed the whole questions. They wouldn't allow Biden commercials on and then they didn't have Biden on for a long, long time and so I had to call them out on it. I called them out and their marketing people called me back. COLBERT: What did they say? Like did they-- LEGUIZAMO: They said “it's not true. You know, we are not really -- we are doing everything we can to be nonpartisan,” but I'm like, “I'm like, yo, how are you doing all these things that are not -- that are leaning very MAGA? So, you need to be non-partial. Otherwise, I'm going to call you out again.” So I won't be on Univision. I won't be. They have the highest rated Spanish-language shows, so I won't be on [speaks Spanish]. … COLBERT: What do you want to explore with the show? Like, what's it about? LEGUIZAMO: I’m looking at Latinx lenses all across America and I find it an embarrassment of riches. You know, we are in every city in America. We've been here since, at least 1492, and before that and you know, from Mississippi to the Pacific was all Mexico until 1840, so we’re everywhere and doing incredible things. I’m meeting politicians, grassroots organizers, chefs who are James Beard nominees and winners. I'm eating the best freaking food you've ever had and gaining pounds and I don’t give a—”

Editor’s Pick: Washington Times Covers DISTURBING Move by BlackRock in China

Our friends at The Washington Times had a front-page story for Thursday’s print edition that showed, once again, The Times has in-depth reporting the rest of the print media wouldn’t dare to touch. This time, national security correspondent Bill Gertz highlighted a report that infamous Wall Street firm BlackRock “is investing millions of dollars in an estimated 30 Chinese military-linked companies sanctioned by the U.S. government”. The report, which came courtesy of the Coalition for a Prosperous America, also revealed BlackRock — a company known for backing woke “environmental, social and governance” (ESG) policies under boss Larry Fink — “has invested in companies working on China’s large-scale nuclear weapons buildup.” Despite its woke pedigree, Gertz said BlackRock specifically has given “nearly $50 million” to “Chinese companies sanctioned under the 2022 Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act”. Here was more from Gertz’s disturbing story: “China’s political leadership wants to redirect capital to emerging technologies with military application in preparation for a potential war with the United States,” the report said. “Beijing also wants to continue its campaign of oppression against the Uyghurs and other minority groups in northwestern China.” Noting that BlackRock has said it does not do business with companies in China producing nuclear arms, the report concludes: “The reality is that BlackRock holds stock in Chinese companies pursuing an aggressive buildup of nuclear warheads meant to hold United States territory at risk.” (....) The report singled out MSCI Inc., a leading provider of support tools for global investors known as indexes, for its role in BlackRock’s investments in banned military-linked companies in China. Christopher Berger, a spokesman for BlackRock, which reports managing $10 trillion in assets, had no immediate comment on the report. MSCI officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment. (....) BlackRock became the first global asset manager allowed to operate a wholly owned mutual fund business in China in 2021. Chief Executive Larry Fink was among the senior American business leaders who reportedly paid $40,000 for a seat at a dinner table with Chinese President Xi Jinping during his visit to California in November. The company said on its website that one of its principles is “we are committed to a better future.”      (....) The report identified MSCI as BlackRock’s main index provider, with more than $15 trillion in assets. “As MSCI’s most important customer and second largest shareholder, BlackRock could demand the exclusion of Chinese military companies and human rights violators from its indexes,” the report said. “Instead, BlackRock fails to acknowledge that its exposure to U.S.-sanctioned entities is a problem, claiming that it ‘complies with all applicable U.S. government laws.’” To read Gertz’s full story, click here.

South Carolina Senate Passes Ban on Transgender Treatments for Minors

On Thursday, the South Carolina Senate approved a ban on transgender procedures and surgeries for minors.  The Help Not Harm bill (H4624) passed by a 27-8 vote which included all South Carolina Republicans and one Democrat who voted in favor of the ban.  If passed, the ban will make it so that healthcare professionals will not be allowed to perform gender surgeries, prescribe puberty blockers or provide hormone treatments for minors who identify as transgender. Additionally, if a child presents as a gender that differs from their biological sex or uses a name that isn’t their legal name, school principals would be required to notify parents or guardians. In response to the verdict, both those for and those against the bill took to X to comment. Executive Director for the American Civil Liberties Union in South Carolina posted a video where he was on the brink of tears over the news since it “hit him hard.” “Folks who want to hurt transgender kids and transgender people, they’d get their way,” he said, “I’m heartbroken.” Our leader Jace is the first (and so far only) transgender Executive Director in the 100+ year history of the nationwide ACLU. The passage of the bill to ban healthcare for transgender kids is hitting him hard. Here's his message. pic.twitter.com/OUghdW4xVF — ACLU of South Carolina (@ACLU_SC) May 2, 2024 One user tagged the South Carolina governorand wrote “for every beautiful transgender child in South Carolina who suffers despair, depression, or harms themselves — it’s on you and your complete lack of empathy and decency.” On the other hand, the group called Palmetto Family wrote that they are “thankful to God that children in the Palmetto State will soon be protected” and one user said it was a “huge win for kids.” Another wrote, “'Gender-affirming care' has never been evidence-based. It is purely activist driven and research shows that it is indeed causing harm. The legislature is following the evidence and protecting vulnerable children.” The bill needs to go back to the House for review after the Senate amended some elements. If it passes there, it will go to Governor Henry McMaster’s (R - S.C.) desk to be signed into law.

Three Years of the Corporate Media Shrieking About the ‘End of Democracy’

In speeches throughout his time in office (and in particular starting with the 2022 midterms), President Biden has warned a second Trump term would herald the “end of democracy.” But if anything, Biden is late to the party. The corporate media were doomsaying about democracy’s brutal demise as far back as early 2021, and their rhetoric has only grown more absurd since then.     The most obvious issue with this dire warning, other than its absurd overuse by journalists loyal to liberals, is that it always entails an almost comically vague, ever-changing definition of “democracy.” For three years, washed-up security analysts have warned that, unless former President Trump goes to prison for his alleged role in January 6, democracy is dead. But that trend started as far back as even January of 2021, when MSNBC contributor and former Watergates prosecutor Jill Wine-Banks pontificated: “It is the end of democracy if we do not take and hold the President accountable for what he inspired.” By that point, the DNC operatives in the news media had already branded Republicans the anti-democracy party. On October 12 of 2021, CNN contributor and former Clinton aide Paul Begala warned that, if Democrats ever lost power again, democracy would be over forever: I’ve got a piece coming out tonight or tomorrow [about this] on cnn.com — shameless plug — and I really don’t think this is hysterical. I’m a pretty moderate guy. If the Democrats fail, it might be the end of American democracy. In December of 2022, MSNBC host Ali Velshi remarked while filling in on The Last Word that Moore v. Harper — a gerrymandering case concerning the North Carolina redistricting map — “could be the end of democracy if it goes the wrong way.” Velshi was far from alone in his assessment. In October of that same year, the ACLU put out a podcast episode about Moore titled, “This Supreme Court Case Could Upend Democracy.” In June 2023, MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell agreed enthusiastically with Mount Holyoke College president-elect Danielle Holley when she remarked that the Dobbs decision was “a case that could end democracy.” A few weeks later, the Los Angeles Times published an opinion piece titled, “How the end of Roe turned into a threat to American democracy.” Do these ideologues really think any of these events will result in the mass-disenfranchisement of millions of Americans? Presumably not, but then what is their definition of democracy? The truth, as most have probably realized, is that “democracy” is simply a stand-in term for the DNC agenda. The Republican-favored North Carolina congressional map threatened “democracy” because it would’ve made it harder for the Democrats to win seats in that state. The overturning of Roe v. Wade also threatens “democracy” because it strips abortion, a sacred calf of the Democratic Party, of its constitutional body armor. But a Trump presidency would be most dangerous of all for “democracy” since a Republican in the White House would threaten all of the “progress” the Democratic Party has made over the last three and a half years.

NPR: Columbia Agitators' Call for 'Intifada' Just an 'Anti-Israel Slogan'?

Taxpayer-supported National Public Radio has picked sides in the Israel-Hamas war, supporting the students/terrorist supporters camping on the quads of progressive colleges campuses. This is how NPR’s Up First newsletter (a summary of what NPR considers the must-know stories of the day) on Wednesday morning described the illegal occupation by pro-Hamas agitators at Columbia University: NPR's Brian Mann tells Up First that Columbia students were shocked, dismayed, and stunned by the overwhelming force used by police. Columbia spokesman Ben Chang said in a press conference that protesters were frightening other students. Mann adds that despite this, there’s been a lot of community support for these encampments. Lena Whitney, a City College graduate who witnessed the police action last night, told NPR, “These students are putting their lives at risk; they’re putting their jobs, their diplomas at risk because they’re fighting for something bigger -- the right to life for Palestinians.” One would have to dig up the online transcript of Mann’s report, which aired first on Wednesday’s Morning Edition --“NYC police used force to clear a pro-Palestinian student encampment at Columbia” -- to confirm the campus disruptors at Columbia heard on the report's background tape were in fact chanting “intifada,” support for the killing of Jews. A Martinez, Host: ….Across the country, the pro-Palestinian encampment at Columbia University is gone this morning, and the campus building that protesters had seized is empty. Police forced their way into the building and arrested and zip-tied the hands of dozens of students who began their demonstration two weeks ago…. NPR’s reporter Mann committed bias by omission, reporting only that “Hundreds of students were defiant at first, A. They were chanting anti-Israel slogans and calling for divestment from doing business with Israel.” Calling for Israel’s destruction via “intifada” -- which Mann didn’t even acknowledge directly -- isn’t just an “anti-Israel slogan” and certainly isn’t a mere call for divestment. It calls up memories of the Second Intifada and the suicide bombers who murdered hundreds of Israeli civilians on buses and in cafes. Unidentified Protester: (Chanting) Intifada, intifada. Unidentified Protesters: (Chanting) Intifada, intifada. Unidentified Protester: (Chanting) Long live the intifada. Unidentified Protesters: (Chanting) Long live the intifada. Still, NPR stuck up for the terrorist supporters and their (illegal) occupation of a campus building. Mann: At one point, A, a student appeared on top of Hamilton Hall. That's the building they occupied Monday night. That student waved a Palestinian flag. But then around 9:30 p.m. last night, a huge number of NYPD officers in riot gear charged the campus. And the student crowd fell back. They were clearly frightened. The NYPD used a massive armored vehicle to push a bridge into a window of Hamilton Hall…. Martinez: Wow, what a scene. How did students react to all this? Mann: Yeah, with shock and dismay. I spoke to one student who was stunned by the overwhelming force. She wouldn't give her name because she fears reprisal by Columbia University. Unidentified Student: Myself and many other students have just felt horror seeing the swiftness with which the NYPD came and deploy themselves onto our campus. Mann ran a bite from a Columbia spokesman who said protesters had “created a threatening environment for many, including our Jewish students and faculty.” Still, the reporter located “a lot of community support” for the agitators, including the bystander Up First found interesting. Mann: You know, many politicians in New York City, including bipartisan members of Congress have condemned these protests, describing them as unlawful and antisemitic. That's a charge many students reject. There's also been a lot of community support for these encampments. NPR spoke last night with Leena Widdi, who watched this police action. She's a graduate of City College. Leena Widdi: Students are putting their lives at risk. They're putting their jobs, their diplomas at risk 'cause they know that they're fighting for something bigger, which is the right to life for Palestinians.

Meyers Claims Columbia Should've Rejected Police, Surrendered Instead

NBC Late Night host Seth Meyers used his Thursday show to condemn Columbia for using the police to clear the illegal encampments and building occupations instead of surrendering to the campers like Brown University. At the same time, Meyers ignored what the leaders of the movement say about Zionism and continued to pretend that they are simply critical of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. On the police sweep, Meyers ranted, “As a New Yorker, I just wanna say, I really appreciate knowing this is where my tax dollars are going, using drones to round up co-eds rather than say keeping librarians open, building affordable housing, or making sure the F Train isn't a total piece of [bleep].” After a digression about the F Train’s lack of punctuality, Meyers got back on track by sarcastically remarking, “So, the NYPD responded with advanced technology and unprecedented force to a college protest. Columbia and New York City officials said they were left with no choice. And I mean, let's face it. It's not like they had any alternatives. Unfortunately, there's just no other way for a college to deal with a protest like this.”     He then played a clip of CNN’s Jim Sciutto reporting that Brown reached an agreement with the demonstrators to “hold a vote on divestment from Israel later this year.” Meyers thought Columbia also should’ve caved to the lawlessness and inflammatory demands, “But, what about our drones? If there's a peaceful settlement, what are we going to do with all our drones? I know. Maybe instead of taking the F train, the drones could fly us to work.” Later, Meyers introduced a clip of Sen. Bernie Sanders by lamenting the demonstrators’ message has been lost, “I would hope that there's maybe one thing we can all agree on. No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about. A point Senator Bernie Sanders made on Wednesday.” In the clip, Sanders suggested, “CNN and maybe some of my colleagues here, maybe take your cameras just for a moment off of Columbia and off of UCLA. Maybe go to Gaza and take your camera and show us the emaciated children who are dying of malnutrition because of Netanyahu's policies.” Meyers agreed, “He's right. The story is what's happening in Gaza. That's what the protests are about… As we said on this show before, the misery and devastation in Gaza is horrifying. It must end. At the same time, it's important to be clear. Anti-Semitism is vile, must be rejected in all its forms. Anti-Semitic harassment has no place anywhere, including on a college campus. And the constitutional right to protest, the actions of any government should be protected. And Jewish students should feel safe at school. All of these things can and should be true at once. To quote my favorite college professor, that just seems to me like—” The sentence was concluded by My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell at a Donald Trump rally, saying “bucket of common sense.” Meyers wants to separate the protestors message from the ant-Semitism, but he can’t. The leaders of these movements are not simply Netanyahu critics who are a bunch of naïve peaceniks who think a ceasefire will bring peace, they are radicals who think Zionism is a form of racism and therefore Israel needs to be destroyed, which is a form of anti-Semitism. They say this on tape and on their signs, but Meyers and Sanders chose to ignore it despite the fact that the people they are defending would consider both of them as guilty as Netanyahu for simply believing Israel should continue to exist. Here is a transcript for the May 2-taped show: NBC Late Night with Seth Meyers 5/3/2024 12:46 AM ET SETH MEYERS: As a New Yorker, I just wanna say, I really appreciate knowing this is where my tax dollars are going, using drones to round up co-eds rather than say keeping librarians open, or building affordable housing, or making sure the F Train isn't a total piece of [bleep]. I like the delays. It gives me a chance to do the Wordle. There's even a new special F train Wordle where the words are twice as long.  The other day my train was trapped for 50 minutes between stocks because Pizza Rat was on the tracks and all the other rats wanted a photo. There were even two tourist rats from Germany. You could tell from their lederhosen. Oh, my god, I fought -- I fought so hard to get that in and it was such a dud.  So, the NYPD responded with advanced technology and unprecedented force to a college protest. Columbia and New York City officials said they were left with no choice. And I mean, let's face it. It's not like they had any alternatives. Unfortunately, there's just no other way for a college to deal with a protest like this. JIM SCIUTTO: We also have news just out of Brown University, which has come to agreement with protesters there. The university says it will hold a vote on divestment from Israel later this year. That is ending investments in Israel. It's a key demand from students. Students have said that in response to that, well, they will disband the encampment by 5:00 P.M. Eastern today. MEYERS: But, what about our drones? If there's a peaceful settlement, what are we going to do with all our drones? I know. Maybe instead of taking the F train, the drones could fly us to work … MEYERS: I would hope that there's maybe one thing we can all agree on. No matter how you feel about the protesters, we should spend less time arguing about college kids and more time focusing on what the protests are about. A point Senator Bernie Sanders made on Wednesday. BERNIE SANDERS: Well I suggest to CNN and maybe some of my colleagues here, maybe take your cameras just for a moment off of Columbia and off of UCLA. Maybe go to Gaza and take your camera and show us the emaciated children who are dying of malnutrition because of Netanyahu's policies. MEYERS: He's right. The story is what's happening in Gaza. That's what the protests are about.  And always I will say, I love Bernie's delivery. Really helps him drive home the point he's making. He's like a grandpa reminding everyone to stop texting during dinner. [BERNIE SANDERS IMPRESSION] "Maybe take your eyes off your phones. And make eye contact at the table. In my day there was no such thing as a gif. When we were surprised, we just did this. And then if somebody missed, you would just loop it and do it again."  [NORMAL VOICE] As we said on this show before, the misery and devastation in Gaza is horrifying. It must end. At the same time, it's important to be clear. Anti-Semitism is vile, must be rejected in all its forms. Anti-Semitic harassment has no place anywhere, including on a college campus. And the constitutional right to protest, the actions of any government should be protected. And Jewish students should feel safe at school. All of these things can and should be true at once. To quote my favorite college professor, that just seems to me like MIKE LINDELL: Bucket of common sense. 

Column: The Public Doesn't Trust the 'Democracy-Saving' Media

The national media consider themselves essential in educating the electorate, so what happens when the electorate does not consider them a trustworthy guardian of democracy? The Associated Press and the American Press Institute just released a poll on the 2024 election and found only 14 percent of their sample expressed a great deal of confidence in election-related information they receive from national sources. By contrast, 52 percent have little or no confidence at all in the information they receive from national news organizations About half of Americans, 53 percent, say they are extremely or very concerned that news organizations will report inaccuracies or misinformation during the election. It's 83 percent if you count the middle option of "somewhat concerned." That has to hurt, since the media elites say “misinformation” is what other people offer. When faced with poll after poll showing the media are not trusted, their failure to accept these results underlines the persistent lack of trust. AP media reporter David Bauder turned to American Press Institute chief Michael Bolden, who said “Years of suspicion about journalists, much of it sown by politicians, is partly responsible, he said. People are also less familiar with how journalism works.” Let’s be uncharitable for a minute. Reporters have sown “years of suspicion about politicians.” That’s how investigating politician performance could be described. So why would investigating journalist performance draw complaints of “sowing years of suspicion”? Why can they never be evaluated for how they serve the public? Respect cannot merely be demanded. It should be earned. Mr. Bolden is implying that politicians have swindled the public, which paints the public as – how did The Washington Post put it? – “poor, uneducated, and easy to command.” Then he lobbed another insult, that people aren’t familiar with “how journalism works.” Maybe these elitists should consider that news consumers might want a mostly factual, somewhat objective product instead of hyperbolic editorializing that tells them what they should think. Obviously, the Republican half of the public isn’t going to support Democrat electioneering badly disguised as “news.” Since they refuse to consider any bowing to objectivity, they have to dismiss any demand for it as ignorance of “how journalism works.” Bolden weirdly claimed this may be because most people don’t have a journalist who “lived on their block.” Since journalists won’t meet you at the summer picnic or the Trick or Treat greetings, media outlets need to tell the public “what journalists do and how people reporting news are their friends and neighbors.” This sounds remarkably similarly to what NPR CEO Katherine Maher recently said to The Wall Street Journal as she dismissed bias complaints as a “distraction.” Maher said, “We want to be able to speak to folks as though they were our neighbors and speak to folks as though they were our friends.” Curiously, they don’t want to talk to Republicans like they’re neighbors and friends. Remember short-lived CNN CEO Chris Licht meeting with Republicans trying to say trust us, “we don’t bite.” That turned out to be (a) untrue and (b) fatal to his CNN career. Brian Stelter channeled the national media arrogance under Trump after Licht was dumped: “We were advocating for the truth, advocating for reality. Others felt that was left-leaning.” When you think reality has a liberal bias, you shouldn’t be shocked when a lot of people change the channel. 

PBS’s Amanpour Celebrates ‘Heart of the Pro-Palestinian Campus Peace Movement’

On Monday’s Amanpour & Co., which runs on PBS and CNN International, host Christiane Amanpour took the side of the pro-Hamas campus protesters who are spewing anti-Jewish rhetoric on “progressive” college campuses nationwide -- no surprise given her long-standing journalistic hostility toward Israel. Against all evidence she insisted that the campus occupiers were “mostly nonviolent” idealists and that concerns had been blown “out of proportion.” Occupying private property is illegal, hence police may be called. Amanpour: Now, a major development sparked by this war is a growing protest and peace movement on college campuses across the United States. Though mostly nonviolent, several schools have called in local police and National Guard troops….the epicenter of all of this is Columbia University, where today, with negotiations between students and the administration at an impasse, the university called on protesters to clear their encampment or face suspension. Amanpour invited on a student journalist, introduced in the show opener like this: "Isabella Ramirez editor in chief of the Columbia Daily Spectator, reports from the heart of the pro-Palestinian campus peace movement." Ugh.   To her credit, she asked her about “student-on-student verbal harassment that has been cited as very damaging and uncomfortable and frightening by some of the Jewish students.” Ramirez replied her paper had “compiled pretty extensive reports regarding this, most particularly when in the aftermath of one of our campus rabbis telling Jewish students, hundreds of Jewish students to leave campus, to not stay because of the environment," including "particularly violent signage that was used to refer to actually Hamas...." But Amanpour then made the college administration the aggressors for calling on the local police to dissolve the disruptive and threatening takeover of the campus. Amanpour complained Columbia's president Minouche Shafik had been "hauled before" Congress to answer to anti-semitism on campus.  Amanpour:  I'm just fascinated to know what you think and how you're writing about the very targeted political situation that's layered upon all of this. Because after that, Shafik, did, as we've been talking, call in the NYPD to break up the protest. Now, it's interesting that the chief of the NYPD patrol on the U.S. said the students who were arrested were peaceful, offered no resistance whatsoever, and were saying what they wanted to say in a peaceful manner. And your newspaper wrote in an editorial, history has made clear who stood on the wrong side then. And it's clear that this is the side you are aligning yourself with now…. Ramirez replied with a laundry list of past protest movements at Columbia, then said her paper's editorial board was trying to warn the college president about her legacy if the wake of “the forceful removal of students from campus and also this crackdown on student protests.” Amanpour: And as we continue to chat, you know, we've seen on other universities, including Emory, it caused a huge ruckus, what happened on Emory, when a teacher -- a professor was essentially manhandled. Other teachers tried to help, faculty members, student, I think it was the police and the state guard or whatever they call them. It was a very rough situation over the weekend in Atlanta…. Ramirez turned understandable concerns about anti-Semitic rhetoric and “scholarship” by Columbia professors into a free speech issue (this after years of liberal academics calling out “micro-aggressions” against campus minorities). She said, "there has been this really big question as to whether the university has done enough to kind of protect academic freedom." Amanpour relayed the views of left-wing students and faculty, which seemingly morphed into her own view of the situation, that concerns about the campus encampments were being blown “out of proportion,” while inviting Ramirez to criticize mainstream media coverage of the protests, as if they were all too conservative. Amanpour: ….a lot of the faculty and some of the students have criticized the way we, the press, have covered these protests, some call it a peace movement. It's not even, you know -- it's not meant to be violence, it's meant to be nonviolent. And obviously, social media is blowing it out of proportion. You're watching it from the inside. Do you have a comment on the way the national press has been covering it? Ramirez demurred, and talked only about how the students can cover it because they live right there on campus. A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS Amanpour & Co. 4/30/24 1:48:55 a.m. (ET) CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Now, a major development sparked by this war is a growing protest and peace movement on college campuses across the United States. Though mostly nonviolent, several schools have called in local police and National Guard troops. Today in Paris, French police entered the Sorbonne University campus to remove students occupying the main square. Now, the epicenter of all of this is Columbia University, where today, with negotiations between students and the administration at an impasse, the university called on protesters to clear their encampment or face suspension. Some of the most valuable reporting on all this comes from inside the student newspaper, the Columbia Daily Spectator. Editor in Chief Isabella Ramirez. Joins us from New York. Isabella Ramirez, welcome to the program. And, you know, I can't tell you how much we've read about what an excellent job you are doing and your, you know, student newspaper, your on campus journalist. What can you tell us is the latest right now as we sit here talking? ISABELLA RAMIREZ, EDITOR IN CHIEF, COLUMBIA DAILY SPECTATOR: Today is going to be a very significant day in terms of our developments. This morning, our president, Minouche Shafik, sent out an e-mail effectively saying that negotiations failed to reach an agreement. And it, for the first time, outlined very explicitly that Columbia will not divest from Israel, which is the central demand of the protesters. As well as, in that e-mail, it laid out, what, the university actually brought to the table to those negotiators, to those student negotiators and included a series of very interesting things, including offering a list of financial transparency of direct holdings of the university that is -- would be accessible to students and updating that list. It also offered to potentially invest in health and education in Gaza, as well as create an expedited process for divestment proposals. And those were all the things that essentially those students would have rejected because it did not fulfill what their central demands would be. And one of the interesting things as well is that that e-mail did not include anything about amnesty for the students, which has also been a very big thing for the arrested and suspended students. And so, now, the university has been handling out notices to those students at the encampment at this moment warning of disciplinary action, and they have until 2:00 p.m. today to potentially clear out if not to face, again, disciplinary action. And at the same time that this is happening, we're hearing word from the encampment, they made an announcement essentially saying that they have voted to stay. AMANPOUR: Wow. RAMIREZ: So, the students currently have voted to stay past 2:00 p.m. and face those suspensions. And just to add one more thing, the suspensions are actually even more severe than previous. The previous suspended students who were suspended simultaneous to the first wave of arrests that happened, you know, on April 18th, those students were allowed to stay on campus, at least in the residential spaces. This interim suspension says they would have no access to any campus buildings, including residences, dorms, dining, et cetera, IDs completely deactivated, which would effectively evict a lot of those students or at least leave them without access to the residence halls and other important buildings. So, the consequences are now much more severe. AMANPOUR: So, it seems, honestly, Isabella, that it's a real standoff that there seems to be, you know, little peace building or bridge building between either side and both sides, administration and students are really holding the toughest positions right now. I don't know whether you see any way forward, but what I want to ask you is, you know, you're watching this, you're talking to people on campus, you also see the ruckus that's being created outside the campus. Can you tel us what is the real picture? What -- is it dangerous, violent on campus? Is that off campus? What are you seeing as journalists from inside? RAMIREZ: So, at the very beginning stages, there were -- there was a lot of activity in terms of protest activity, both outside of our campus on campus. To be frank, that off campus protest activity has held quite a bit. It has calmed down. That is where a lot of people were sort of citing a lot more tension in terms of when it came to, you know, certain chance or certain incidents that were arising from those outside protests. But predominantly for right now, the encampment has sort of remained the same. And there's been very few updates sort of on the day to day. That's why today is actually quite a big day. But, you know, I was just at the encampment pretty recently distributing our newspaper and really, when you walk on and you see it, it's students sort of laying on the lawn, you know, chatting, reading books, getting water, getting food. It's a really interesting environment because we are certain that there are a lot of students who have reported feeling uncomfortable, have reported feeling unsafe by the presence of the encampment. But also, when you walk onto it, there isn't like active protests necessarily occurring on the encampment itself, it's mostly just the state of occupying that space and kind of being on that space, and there being kind of a series of other activities often but very little in terms of tangible protest. There is going to be probably more escalation we can anticipate as a result of the university's crackdown. And that's sort of why we saw, in the first place, some of those outside protests come in and also some of the students themselves start to galvanize in terms of upping their protest activity was because or was in response to the arrests and also university crackdown. But for these past few days where everything hs been at sort of a -- the negotiations have stalled, it has been pretty, you know, regular in terms of just the students laying on the lawns and, you know, kind of doing their day-to-day activity and programming, sometimes even tuning in to class from the lawn. AMANPOUR: Isabella, did you see, or were you able to hear the kind of, you know, student on student verbal harassment that has been cited as very damaging and uncomfortable and frightening by some of the Jewish students? RAMIREZ: Yes, we have compiled pretty extensive reports regarding this, most particularly when in the aftermath of one of our campus rabbis telling Jewish students, hundreds of Jewish students to not -- to leave campus, to not stay because of the environment. We, in that report, were able to compile a series of incidents that had happened. I believe on the Saturday following the arrests, much were related to off campus protest somewhere on campus that involved certain rhetoric, some of which was evocative of the Holocaust, telling students to go back to Poland, go back to Europe. And there were also other particularly violent signage that was used to refer to actually Hamas and that was one singular protest, that was a protester that was holding that sign and referring to the pro-Israel protesters behind them. And so, we have seen those incidents, and for sure, it has come up quite a lot in the dialogue when it comes to Shafik's communication to the community and all communication we've been receiving from the administration has been very strongly condemning the particular incidents that have arisen from this. Now, is that to say that that represents the entirety of the protesters at the encampment or all of the sort of different moving pieces? I think that is, of course, probably too wide sweeping, but there have certainly been these incidents that should draw concern for our community in half. AMANPOUR: So, let's go back. There's so much politics as well. You just mentioned the president, Minouche Shafik, who is new, let's face it. She started at the beginning of this academic year and has been hauled, like the others, in front of the special committee in Congress. I want to play a little bit of what happened on April 17th as you guys were -- well, not you, but the campus protesters were building the encampment. This is an exchange between Shafik and the GOP Representative Lisa McClain. REP. LISA MCCLAIN (R-MI): Are mobs shouting, from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free or, long live the intifada. Are those antisemitic comments? MINOUCHE SHAFIK, PRESIDENT, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: When I hear those terms, I find them very upsetting. And I have heard -- MCCLAIN: That's a great answer to a question I didn't ask. Is that fall under definition of antisemitic behavior? Yes or no? Why is it so tough? SHAFIK: Because it's a difficult issue. MCCLAIN: Maybe I should ask your task force. Does that qualify as antisemitic behavior, those statements? Yes or no? Yes. OK. Do you agree with your task force? SHAFIK: Yes, we agree. The question is what to do about it? MCCLAIN: So, yes. So, the -- so, yes, you do -- AMANPOUR: So, I'm just fascinated to know what you think and how you're writing about the very targeted political situation that's layered upon all of this. Because after that, Shafik, did, as we've been talking, call in the NYPD to break up the protest. Now, it's interesting that the chief of the NYPD patrol on the U.S. said the students who were arrested were peaceful, offered no resistance whatsoever, and were saying what they wanted to say in a peaceful manner. And your newspaper wrote in an editorial, history has made clear who stood on the wrong side then. And it's clear that this is the side you are aligning yourself with now. This will be your legacy. Are you -- were you addressing the president and the administration? RAMIREZ: Yes. So actually, our editorial board, I do not serve on, but it represents a sector of our opinion team who is very talented and has been working very hard on, you know, kind of reflecting discourse in a different way, because I oversee both the opinion and the newsroom. But that was -- that piece in particular was addressing Shafik herself. It was attempting to say, Shafik, take a look at what your legacy looks like right now to the public, to your students, to the administration. And I think a lot of it is inspired as well by what we know from previous protests at Columbia, 1968, Vietnam, antiwar, South African apartheid, these are all huge moments in Columbia's history in which those presidents also have been looked upon for the decisions that they made at that time. And now, when we reflect on it now, there is, of course, a lot of disdain and criticism for those decisions. So, I believe what the editorial board was really trying to get out here is, you know, really warning President Shafik as to what your legacy will entail if it means, you know, the forceful removal of students from campus and also this crackdown on student protests. Now, of course, there are many differing opinions here, but that was the opinion reflected by our editorial board in terms of what the majority voted for. AMANPOUR: And as we continue to chat, you know, we've seen on other universities, including Emory, it caused a huge ruckus, what happened on Emory, when a teacher -- a professor was essentially manhandled. Other teachers tried to help, faculty members, student, you know, the -- I think it was the police and the state guard or whatever they call them. It was a very rough situation over the weekend in Atlanta. But I guess what I want to ask you, because Columbia is known around the world for, you know, it's history of student protests, but most importantly, it's very enviable and distinguished Middle East program. You have a very important Middle East studies on Arab and Palestinian studies. You have very, very important Jewish studies program. What do you think happened? Why can't people talk to each other? RAMIREZ: I think part of it is that there is -- encircling all of this, encircling the protest activity is there's a big conversation about academic freedom at Columbia and sort of what are the limits of that, but as well as has the university done enough to protect those -- the academic freedom of the professors on our campus. And we saw that as well in the congressional hearing. Congress went very, very hard on Columbia for, naming multiple faculty members by name, most of whom came from the department regarding statements that they had made, scholarship, and other things that they have taught in their classrooms as, of course, labeling them antisemitic and unsafe. And so, there has been this really big question as to whether the university has done enough to kind of protect academic freedom in the first place to allow that discourse to even happen. And so, I think, you know, in terms of agree, like our tradition here at Columbia of both our Middle Eastern Studies Department, but also our immense connections too, we have the Jewish Theological Seminary, we have a -- controversial, but we have a relationship through a program with Tel Aviv University. We have these very deep-seated ties to this issue in particular Edward Said, many scholars who are considered foundational in Israeli and Palestinian issues. And so, a big question here has, though, been, what is academic freedom, what is the university's role in protecting it, and has Columbia, in this time frame, under political pressures, under student pressures, has it done enough to protect that and allow that discourse to occur on its campus? AMANPOUR: And briefly, we got just a little bit left. You know, a lot of the faculty and some of the students have criticized the way we, the press, have covered these protests, some call it a peace movement. It's not even, you know -- it's not meant to be violence, it's meant to be nonviolent. And obviously, social media is blowing it out of proportion. You're watching it from the inside. Do you have a comment on the way the national press has been covering it?

REGIME MEDIA: ABC Keeps Pushing ‘Bloodbath Hoax’ In Trump Smear

ABC World News Tonight, far and away the most fervent propagator of Biden talking points, farted out an embarrassment of a report that served little purpose other than to attempt to rekindle January 6th fearmongering and rehash the broadly-debunked “Bloodbath Hoax”. Watch the aforementioned report in its entirety, as aired on ABC World News Tonight on Thursday, May 2nd, 2024 (click “expand” to view full transcript): DAVID MUIR: Meantime, in the race for The White House, Donald Trump refusing to commit now to accepting the results of the upcoming November election, and President Biden tonight saying, "Take Donald Trump at his word" on this. Here's Mary Bruce. MARY BRUCE: Tonight, the Biden campaign is calling Donald Trump “a danger to the Constitution and a threat to our democracy”, after the former president refused to say he would accept the results of the election. Trump telling the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: “If everything's honest, I'd gladly accept the results… If it's not, you have to fight for the right of the country.” BRUCE: Tonight, President Biden saying, take Trump at his word. Our Karen Travers asking him: KAREN TRAVERS: Are you worried that Trump says he won't accept the election results? BIDEN: Listen to what he says! BRUCE: Earlier this week, when Trump was asked by Time magazine if he's concerned about violence if he doesn't win, he said, "If we don't win, you know, it depends. It always depends on the fairness of an election."  Biden has been ramping up his warnings. BIDEN: He promises quote,” a bloodbath”, if he loses. This guy denies January 6th. Listen. Listen to what he says. Because you know he means it. BRUCE: The president urging voters to take this seriously, as some of Trump's language echoes what he said in the runup to the January 6th attack on the Capitol. The Biden campaign concerned that Trump supporters may be listening closely. David. MUIR: Mary Bruce, live at The White House tonight. Mary, thank you. Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce rehashes the usual January 6th hysteria, by citing portions of an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel wherein Trump hedges when asked if he’d accept the results of the election should he lose. Bruce takes the opportunity to tie this to Trump’s Time  interview, and feed it to Biden as an election-denial burger.  It is at this point that Bruce allows Biden’s utterance of the Bloodbath Hoax to go unchallenged and uncorrected. As we said when ABC World News Tonight, with Bruce behind the anchor desk, first furthered the Bloodbath Hoax: …to accept the idea that people who are the elite in the industry of communicating with words are suddenly unable to comprehend plain English requires multiple significant suspensions of disbelief. That’s not to say that some of these elites are not intellectually deficient. But not to this extent. Which leaves willful deception as the only likely reason why reporters, correspondents and anchors would, in near unanimity continue to promote Trump’s assessment of damage to the American automotive industry under a second Biden term as both a violent threat and a January 6th-adjacent attack against democracy. Bruce closes out tonight’s report by contemptibly suggesting, without evidence, that Trump’s rhetoric echoes what he said in the runup to January 6th and echoing the Biden campaign’s talking point that “Trump supporters may be listening closely”.  The title “Regime Media” is well-earned.  

CBS’s Nancy Cordes Frets Campus Protests Might Hurt Biden

CBS Senior White House Correspondent Nancy Cordes went into full “Protect the Precious” mode as she covered the political fallout from the radical and often violent protests at various elite college campuses across the nation. Watch as Cordes laments that “the unrest is now threatening to become an election issue” affecting President Biden with the youth vote: PROTESTERS: Palestine will be free! NANCY CORDES: Like many protesters, President Biden has expressed concern about the plight of Palestinian civilians. More than 34,000 killed, according to the Hamas-run Health Ministry. But when asked today if he would change his policies towards Israel, as the protesters have been demanding, Biden said, simply: JOE BIDEN: No. CORDES: The unrest is now threatening to become an election issue. Young people are a key Democratic voting bloc. SELINA AL-SHIHABI: Biden needs to listen to what the students are calling for, which is an end to a genocide funded by the United States. So, first things first, stop funding Israel. It is a small wonder that Cordes didn’t utter “Michigan” at some point in the report. You know she must’ve thought it. This item serves as a reminder that there is only one true, pure victim of whatever the calamity of the day might be- and that is the electoral prospects of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.  The report plays more like a mashup of two different reports: first, a recap of the happenings at the different universities across the nation, with their varying degrees of protest and crackdown. On the other hand, there is the standard D.C. wrapup.  In addition to the lamentation over the youth vote, the report unquestioningly cites Hamas Health casualty figures, and attempts to compensate for Biden’s perceived misfortunes by taking a “without evidence” shot at former President Donald Trump, who at a rally suggested that there were paid foreign agitators: Laying down this marker for when it is discovered that at least ONE (1) foreign-born student and/or outside agitator was paid by some radical oligarch-funded organization. pic.twitter.com/kR0GYRjIU0 — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) May 3, 2024 Cordes’ shootdown of Trump’s statement so early into the protest fallout is arrogant to the point of recklessness. All it takes is ONE paid foreign student/agitator in order to make Cordes look like a total fool. The report closes with a casual “by the way” observation- that the Biden administration is thinking about bringing in some Gazan refugees to be reunited with family stateside. Again, Cordes managed to bite her tongue and not utter “Michigan”. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on the CBS Evening News on Thursday, May 2nd, 2024: JAMES BROWN: And we begin tonight with President Biden's sharp criticism today of the violence that has broken out in protest on America's college campuses over the Israel-Hamas war. In recent weeks, nearly 2,000 people have been detained or arrested at dozens of schools. There were more protests today at Portland State, George Washington University, the University of Pennsylvania, and NYU. Speaking at the White House today, President Biden made his most extensive comments to date on the protests, condemning anti-semitic slurs, vandalism, trespassing, and major disruptions to classes and graduations at some universities. New York City Mayor Eric Adams says nearly half of those arrested earlier this week at Columbia University and nearby City College were not students at those schools. Adams claims outside agitators are radicalizing students. CBS's Nancy Cordes leads off our coverage tonight from The White House. NANCY CORDES: White House officials say it was the sheer number of violent encounters on college campuses over the past two days that prompted President Biden to speak out. JOE BIDEN: There’s the right to protest, but not the right to cause chaos. CORDES: His comments came in the wake of nearly 2,000 arrests. More than 30 colleges and universities. POLICE: Start clearing the barricade. CORDES: Just today, protesters were ejected from a library at Portland State University that they had occupied for three days. Inside, police say they found ball bearings, paint balloons, spray bottles of ink, and DIY armor. BIDEN: Vandalism, trespassing, breaking windows, shutting down campuses, forcing the cancellation of classes and graduations. None of this is a peaceful protest. PROTESTERS: Palestine will be free! CORDES: Like many protesters, President Biden has expressed concern about the plight of Palestinian civilians. More than 34,000 killed, according to the Hamas-run Health Ministry. But when asked today if he would change his policies towards Israel, as the protesters have been demanding, Biden said, simply: BIDEN: No. CORDES: The unrest is now threatening to become an election issue. Young people are a key Democratic voting bloc. SELINA AL-SHIHABI: Biden needs to listen to what the students are calling for, which is an end to a genocide funded by the United States. So, first things first, stop funding Israel. CORDES: In battleground Wisconsin, Donald Trump argued Biden should have spoken out sooner. DONALD TRUMP: There’s a big fever in our country and he’s not talking. CORDES: But Trump also made this unfounded claim about campus demonstrators. TRUMP: They do come from other countries, and they are paid.  CORDES: Some Republicans have urged President Biden to send in the National Guard to quell campus protests, but he said no to that today. CBS News was first to report that the Biden administration is now considering bringing some Palestinians from war-torn Gaza to the U.S. as refugees. JB. BROWN: Nancy, thank you very much.  

Why Biden’s Just Wrong: NO ONE ‘Knows How to Make Government Work.’

President Joe Biden says, “I know how to make government work!” You’d think he’d know. He’s worked in government for 51 years. But the truth is, no one can make government work. Biden hasn’t. Look at the chaos at the border, our military’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, the rising cost of living, our unsustainable record-high debt ... In my new video, economist Ed Stringham argues that no government can ever work well, because “even the best person can’t implement change. ... The massive bureaucracy gets bigger and slower.” I learned that as a consumer reporter watching bureaucrats regulate business. Their rules usually made life worse for consumers. Yet politicians want government to do more! Remember the unveiling of Obamacare’s website? Millions tried to sign up. The first day, only six got it to work. Vice President Joe Biden made excuses: “Neither (Obama) and I are technology geeks.” Stringham points out, “If they can’t design a basic simple website, how are they going to manage half the economy?” While bureaucrats struggled with the Obamacare site, the private sector successfully created Uber and Lyft, platforms like iCloud, apps like Waze, smartwatches, etc. The private sector creates things that work because it has to. If businesses don’t serve customers well, they go out of business. But government is a monopoly. It never goes out of business. With no competition, there’s less pressure to improve. Often good people join government. Some work as hard as workers in the private sector. But not for long. Because the bureaucracy’s incentives kill initiative. If a government worker works hard, he might get a small raise. But he sits near others who earn the same pay and, thanks to archaic civil service rules, are unlikely to get fired even if they’re late, lazy or stupid. Over time, that’s demoralizing. Eventually government workers conclude, “Why try?” In the private sector, workers must strive to make things better. If they don’t, competitors will, and you might lose your job. Governments never go out of business. “Companies can only stay in business if they always keep their customer happy,” Stringham points out. “Competition pushes us to be better. Government has no competition.” I push back. “Politicians say, ‘Voters can vote us out.’” “With a free market,” Stringham replies, “The consumer votes every single day with the dollar. Under politics, we have to wait four years.” It’s another reason why, over time, government never works as well as the private sector. Year after year, the Pentagon fails audits. If a private company repeatedly does that, they get shut down. But government never gets shut down. A Pentagon spokeswoman makes excuses: “We’re working on improving our process. We certainly are learning each time.” They don’t learn much. They still fail audits. “It’s like we’re living in Groundhog Day,” Stringham jokes. When Covid hit, politicians handed out almost $2 trillion in “rescue” funds. The Government Accountability Office says more than $100 billion were stolen. “One woman bought a Bentley,” laughs Stringham. “A father and son bought a luxury home.” At least Biden noticed the fraud. He announced, “We’re going to make you pay back what you stole! No. They will not. Biden’s Fraud Enforcement Task Force has recovered only 1% of what was stolen. Even without fraud, government makes money vanish. I’ve reported on my town’s $2 million toilet in a park. When I confronted the parks commissioner, he said, “$2 million was a bargain! Today it would cost $3 million.” That’s government work. More recently, Biden proudly announced that government would create “500,000 (EV) charging stations.” After two years, they’ve built ... seven. Not 7,000. Just seven. Over the same time, greedy, profit-seeking Amazon built 17,000. “Privatize!” says Stringham. “Whenever we think something’s important, question whether government should do it.” In Britain, government-owned Jaguar lost money year after year. Only when Britain sold the company to private investors did Jaguar start turning a profit selling cars people actually like. When Sweden sold Absolut Vodka, the company increased its profits sixfold. It’s ridiculous for Biden to say, “I know how to make government work.” No one does. Next week, this column takes on Donald Trump’s promise: “We’ll drain the Washington swamp!”

Fla. Heartbeat Act Goes Into Effect: Pro-Lifers Rejoice, Pro-Aborts Cry

The Florida Heartbeat Protection Act went into effect on Wednesday in the 'Sunshine State,' protecting babies with detectable heartbeats from the brutal effects of abortion. Both individuals in support and those in opposition uttered their feelings regarding the new law going into effect. The Act makes it so that babies at around six-weeks gestation, when heartbeats are generally detectable, cannot be aborted. According to Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, it has the potential to protect roughly 50,000 lives annually. The law, however, does leave exceptions for cases where a mother’s life is at risk, when a fatal prenatal diagnosis occurs, and in cases of rape, incest or human trafficking. In response to the news, many pro-life individuals and groups celebrated the potential this has to save lives. “The Florida Heartbeat Act took effect today! That means preborn children are protected after 6 weeks gestation!” Catholic professor Michael New wrote on his X account linking to data from the Charlotte Lozier Institute about the 160 pregnancy centers in Florida who can serve more women, like the 88,000-plus they served in 2022, now that the heartbeat law is in effect. “While not perfect, the Heartbeat Protection Act will nonetheless now SAVE tens of thousands of unborn children’s lives annually here in the Sunshine State!” Florida Voice for the Unborn wrote and linked to a verse in Psalms about rejoicing in what the Lord has done. On the contrary, pro-aborts were mad that babies would be saved. “As of this morning, 4 million women in this state woke up with fewer reproductive freedoms than they had last night,” Vice President Kamala Harris said at an appearance in Jacksonville, Florida on Wednesday. One user wrote, “The law is barbaric. Like the man who signed it,” in response to a woman who wrote that “today marks the day, my daughter has less rights than the day she was born.” “Florida’s abortion ban will have a catastrophic impact on abortion access across the Southeast. As this years-long crisis continues to unfold and confusion mounts, abortion funds continue to show up and show out for their communities,” The National Network of Abortion Funds wrote with a graphic that read “F**K ABORTION BANS.” Obviously, with new laws not everyone is going to get their way, but all I can say is that babies get to live and nobody should be against that.

As Police Bust Pro-Hamas UCLA Camp, CBS Hints Students Will Be Killed

Thursday’s CBS Mornings was live on the scene as California Highway Patrol was busting the anti-Semitic/pro-Hamas encampment at UCLA. But from the get-go, the network seemed intent on hinting that at any moment police would turn their guns on the students and UCLA would become the next Kent State massacre. Before they even started the show, their opening tease (teed up by co-anchor Nate Burleson) highlighted a student who claimed, without evidence, that the university wanted them dead: BURLESON: Breaking overnight, police swarm demonstrators at UCLA a day after their encampment was attacked by counter-protesters. PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER: The aggression that we faced shows that the university has no choice to just stand by and wait for us to get killed by Zionist aggressors. Seemingly ill-prepared to go to their live shots of correspondent Carter Evans, who at the scene, the network sloppily had their in-studio fill-in anchors try to report on what they were seeing live. Vladimir Duthiers noted: “Police fired what appear to be nonlethal rounds at some of the protesters. That was the pop, pop, pop that you just heard there.” His tone turned to what seemed like panic he seemed to suggest the highway patrol had switched to real guns. “As again, this is live pictures coming into the newsroom right now where you see looks like hundreds of police officers in full riot gear now holding up weapons at those protesters!” he exclaimed.     But they didn’t. Following the video portion of Evans’ report, co-anchors Burleson, Duthiers, and Jericka Duncan bloviated about the profound nature of what they were witnessing. “Again, Americans haven't seen scenes like this since the 1960s when college campuses erupted over protests in Vietnam. And now we're seeing this again play out on college campuses all across the country,” Duthiers suggested, inching toward a Kent State parallel. It was Duncan who hinted the strongest that they could see students get killed soon: DUTHIERS: They seem to be inching inch by inch to try to move these protesters off, but it's going to be very, very difficult. And of course the fear is that somebody gets hurts. BURLESON: Yeah. No doubt about it. DUNCAN: Or even worse. Burleson built off of Duncan by suggesting it was a real fear among the pro-Hamas mob. “And when you look at the protesters, some are speaking and saying that ‘we are protesting peacefully, and we are looking for support from the police.’ And then others are saying that the police are not offering that, they are actually doing the opposite,” he said. Duthiers did note that there was also a danger to officers from “outside agitators” and concluded with: “So, it becomes really, really difficult and, of course, the danger, as you see this police officer trying to tear down a barricade that presumably protesters put up, the danger is that somebody gets hurt.” Over 130 people were reportedly arrested and no one was seriously injured, let alone killed. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CBS Mornings May 2, 2024 7:00:22 a.m. Eastern [Opening tease] (…) NATE BURLESON: Breaking overnight, police swarm demonstrators at UCLA a day after their encampment was attacked by counter-protesters. PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER: The aggression that we faced shows that the university has no choice to just stand by and wait for us to get killed by Zionist aggressors. (…) 7:02:16 a.m. Eastern [Live video of the chaos at UCLA without voiceovers] VLADIMIR DUTHIERS: Again, we just want to reiterate, this just happened minutes ago. Police fired what appear to be nonlethal rounds at some of the protesters. That was the pop, pop, pop that you just heard there. Those folks were sheltering behind a barricade. As again, this is live pictures coming into the newsroom right now where you see looks like hundreds of police officers in full riot gear now holding up weapons at those protesters! (…) 7:06:19 a.m. Eastern DUTHIERS: These pictures are remarkable coming into us right now, into the newsroom. When you see what looks like dozens if not perhaps hundreds of police officers in full riot gear, and they're trying to get in to clear this encampment. Again, Americans haven't seen scenes like this since the 1960s when college campuses erupted over protests in Vietnam. And now we're seeing this again play out on college campuses all across the country. It looks like now the police are actually moving toward those barricades that protesters have set up. You can see those pieces of plywood that they -- protesters are using to try and force the police back. They seem to be inching inch by inch to try to move these protesters off, but it's going to be very, very difficult. And of course the fear is that somebody gets hurts. BURLESON: Yeah. No doubt about it. JERICKA DUNCAN: Or even worse. BURLESON: And when you look at the protesters, some are speaking and saying that “we are protesting peacefully, and we are looking for support from the police.” And then others are saying that the police are not offering that, they are actually doing the opposite. DUTHIERS: The difficulty, of course, is that when you hear police officials – and we heard that yesterday from New York City Mayor Adams – that there are outside agitators who are taking part in some of these demonstrations, it's difficult for police to know who the outside agitators are. Look -- it's dark, there are lights, there are teargas -- BURLESON: Most people are covered. DUTHIERS: Being deployed – Exactly. People have their faces covered. So, it becomes really, really difficult and, of course, the danger, as you see this police officer trying to tear down a barricade that a presumably protesters put up, the danger is that somebody gets hurt. (…)

NYT's Frank Bruni Blames Trump, Mike Johnson for Escalation at Columbia

Appearing as a guest on Tuesday's Erin Burnett OutFront, New York Times columnist Frank Bruni tried to blame Republicans Donald Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson for the escalation by far-left anti-Israel protesters at Columbia University that included taking over and occupying an academic building. Host Erin Burnett recalled that other schools had had more success in negotiating the demands of protesters, and then posed: "What do you think is different here about Columbia? There has been no ability to tamp it down." Bruni quickly pointed a finger at Speaker Johnson recently visiting Columbia University and calling for more to be done to stop Jewish students from being harassed: BRUNI: Yeah, I mean, part of it is, everything that happens in New York City is on steroids, right?.. I also think that various political actors -- and this is indicative of our grievance culture. Various political actors have decided to choose this particular circumstance to come in and choose their sides and make their statements, and I think that has accelerated and amplified things. Mike Johnson, for example -- the Speaker of the House -- a week ago, I was writing about how much I admired the fact that he made common cause with Democrats -- changed his mind about Ukraine aid, and then, the next day or the day beyond that, he goes up to New York -- he didn't need to be here -- and he says, "Maybe we should bring in the National Guard." So a politician calling for less hate is "accelerating and amplifying" the problem, not the protesters. After Burnett recalled that she had been there during Speaker Johnson's visit and was surprised about the unhappy students surrounding him, Bruni added: BRUNI: But did he need to do that? You know, so many of the voices that have joined the situation and have shouted about it -- because that's what we do these days -- we shout, we don't talk. Have they been there for -- to score political points and their own purposes? Or have they come there really to come and solve this? I think this has been a sort of -- this particular situation has attracted political actors scoring points in a way that the situation on some of those other campuses have not. Once again, what are the protesters doing there if not to "score political points"?  Burnett -- who last week pressed Speaker Johnson from the left on the issue of him criticizing anti-Israel protesters -- voiced agreement with her left-leaning guest: BURNETT: Yeah, right. Maybe somehow maybe because it's Columbia. He came, he brought -- he brought four -- three or four other representatives with him, and I, you know, I was standing next to him. I was -- the students couldn't fully hear him, and that was a good thing because if they had heard what they were saying -- in one case, saying, "You all should be ashamed" -- there would have been a true outcry. The intention of them appearing was for the press conference part, not to actually talk to the students. Again, as if the protesters aren't there for the cameras. A bit later, after the CNN host recalled that seeing broken windows, "I'm thinking of that indelible image of the Capitol, far-right protesters on January 6. Here we are on April 30, people who would identify themselves as far-left protesters doing the same thing." Bruni suggested that President Trump had culpability because he has defended January 6 rioters: BRUNI: Well, you do have to ask if there's a through line from one to the other. I mean, on January 6, we had a President still at the time -- now a former President who has romanticized what's happened there -- who has sent the message that if you really believe in something and if you're fighting for it, you do the most provocative, disruptive, confrontational thing possible. That's what the rioters on January 6 did. That's what these students and their non-student allies, whatever you want to call them, were doing here. There's this -- it's all the same sort of ethos -- the same sort of approach. It was not mentioned that left-wing anti-police protesters showed plenty of ability to cause damage (more than a billion dollars) during the summer of 2020 before the Capitol Hill riots of 2021 had even happened. Transcript follows: CNN's Erin Burnett OutFront April 30, 2024 7:43 a.m. Eastern ERIN BURNETT: So, Frank, I'm just trying to understand -- and I know every situation because there's different individuals involved, right -- but Yale and Brown today succeeded -- two different ways but negotiating so that the encampments were dismantled and things appear to be going back to normal. Some of the students, you know, in the case of one of the universities -- okay, look at the police are walking here as we're talking so we're seeing where they're going. As they do that, Frank, what do you think is different here about Columbia? There has been no ability to tamp it down. FRANK BRUNI, NEW YORK TIMES: Yeah, I mean, part of it is, everything that happens in New York City is on steroids right now. We don't know exactly who's in that building and what effect that has on it. I also think that various political actors -- and this is indicative of our grievance culture. Various political actors have decided to choose this particular circumstance to come in and choose their sides and make their statements, and I think that has accelerated and amplified things. Mike Johnson, for example -- the Speaker of the House -- a week ago, I was writing about how much I admired the fact that he made common cause with Democrats -- changed his mind about Ukraine aid, and then, the next day or the day beyond that, he goes up to New York -- he didn't need to be here -- and he says, "Maybe we should bring in the National Guard." We have two -- BURNETT: I was there, by the way, on the steps at Columbia when he was there, and he came out, and he said and did what he intended to do. BRUNI: Right. BURNETT: But he was clearly taken aback and surprised by how many students were there. And at that point -- there were only a few hundred -- but they gathered -- and they were not happy, which is not what he was expecting. BRUNI: But did he need to do that? You know, so many of the voices that have joined the situation and have shouted about it -- because that's what we do these days -- we shout, we don't talk. Have they been there for -- to score political points and their own purposes? Or have they come there really to come and solve this? I think this has been a sort of -- this particular situation has attracted political actors scoring points in a way that the situation on some of those other campuses have not. BURNETT: Yeah, right. Maybe somehow maybe because it's Columbia. He came, he brought -- he brought four -- three or four other representatives with him, and I, you know, I was standing next to him. I was -- the students couldn't fully hear him, and that was a good thing because if they had heard what they were saying -- in one case, saying, "You all should be ashamed" -- there would have been a true outcry. The intention of them appearing was for the press conference part, not to actually talk to the students. BRUNI: They came here because New York City is the media capital. Where are you and I sitting right now? We're sitting in a studio in New York City. They came here because more cameras are here. More media companies are here than in any other city. (...) BURNETT: These kids were offered -- the ones that are students, you know, that they would be able to not be expelled, you know, that if they would just to sign papers to back off today. Which at Yale, Brown -- this seemed to work to deescalate -- did not happen in this case. But when we look at the images of where -- I don't know how many people are in there and how many of them are students, but right now, in Hamilton Hall, in Columbia, right near these images that you're looking at where when the police go in that is where we anticipate this confrontation will happen -- we saw the students occupy it and whoever else was with them, broken windows. And the first thing when you see that broken window, I'm thinking of that indelible image of the Capitol, far-right protesters on January 6. Here we are on April 30, people who would identify themselves as far-left protesters doing the same thing. BRUNI: Well, you do have to ask if there's a through line from one to the other. I mean, on January 6, we had a President still at the time -- now a former President who has romanticized what's happened there -- who has sent the message that if you really believe in something and if you're fighting for it, you do the most provocative, disruptive, confrontational thing possible. That's what the rioters on January 6 did. That's what these students and their non-student allies, whatever you want to call them, were doing here. There's this -- it's all the same sort of ethos -- the same sort of approach.

CBS Lionizes Climate Losers Blocking Traffic, Throwing Paint, Interrupting Conservative Gala

Like being able to visit museums without climate freaks throwing soup on world-renowned paintings? Looking to enjoy a night out at a gala? Need a peaceful commute without anyone blocking the road? If the answer to any of these questions is no, CBS Mornings all but said no way, Jose. On Thursday, they ran a lengthy puff piece fawning over Climate Defiance and even followed them as they interrupted the March 6 gala for our friends at American Moment.     Co-host Nate Burleson incredibly wove in the climate freaks with the live scenes from UCLA as “police are clashing with protesters against the war in Gaza”. “College campuses aren’t the only places where protesters are making their voices heard. This morning in our Climate Watch series, we’re focusing on climate activists who are taking direct action to make their point. Last week one group blockaded the entrance to the global headquarters of CitiGroup in Manhattan. They demanded the banking giant stop funding fossil fuel interests,” boasted fill-in co-host Jericka Duncan. She added “[s]enior national and environmental correspondent Ben Tracy [took] a closer look at one climate group that says it doesn’t need to be liked to be effective.” The chyron was unsurprisingly stupid: “Climate Watch; Protests for the Planet; A Look at What’s Driving Climate Activists to Get Aggressive”. With that stacked deck, Tracy gave unassuming and seemingly neutral (i.e. pro-thuggery) open: “Blocking traffic, throwing red powder on a case housing the U.S. Constitution, and dousing a global-covered Van Gogh with soup, climate protesters are not just marching in the streets. They’re finding new and more aggressive ways to demand climate action.” Tracy was then shown following around Climate Defiance in their preparation, execution, and aftermath of their storming of the American Moment gala. Tracy and CBS cameras even palled around with one of their leaders as they scouted out the hotel a day beforehand. Of course, Tracy denied our friends the full free advertising by refusing to name them (click “expand”): MAXWELL DOWNING: We can still cause a little bit of a scene. Cause some chaos. TRACY: On a recent Wednesday night in Washington, D.C. — DOWNING: I know exactly the route that we can go. TRACY: — 21-year-old Maxwell Downing shared his plan to cause a scene at this nearby hotel. [TO DOWNING] What exactly are you guys doing tonight? DOWNING: We’re going to a fancy, schamncy gala that J.D. Vance — Republican senator from Ohio — is going to be speaking at. J.D. Vance is one of the top 20 recipients of oil and gas money in Congress. TRACY: Downing cased the hotel the day before they found the best escape routes. DOWNING [TO FELLOW THUGS]: Who does not have $50 in cash? TRACY: So, after making sure that everyone had money in case they got arrested — DOWNING [at American Moment gala]: J.D. Vance is a climate supervillain! TRACY: — these climate protesters stormed the ballroom — DOWNING: Come out, J.D., face us. CLIMATE DEFIANCE PROTESTER: He’s a climate criminal. TRACY: — interrupting the event until security finally threw them out. DOWNING: Face us! Off fossil fuels! AMERICAN MOMENT SECURITY GUARDS: Get out. Get out. DOWNING: Immediately, security guards hands around the neck, which is not usual. Nearly a minute and a half into the five-minute-and-37-second block, Tracy finally identified the group as Climate Defiance, taking them at their word that they don’t “engage in vandalism or violence” and have “become notorious for surprise confrontations with oil executives...and politicians on both sides of the aisle.” Tracy even served at the group’s unofficial spokesman by having CBS ask Senator J.D. Vance “for his reaction to the disruption” at the gala he was speaking at. Of course, Vance’s team “did not respond”. One could presume this question to Climate Defense executive director Michael Greenberg was meant to be adversarial: “When you burst into a room and you call somebody like Senator Manchin a sick f-word, what is the outcome you’re hoping to achieve?” Greenberg was unapologetic in explaining they “don’t necessarily expect to move Manchin or whatnot” but instead “make climate change a top issue in American politics”....via intimidation. “He says their protests are designed to go viral on social media, attracting new members to their cause, and raising awareness of climate change as an existential issue,” Tracy added. Tracy’s other question came with a drive-by-ish tone: “Do you worry about turning people off, that they see you as more annoying or more of a threat than actually helping the cause you say you’re trying to help?” The only mild, official pushback from Dana Fisher, an American University professor who penned “a new book about climate activism” (Click “expand”): GREENBERG: We’re trying to shake the public awake. TRACY [TO GREENBERG]: Do you worry about turning people off, that they see you as more annoying or more of a threat than actually helping the cause you say you’re trying to help? GREENBERG: Yeah, we’re definitely an acquired taste. Not everybody loves us. You don’t need to be popular to be effective. FISHER: And their goal is media attention, plain and simple. [TO STUDENTS] When you guys look at the general population — TRACY: Dana Fisher is a professor at American University and author of a new book about climate activism. DOWNING: He is a criminal! TRACY: She calls these kinds of activists “shockers,” not unlike some of the AIDS activists of the 1980s who desperately tried to get people’s attention. [TO FISHER] How do we know if this is actually effective? FISHER: I think it’s going to be a hindsight thing. I mean, I do not think that the whole movement should shift toward these kinds of actions because I think it will be a detriment to the movement itself, but it is playing a role in helping to keep the conversation going. The CBS correspondent closed by bragging that “they have had some success” in securing “a meeting with John Podesta, the White House’s chief climate adviser” and were “part of the pressure campaign that recently led President Biden to pause the expansion of liquefied natural gas exports.” Duthiers gushed about how “this is such a great piece” with “a lot to digest,” adding “you can understand that they want cameras there...because it does cause people to pay attention” since “politicians...have enacted or have at least put plans into place to address climate issues.” Duncan also voiced her support: “But only time really will tell in terms of what action is actually taken, what policies are actually passed as a result of bringing attention to something that I think everyone, at this point recognizes, is a problem.” “We love shock value. But we’ll see if this is counterproductive or not in the future,” Burleson said. Exit question: How would liberal journalists feel if protesters stormed and occupied their studios, or say, blocked roads that made them late for family emergencies? To see the relevant CBS transcript from May 2, click here.

MRC’s Bozell Joins FBN’s Varney in Slamming Media’s Campus Protest and Trump Coverage

On Thursday, MRC President Brent Bozell appeared on the Fox Business’s Varney & Company to break down how the leftist media are failing to properly cover the student protests. Bozell and Varney also had a good laugh over the Trump trials backfiring on the left and MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace’s “end of democracy” fear-mongering.   The segment began with Bozell admonishing network and cable coverage (with the exception of Fox News) for ignoring three key elements of the protests.  First up, Bozell noted the lack of coverage of the protest backers: “The agitators, the professional people who are causing trouble funded by radical left-wing groups. How is that not a story?” Bozell then called out the censorship of the ugly slurs on display: “Second, the comments that are being made. The chants! ‘Hamas, we love you, we support your rockets too!’ Putting up signs that say ‘Final Solution.’ ‘From the river to the sea.’ All these messages that say kill Israelis. Not political, kill Israelis.”   Bozell continued: “And then the third element. The big one that’s been missing here. Is this is all couched under a pro-Palestinian, it is not pro-Palestinian, it is pro-Hamas. And they’re not saying it. They’re not saying that this is endorsing a radical terrorist movement that slaughters thousands of Israelis.”     Later on in the segment, Varney and Bozell chatted about the left’s strategy of keeping Trump tied-up in the courtroom and how it has backfired.   Bozell observed: “Why is Donald Trump going up in the polls? Because the public is seeing the puppet trials that are taking place right now….They’re saying this is fundamentally unfair. This guy is being kept off the campaign trail through these ridiculous lawsuits that are being thrown at him….and it’s backfiring on the left.” Varney and Bozell then had a good laugh over MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace’s claim that a “free press” may no longer exist if Donald Trump wins in November. The following is a complete transcript of the Fox Business Varney & Company segment that aired on May 2:  Fox Business Varney & Company May 2, 2024 HOST STUART VARNEY: The president of the Media Research Center is Brent Bozell and he joins me now. Brent studies the media and what they are up to. So I got two questions for you, Brent. Number one. How is the media covering the campus unrest and then deal with how the media is covering Trump trials? Start with the campus unrest please. L. BRENT BOZELL: Ok, campus unrest. There’s a rule, a normal rule about reporting. Which is the analysis before an event or after an event is where you see real bias but when it’s hard news of an event it tends to be pretty good. Well there are exceptions to the rule and we’re talking about an exception to the rule.  There are three things — elements of this in the hard news phase that Fox is covering. They should all be covering but they’re not.  The first one, we just heard. The agitators, the professional people who are causing trouble funded by radical left-wing groups. How is that not a story?  Second, the comments that are being made. The chants! “Hamas, we love you, we support your rockets too!” Putting up signs that say “Final Solution.”  “From the river to the sea.” All these messages that say kill Israelis. Not political, kill Israelis.  Second, Donald Trump. VARNEY: Yeah.  BOZELL: You’re seeing recent surveys that are showing this. Why is Donald Trump going up in the polls? Because the public is seeing the puppet trials that are taking place right now. I think they’re saying this is fundamentally unfair. This guy is being kept off the campaign trail through these ridiculous lawsuits that are being thrown at him. When he’s up, when he is going up two, three, four, five, six points in the polls while he’s sitting in a courtroom, that tells you that the public is fed up with this and it’s backfiring on the left.  VARNEY: Next one, Brent. I want you to listen to what MSNBC’s Nicole Wallace said about the threat Trump poses to democracy. Roll it please. CLIP OF MSNBC HOST NICOLLE WALLACE: Depending what happens in November — seven months from right now — this time next year, I might not be sitting here. There might not be a White House Correspondents Dinner or a free press. While our democracy won’t exactly fall apart immediately without it, the real threat looms larger. A candidate with outward disdain not just for a free press but for all of our freedoms and the rule of law itself.  VARNEY: Okay, Brent. Wallace thinks Trump will destroy democracy. Do you think the media is destroying democracy? BOZELL: Those same people that are chanting that Trump is trying to end democracy had nothing to say when there were attempts in 36 of  the 50 states of the United States to keep Donald Trump off the ballot, and the Supreme Court by a unanimous 9-0 vote declared it was unconstitutional. That it was — in fact — an attack on democracy. It’s these same hypocrites who are doing this. Welcome to today’s world.  VARNEY: It never changes. Great stuff, Brent. Come and see us again. Don’t be a stranger, okay? BOZELL: Thanks Stuart.

No, Demonstrations Today Not Like the 1960s

The current demonstrations on college campuses against Israel remind some of the unrest on college campuses during the 1960s. But the comparison is not a good one. The unrest of the 1960s was defined by the war in Vietnam and by the Civil Rights Movement. Both had practical, personal impact on young Americans in their own country. American soldiers were fighting and dying in Vietnam. There was real, life-and-death impact on all Americans, and certainly on young Americans. The military draft was still operative then. Despite various deferments, including deferment for university attendance, the draft was still a reality and was a looming presence for all college-age Americans. They knew they could be drafted and had friends and friends of friends who were. The official number of American soldiers killed in Vietnam stands at 58,220. Although there were legitimate moral concerns about American involvement in this war, the moral concerns were accompanied by young Americans having real skin in this game. The Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s also had real personal moral impact on all Americans. And youth are always highly sensitive to the moral failings around them. The reality of segregation and Jim Crow started getting national attention with the Civil Rights Movement, the activism of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference and other more violent groups in the movement. In contrast to the woke activism of today, which is totally political in character, the Civil Rights Movement was led by a charismatic and articulate Black pastor and had a religious, moral tone rooted in the Christian church. Anyone that questions this should read, or reread, King’s “I Have a Dream” speech from 1963. But King’s moral appeal was to an America very different than today. In 1965, per Gallup, 70% of Americans said religion was personally “very important” to them. In 2023, by contrast, only 45% of Americans say religion is “very important.” In 1962, per Gallup, 46% of Americans said they attended religious services over the last seven days. In 2023, this was down to 32%. During this period there were two major wars involving Israel and the surrounding Arab states. In 1967, Israel prevailed in the Six-Day War, which began with preemptive action by Israel against the Egyptian army mobilized for attack, and subsequent aggression by Syria in the North and Jordan in the East. In 1973, Israel again prevailed against attacks on these same fronts. In 1967, per Gallup, 45% of Americans supported Israel against 4% who supported the Arab states, with 26% with no opinion. In 1973, 48% of Americans expressed support for Israel versus 6% expressing support for the Arab states and 24% with no opinion. Support for Israel among Americans during this period was one-sided and clear. But, again, America today is very, very different. Our young people in the 1960s understood what personal responsibility is about. On a national level, in the 1960s, all young Americans faced the reality of military conscription. Today, regarding national obligation and service, there are virtually no demands on our youth. Now President Joe Biden is even erasing their student loan obligations. On a religious, moral level, religion then held a much stronger hold on the nation. Religion teaches and inspires a culture where individuals have a sense they belong to and have obligation to something beyond their own egotistical inclinations. Nature abhors a vacuum, and as religion has weakened and disappeared from our culture, it has been replaced by politics and the welfare state. The end of it all is we now have a generation of youth insulated from all sense of national and religious and moral personal responsibility. So now they demonstrate in support of terrorists and against the only free country in the Middle East that shares the very values that made our own country great.

WATCH: Bishop’s Powerful Response to Censorship Demands of Stabbing Video

Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel is back to preaching and has issued a powerful new sermon in defense of free speech and the natural rights of man. On April 28, Bishop Emmanuel made his first public appearance after being viciously attacked by a knife-wielding assailant who left the bishop with only one eye. The bishop delivered a sermon in which he defended the right to freedom of speech as a fundamental human right and referred to the Australian government’s recent attempts to suppress the video of his stabbing on social media platforms such as X. Bishop Emmanuel expressed dismay at attitudes that dismiss or outright attack freedom of speech, saying, “Every human being has the right to their freedom of speech and freedom of religion…and for us to say that free speech is dangerous, that free speech cannot be possible in a democratic country … I’m yet to fathom this.” Bishop Emmanuel also lamented the state of the Western world and the increasing prevalence of a nihilistic viewpoint that fails to uphold universal moral truths or recognize basic human worth.  “I’ll say it again, the Western world has succeeded exceedingly in giving value to everything, but I’ll say this with utmost sadness in my heart, the Western world has failed miserably in giving purpose to everything, but until we find the purpose of the thing, we can never give it value… Human rights is human value,” Bishop Emmanuel argued.  The bishop contrasted this modern view with the attitudes of Australia’s forebears, who fought for human rights.  “I am very proud of these great ANZAC warriors who gave their life up to the very human rights, to the very freedom of speech and freedom of religion,” Bishop Emmanuel said. “They died to keep and preserve the human identity.” In recent weeks, the bishop has been the center of a controversy between the Australian government and Elon Musk.  The head of Australia's eSafety commission, Julia Grant, issued an order on April 16 to X demanding that the platform take down the video of the stabbing of Bishop Emmanuel that had been proliferating on the platform.  The order even prohibited users outside of the country from viewing the content. X’s Global Government Affairs Team refused to ban the content for users outside Australia, saying that the order was unnecessarily broad and outside the legal authority of the Australian government.   Musk and X’s refusal to toe the line of the Australian government has attracted the criticism of numerous Australian politicians such as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.  “By and large, people responded appropriately to the calls by the [eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant],” Albanese recently commented. “They stand, I think … I find it extraordinary that X chose not to comply and trying to argue their case.” Australian Senator Jacqui Lambie even threatened Musk with prison time for not complying. “Someone like that should be in jail, and the key be thrown away,” Lambie asserted. “That bloke should not have a right to be out there on his own ideology platform and creating hatred, you know, showing all this stuff out there to our kids and all the rest.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.   

MSNBC Hosts Praises Colleges That Surrendered To The Israel-Haters

MSNBC hosts Chris Hayes and Alex Wagner used their respective Wednesday editions of All In and Alex Wagner Tonight to attack those who called in the police to end the illegal encampments and occupations on college campuses by claiming it was they who were escalating tensions and to prove their point, they pointed to those schools that surrendered to the mob. Hayes came out of commercial break wondering what the big deal about violently breaking into a building and occupying it is, after all, actor Samuel L. Jackson was involved in a similar episode in the 60s, “Now, I tell this story for two reasons. One to remind us that college activism has long been a part of college education. The other reason, though, is to get a sense of proportion, which seems lacking today as we watched disturbing imagery emerge from campuses at Columbia, UCLA, University of Texas, University of South Florida, so many others, where cops or, in some cases, mobs took down pro-Palestinian student encampments and protests, as well as professors and journalists and just random bystanders.”     Hayes didn’t mention that the altercation counter-protestors had with the “pro-Palestinian student encampment” at UCLA came about because the campers assaulted a Jewish girl and committed other acts of violence the school did nothing about. If violence sounds escalatory, Hayes was there to say that the real escalators are those who called in the cops, “The cumulative effect of this coverage, along with unverified assertions from police and politicians, has been to drive home the idea that student protests are basically a terrorist-level threat. That they have to be neutralized by battalions of cops armed like soldiers with MRAPs and sonic cannons. The reason this seems to me, a reaction that's out of proportion to the protests themselves.” This led Hayes to praise those who surrendered to the mob, “It seems especially true when you look at other campuses like Brown University, where administrators negotiated with protesters who took down their encampment. At Wesleyan University whose president said the protesting there was non-violent and non-disruptive, adding, ‘as long as it continues in this way, the university will not attempt to clear the encampment.’” Roughly 25 minutes later, Wagner played an NYPD video that did not sit well with her, “Sort of a half-promotional video for the NYPD, half a warning shot to future protesters. There's also a soundtrack, you may have noticed, and situation room footage as officers plan the Columbia sweep like it was, I don't know, the Bin Laden raid. It is not what you might call a tool for de-escalation.”     Violently occupying a building is not de-escalation either, but Wagner continued, and unlike Hayes, she actually mentioned what Brown agreed to, “But it is worth noting that some colleges have actually managed to do just that, to de-escalate the tension on their campuses this week. Both Brown and Northwestern University reached deals with student protesters this is week with protesters leaving encampments and the colleges agreeing to hear them out and to vote on divestment issues.” Wagner didn’t mention that Northwestern agreed to also hire more Palestinian faculty, subsidize scholarships for five Palestinian students, and allow the mob and their supporters to sit on an advisory committee on university investments. Both Brown and Northwestern’s response to the lawlessness and anti-Semitism was to give the anti-Semites more power and give their Jewish students and faculty nothing. Still, for Wagner, the bad guys in this situation are anybody who objects to this madness, “This is happening across the country with lots of individual actors making separate decisions and that makes this story complicated, and that is important to remember because we have actors in our national discourse right now who are very much trying to exploit this tension for fairly obvious political gain.” In related news, Northwestern is facing multiple lawsuits for its deal with the agitators.  Here are transcripts for the May 1 shows: MSNBC All In With Chris Hayes 5/1/2024 8:42 PM ET CHRIS HAYES: In the spring of 1969, a group of students at Morehouse College, a historically black college in Atlanta, were frustrated by what they said was the school’s slow progress on civil rights and they protested and had been rebuffed, so they locked the college trustees in their office for two days and essentially held them hostage. Now, one of the trustees was Martin Luther King Sr., father of the recently slain civil rights leader. He began having chest pains and one of the students later said we let him out of there so we wouldn’t be accused of murder. That student and his classmates eventually gave up under a promise of amnesty from the college. The college reneged and he was expelled, it would be years before he was rehabilitated, decades before he became known the world over as actor Samuel L. Jackson. Now, I tell this story for two reasons. One to remind us that college activism has long been a part of college education. The other reason, though, is to get a sense of proportion, which seems lacking today as we watched disturbing imagery emerge from campuses at Columbia, UCLA, University of Texas, University of South Florida, so many others, where cops, or in some cases mobs, took down pro-Palestinian student encampments and protests, as well as professors and journalists and just random bystanders.  The cumulative effect of this coverage, along with unverified assertions from police and politicians, has been to drive home the idea that student protests are basically a terrorist-level threat.  That they have to be neutralized by battalions of cops armed like soldiers with MRAPs and sonic cannons. The reason this seems to me, a reaction that's out of proportion to the protests themselves. It seems especially true when you look at other campuses like Brown University, where administrators negotiated with protesters who took down their encampment. At Wesleyan University whose president said the protesting there was non-violent and non-disruptive, adding “as long as it continues in this way, the university will not attempt to clear the encampment.”  *** MSNBC Alex Wagner Tonight 5/1/2024 9:06 PM ET ALEX WAGNER: Sort of a half-promotional video for the NYPD, half a warning shot to future protesters. There's also a soundtrack, you may have noticed, and situation room footage as officers plan the Columbia sweep like it was, I don't know, the Bin Laden raid. It is not what you might call a tool for de-escalation. But it is worth noting that some colleges have actually managed to do just that, to de-escalate the tension on their campuses this week. Both Brown and Northwestern University reached deals with student protesters this is week with protesters leaving encampments and the colleges agreeing to hear them out and to vote on divestment issues. Whether or not that can be replicated elsewhere at this point is totally unclear. This is happening across the country with lots of individual actors making separate decisions and that makes this story complicated, and that is important to remember because we have actors in our national discourse right now who are very much trying to exploit this tension for fairly obvious political gain.

ABC Claims UCLA Mob Was ‘Largely Peaceful’ While They Gassed Police

CNN proved themselves to be biased fools in the summer of 2020 when they claimed the Black Lives Matter Riots were “fiery but mostly peaceful.” Well, ABC News told them to hold their beer Thursday morning as they had correspondent Trevor Ault assert that the anti-Semitic/pro-Hamas encampment at UCLA was “largely peaceful” with no sign of “fighting back” against police while admitting that they were throwing stuff and using fire extinguishers to gas them. The California Highway Patrol crackdown on the UCLA encampment, where they employed Nazi-style tactics against the Jews on campus, was already underway as ABC’s Good Morning America came on the air at 7:00 a.m. and was the first story they got to. Ault was live on the scene where he reported “So far, we haven't seen a lot of physical resistance other than standing their ground.” But he did admit: “If anything, we’ve seen a few demonstrators who were throwing bottles, tossing water, and you actually at some points see some smoke that we believe is from fire extinguishers.” According to Poison Control, the contents of fire extinguishers can be very harmful: People with lung conditions like asthma or someone deliberately sprayed at close range can have more serious respiratory effects and might need medical attention. Contact of these powders with the eyes, nose, throat, and skin can cause irritation, which should improve after rinsing the exposed area. Deliberate inhalation or ingestion can cause serious symptoms such as pneumonia, seizures, irregular heartbeat, and kidney failure.     Throwing things and spraying chemicals in the face of law enforcement doesn’t sound like what non-violent demonstrators do. And Ault might have had someone give him a strong talking-to about disclosing those facts because it was the last time they were mentioned all morning. In his 7:30 and 8:00-a.m. live shots, Ault dropped all mentions of the anti-Semitic mob throwing anything and using fire extinguishers. “They have said to me that their plan is never to fight back. That is not how they go about things,” Ault defended them in the 7:30 live shot. “Although, at least from what I have seen on the ground, we haven't been seeing people fight back. It's more about standing their ground.” “So, they’ve been saying they're going to be peaceful,” he reported around 8:00. “We haven't seen violent clashes but you have to anticipate at any moment law enforcement is going to begin making a lot of arrests.” Ault’s next report didn’t come until after ABC broke into The View to air President Biden’s address condemning the encampments. After the address, they went to Ault for an update on the situation at UCLA. Possibly in response to those calling him out online for his earlier ridiculous description of the peaceful violence, Ault tried to have it both ways: Now, I do want to specify from at least what we saw. This was a largely peaceful demonstration, at least in terms of the protesters not fighting back against the law enforcement presence that was there. But they also didn't necessarily give themselves up. “And what we've heard from California Highway Patrol so far is that at least 132 people have been arrested here for this unlawful gathering,” he added. The transcripts are below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America May 2, 2024 7:03:51 a.m. Eastern (…) TREVOR AULT: So far, we haven't seen a lot of physical resistance other than standing their ground. We’ve seen some of them very distressed but screaming that they don't have weapons but still not giving up their ground here. If anything, we’ve seen a few demonstrators who were throwing bottles, tossing water, and you actually at some points see some smoke that we believe is from fire extinguishers. But mainly we’re watching as these protesters are standing their ground after what has been many, many days here on campus of very intense situations that has escalated significantly just in the past 45 minutes or so. And this is probably one of the most intense clashes that we’ve seen as these campuses have been playing out all over the country. (…) 7:30:44 a.m. Eastern AULT: We have been watching over those several days as they’ve basically been preparing for this moment. You’ll notice, if you look closely, that a lot of these demonstrators have hard hats, a lot have gas masks, a lot have eye-protective wear, too. They have said to me that their plan is never to fight back. That is not how they go about things. But when I was asking them about it, it was largely about counter protesters; it could be a different thing with law enforcement involved. Although, at least from what I have seen on the ground, we haven't been seeing people fight back. It's more about standing their ground. The big question now is how does law enforcement move forward? (…) 8:02:51 a.m. Eastern AULT: Those protesters have been preparing for any kind of law enforcement tactics; they have hard hats; they have gas masks. So, they’ve been saying they're going to be peaceful. We haven't seen violent clashes but you have to anticipate at any moment law enforcement is going to begin making a lot of arrests. These are perhaps the most intense moments we’ve seen of what have been many days of tense moments at campuses across the country. (…) The View (Break in for President Biden’s address & follow-up reports) 11:13:03 AULT: Now, I do want to specify from at least what we saw. This was a largely peaceful demonstration, at least in terms of the protesters not fighting back against the law enforcement presence that was there. But they also didn't necessarily give themselves up. And so, law enforcement basically pushed them up against that library till it was one on one. They pulled them apart, put them into zip ties and took them away. And what we've heard from California Highway Patrol so far is that at least 132 people have been arrested here for this unlawful gathering. (…)

Gay Group Calls on Hollywood to Have Even MORE Gay Characters

LGBTQ characters in Hollywood TV fell more than 20 percent during the 2023-2024 season and now, the LGBTQ activist group, GLAAD, has become especially concerned that there weren't enough gay characters in movies and shows coming out of entertainment. The group issued a statement asking Hollywood to re-direct and add more gayness to shows. GLAAD tallied all the characters in shows from 2023-2024 and found that there were 468 LGBTQ characters. During the 2022-2023 season there were a total of 596 LGBTQ characters meaning that there was a roughly 21.4 percent drop from last season to the most recent one. God forbid we see less gay sex and transvestites on TV. “We know that LGBTQ stories are crucial now more than ever—it is paramount to see our lives reflected on screen, challenging the misinformation and harmful rhetoric that is running unchecked by politicians and journalists,” GLAAD CEO and president Sarah Kate Ellis said. Ellis was sure to note that integrating stories with LGBTQ characters into TV is important for young people who want to see characters that “truly reflect themselves.” While I’d argue that her intention with that statement was to get more kids to join the LGBTQ mafia, she insisted it was to help networks and streamers “grow their audience.” At the launch event for the report, Ellis GLAAD-ly proclaimed, “when all of us [LGBTQ’s] are in every show,” she’ll be satisfied about the level of representation. “We deserve to be in every story,” she said. LGBTQ people are in every family, we're in every community, we're in every school, we're in every office. We belong there. LGBTQ people deserve to be in every story. 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️ pic.twitter.com/3IAXhuy1m6 — Sarah Kate Ellis (@sarahkateellis) May 2, 2024 Even stories about a Christian family who follows biblical principles when it comes to homosexuality and gender? What about a story about Palestine? Should gay people be in those movies even though if you were gay in Palestine you’d probably end up beheadded? No, Ellis, you don’t belong in every story. Get off your high horse of entitlement. Thing is, there’s already WAY too much gay crap in shows. For example, in the show “Abbott Elementary,” a second grade teacher used nonbinary pronouns in a recent episode, ABC’s “Station 19” show promoted kids attending pride parades and called gay open relationships “ethical non-monogamy” and ABC’s “The Conners’” show had characters begging for more gay propaganda in schools. Yet for the left, that still isn’t good enough. What’s new?

Doocy, Wegmann, Gutierrez Grill Inept KJP Over Biden’s Inaction on Pro-Hamas Students

Before being shamed into speaking on-camera Thursday to the American people about the dangerous anti-Semitic hooligans who’ve thrown college campus into chaos, Wednesday’s White House press briefing was dominated by numerous reporters — including Fox’s Peter Doocy, Real Clear Politics’s Philip Wegmann, and even NBC’s Gabe Gutierrez — pressing the ever-inept Karine Jean-Pierre on why Biden hasn’t been more public in denouncing these scenes. The initial questions were rather pedestrian. After AP’s Zeke Miller asked “[w]hy haven’t we heard directly from the President”, he was followed by ABC’s Karen Travers wondering whether “anyone from the administration been in touch with...any of these universities that are seeing these protests”, CBS’s Weijia Jiang asking the same except with the NYPD, and NPR’s Mara Liasson inquiring as to how read in Biden is on the chaos. Gutierrez finally called out what had been denials from Jean-Pierre about how much Biden knows and why he’s been out of sight aside from paper statements: I wanted to follow up on a previous question that was asked. And, respectfully, you didn’t quite answer it. The question was, why hasn’t the President been more forceful in talking about the protests. You talk about how he’s talked about anti-Semitism. But specifically on the protest, why hasn’t the President been more forceful on that? Jean-Pierre grew defensive, claiming she “hear[s] the question....but...the President has been the — one — the — no other president has spoken about anti-Semitism than this President.”     Gutierrez countered that was “not the question” and Jean-Pierre hit back that she was “answering it in the way that, I believe, is the best way to” do so with binder notes about Biden’s “strategic plan to deal — to counter anti-Semitism more than 100 new actions...across the administration.” Some blah, blah, blah later, Gutierrez followed up with a fact-check (click “expand”): GUTIERREZ: You mentioned that the President has taken questions on this. Again, respectfully he — he hasn’t. He did take a question where he said he “condemns those who don’t understand what’s going on with the Palestinians.” I know you’ve been asked about that. But since you brought up Charlottesville, what do you say to those critics who say that he is trying to have it both ways that he’s essentially, you know, trying to talk about both anti-Semitism and what’s going on with the Palestinians? JEAN-PIERRE: I would say to those critics is no. He’s not doing a both sides scenario here. When you think about Charlottesville, you think about the — the — the vile anti-Semitism that we heard on the streets of Charlottesville, right here, uh, in Virginia — right — not far from here. The President and many of us wanted to make sure that was called out. Somebody died. A young woman lost her life and, when the President saw that, it put him in a situation where he believed it was the right thing to speak against that. He wrote an op ed that was in The Atlantic because — about that — about that. He decided to run because of what he saw in Charlottesville and that was just vile, nasty rhetoric. And you had — um — you know, a former President talk about both sides. There was no both sides here. None. Absolutely none. As it relates to the Palestinians, he was talking about the humanitarian — a dire humanitarian situation — that we’re currently seeing. I just mentioned the Secretary — Secretary Blinken is going to be talking about the humanitarian aid that we are trying to get into Gaza for the people of Gaza. We’re trying to get this hostage deal done so that we can get hostages home and create an environment to get humanitarian aid that would lead — also, the hostages would lead to a ceasefire. Those things are not the same. They are just not the same. Fundamentally, not the same. And it is in bad faith. It is in bad faith to say that. Incredibly, one reporter moments later wondered if President Biden’s concerned the rise of campus protests are “turning“ ”the court of public opinion...against what the President is standing for” in supporting Israel: Reporter: “These protests that have been going on college campuses, we're hearing that some of them are starting to wane a little bit, but they're not just a one day protest. This has been going on for quite some time. Is there some concern within the Biden administration that… pic.twitter.com/97C14wXBvF — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 1, 2024 USA Today’s Joey Garrison had a few questions from the left, including twice bringing to the forefront concerns about how university leaders and law enforcement have acted “harshly” in ““forcibly shut[ting] down” encampments: USA Today's @JoeyGarrison: “With that said, I mean, does the President believe New York Mayor Adams and leaders of Columbia University and — and City College of New York acted appropriately by having the protesters at those colleges — colleges arrested and their encampments… pic.twitter.com/7sJ80I5s1e — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 1, 2024 After having been ignored on Monday, she called on Doocy and, like always, he asked something no one else in the room had brought up: Some of these encampments, they had a matching tents. We’re being told that there are professional outside agitators involved. We don’t know if they’re being paid to sow chaos by domestic folks or foreign entities. Does President Biden want his administration to find out who is funding some of these protests? Our friend Nicole Silverio of the Daily Caller had it right when she tweeted the Jean-Pierre promptly “short-circuited”.     Click “expand” to read her psychobabble and Doocy’s hardball follow-up wondering if Biden’s silence served as further indication that he’s “worried about losing the youth vote” if he were to firmly denounce them: JEAN-PIERRE: What I can say — you know — um — I cannot — uh — I cannot speak to — uh — the organizations that are being reported out on the ground. That is not something for me to speak to. That is obviously something that local governments — uh — local officials — I keep saying local government — local officials are going to speak to. They’ll have better information on that. What we have said — and I don’t think I’ve iterated that yet from here is that the DOJ and FBI is going to continue to offer support to universities and colleges — uh — with — in respect to federal laws, so that is something that the DOJ and FBI is doing. As far as local organizations and what is all being reported on the ground, that is something that — I’m — that local law enforcement, I’m certainly, is looking into. DOOCY: And I understand that President Biden historically has spoken — JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. DOOCY: — very forcefully about anti-Semitism, but this week, he’s not. He’s MIA. Is he that worried about losing the youth vote with these protesters? JEAN-PIERRE: I’m going to be mindful. You’re talking about youth vote. You’re talking about 2024. DOOCY: Support of young people. JEAN-PIERRE: No, no, no, no. I — I — I — I have to say what I have to say and just give me a second.  (....) JEAN-PIERRE: I’ll speak more broadly. I can’t speak to youth people, youth and support and voters. That’s not something I can do from here. Uh, the President has taken a lot of policy actions here that he knows that young people care about and a lot of those actions are popular with those young folks, whether it’s giving a little bit of breathing room with student debt relief — so we made announcement today, matter of fact, and we are going to continue to do that, because we think it’s important as families or as an American and you coming out of college and you wanna build a family by home — uh — you have the opportunity to do that and not be crushed by student debt. The President understands how important it is to deal with that issue. Climate change — something that young people really truly care about. One of the crises that the President said he came into having to deal with was the climate change crisis. This is a President that has taken more — has taken aggressive, aggressive action to deal with climate crisis. You know, look, I can’t speak to — um — I can’t speak to youth voters or their support, but we’re going to do continue to take actions that we believe helps all Americans and all communities. Doocy had one more question: “[Y]ou mentioned what he said in 2017 after Charlottesville. He said, about Trump’s response then, ‘Charlottesville, for me, was a moment where I thought silence would be complicity.’ So how does he explain — how do you explain his silence this week?” Like with Gutierrez, Jean-Pierre stood pat and reiterated Biden “has not been silent on this issue when it comes to hate speech, anti-Semitism” but Doocy noted “he hasn’t” and his written words obviously mean nothing since “a school building at an Ivy League campus got taken over.” Jean-Pierre dithered away and ran out the clock until Wegmann came up to close the briefing.  Like Doocy, Wegmann stuck to his reputation of going against the grain. This time, he wondered what the administration made of “some of these college campuses where we’ve seen the U.S. flag torn down and the Palestinian flag replace it.” Jean-Pierre declined to comment and instead spoke more generally about how none should be able to “disturb campuses in the way of taking over buildings in the way that we have seen” and “it is a dangerous time for [the Jewish] community and we have been very clear about what we need to do to fight that hate.” The Press Secretary also refused to weigh in on Wegmann’s other question about whether Biden believes “higher education has gone off the rails that, you know, something more fundamental has gone wrong on these college campuses” given the rampant anti-Semitism among younger Americans. To see the relevant transcript from the May 1 briefing (including even more protests-related questions), click here.

Big Three Networks Ignore Hearing Exposing Biden Cabinet Member: She Did What?

After a brutal hearing exposed connections between activist groups and a Biden cabinet official, all three major networks ignored the revelations in their coverage.  During an April 30 hearing before the House Committee on Natural Resources, Capital Research Center President Scott Walter and The Daily Signal Managing Editor Tyler O’Neil hammered Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland and her department over damning allegations. According to Walter, at the center of the allegations is that Haaland’s daughter Somah Haaland is a member of the radical environmentalist group Pueblo Action Alliance (PAA) which is plagued with communist connections. Even worse, Walter asserted that Deb Haaland has other connections to the PAA and that the group influences the policies of the Department of the Interior.  Echoing Walter’s sentiments, O’Neil addressed the negative impact that Deb Haaland’s policies have on American energy, urging Congress to get to the bottom  of the “far-left infiltration of the Department of the Interior under President Biden.” Tellingly, the big three networks entirely ignored this hearing in their evening coverage on April 31 and May 1, as ABC World News Tonight, CBS Evening News and NBC Nightly News opted to cover other topics.  On April 30, NBC Nightly News had time to talk about malfunctioning iPhone alarms and fearmonger about Russians on social media. In lieu of Deb Haaland’s scandals, ABC World News Tonight brought its viewers the story of a car crashing into a store in New Mexico and a death in a bounce house. The latter story also made it into CBS Evening News coverage, alongside the news that online scammers are targeting seniors. Stop the presses!  Here’s What the Legacy Media Missed: Deb Haaland’s Damning Allegations After detailing the communist connections of the PAA, Walter brought up Deb Haaland’s daughter PAA media organizer Somah Haaland. He also ripped the Department of the Interior, saying, “It’s shocking the Interior Department not only treats Pueblo Action Alliance as a source of policy wisdom but also appears to have made official policy with bias toward the alliance and provided improper assistance to the alliance."  Walter went on to point out a case where Deb Haaland had put the concerns of such environmentalist groups first while ignoring the financial damage predicted by Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren. Walter also mentioned that “multiple meetings between the secretary and Pueblo Action Alliance officials” have taken place and excoriated Deb Haaland for promoting “PAA by having its insignia appear in public photographs beginning her first day in office.”  Moreover, Walter noted that PAA had posted these photographs on social media, later adding, “Activists have promoted Secretary Haaland’s involvement in a film produced by the director of PAA, which demands that oil, gas and mineral leasing outside of the Chaco National Historical Park be ended, a question on which the Secretary officially ruled in favor of PAA’s demand.”  A ‘Sue and Settle’ Plot?  When Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) mentioned a case of close cooperation between the Department of the Interior and leftist activists, O’Neil unearthed a disturbing pattern of collaboration.  “What we’ve seen over and over again, in this case in particular as well, this ‘sue and settle’ strategy, where an activist group that shares the broad policy preferences of the administration, sues an administrative agency for a change in the law, claiming that there’s a legal requirement,” O’Neil told Gosar.  “And then what the agency winds up doing is settling that lawsuit, agreeing to implement the legal requirement.” O’Neil alleged that the agency repeatedly used this duck process and transparency requirements.  Earlier in the hearing, O’Neil noted that the leftist Sierra Club successfully lobbied for a policy resulting in the “smallest number of oil and gas lease sales in the Gulf in history.” He explained efforts by the leftist grant-making behemoth Arabella Advisors and the Soros-funded Tides Foundation to pour vast amounts of dark money into environmentalist groups.  To sum up the situation at the Department of Interior, O’Neil explained that “the left's dark money network is propping up radical environmentalist groups that help steer policy at Interior.” Disturbingly, the leftist media couldn’t have cared any less.  [WATCH MORE: Rep. Mike Collins Goes After Department of the Interior for Energy Policies That Benefit America’s Adversaries] Conservatives are under attack. Contact ABC News 818-460-7477, CBS News 212-975-3247 and NBC News 212-664-6192 and demand they report on Secretary Haaland’s scandalous behavior. 

Scarborough Rips MSM For Mocking MAGA As Rednecks -- But Did the Same Himself

With all the focus on Joe Biden's decline in mental acuity, have we overlooked the possibility that his phone buddy Joe Scarborough is also suffering some short-term memory loss? The question arises in light of this comment Scarborough--now in his seventh decade--made on today's Morning Joe. "You know, Jen [Palmieri], there is a stereotype of the Trump voter that the media does. Oh, people are stumbling drunk out of their trailer park and, you know, shooting raccoons or something like that. No, it's bankers. It's lawyers. It's people with advanced degrees." So Scarborough rips the MSM for stereotyping MAGA as people "stumbling drunk out of their trailer park, shooting raccoons?" Really, Joe? This from the man we recently caught mocking Jim Comer, the Republican chairman of the House Investigations Committee as saying in a stereotypical southern accent, apropos of his committee's investigation of Hunter Biden: "We ain't got nuthin' but a squirrel fryer and a hound dog. " Scarborough, who claimed: "Comer and his gang are running for the hills. In their coon hats, holding a squirrel fryer in their left hand and a shotgun in the right!" The same Scarborough who we caught putting on a heavy Southern accent to mock Speaker Mike Johnson's belief in the Bible. In reality, as Scarborough surely knows, Johnson sounds more like a newsreader from Nebraska than anything resembling the typical native of his Shreveport, Louisiana home town. More recently, we noted Scarborough indulging a negative stereotype of Southerners, describing legislators who had adopted a pro-life law as "old, fat, white men in Mississippi." So yeah, Joe. The media really does mischaracterize Trump voters and the people they elect -- just have a look in the mirror. Note: Instead of rednecks, Scarborough blamed "billionaires" for making the election of Trump possible, and he said they're "not understanding that this is not just a threat to democracy, but this is a threat to capitalism." At least Joe didn't point the finger at the Rothschilds. And a nervous Scarborough noted Trump "way ahead" in a number of swing-state polls.  Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 5/2/24 6:13 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: You know, Jen, there, there's a stereotype of the Trump voter that the media does. Oh, it's, people are stumbling drunk out of their trailer park and, you know, shooting raccoons, or something like that. No! It's bankers. It's lawyers. It's people with advanced degrees. This is something Anne Applebaum brought out so masterfully in her book, The Twilight of Democracy. Which is, it's, it's, the elites make this possible.  Think about all the billionaires that said, Oh, I'll never vote for Trump. Now, it's like, yeah, I'll vote for Donald Trump. They know this. They read this. They read that Donald Trump says that there's going to be mass deportation. He's going to force prosecutors to arrest political enemies. He's going to execute generals that don't follow his commands. He's able to use SEAL Team Six to execute political opponents. And he says, you can't arrest me for that.  You can go down the list. He's going to be a dictator from day one. He's going to terminate the Constitution. On and on, they've heard all of this. They heard what he said to Time magazine a couple of days ago. It is a dark, autocratic vision of America. And these people, these educated people with advanced degrees, are the ones saying, yeah, I'll support Donald Trump again. Thinking, oh, you know what? Maybe my investments will go, or maybe he won't tax me 3%. Not understanding that this is not just a threat to democracy, but this is a threat to capitalism. JEN PALMIERI: Right. Well, I mean, that's the thing that makes me think maybe they will reconsider if they continue to hear him -- DONNY DEUTSCH: No. They don't get that. PALMIERI: They don't, they don't, they will not make that connection? DEUTSCH: What Joe just said: they don't get how it could affect them negatively. PALMIERI: They don't think that that's going to affect affect business? But there are the 20% of people in Republican primaries who still are not voting for him. And there's the people that say that they were worried about Jan 6th. There's people that, you know, the Republicans Against Trump, those videos about people who voted for him twice but, because of January 6th, won't do it a third time. And, you know, keep doing these interviews, keep saying this, it's like, Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. SCARBOROUGH: You look at the polls, though. PALMIERI: I know, I know. SCARBOROUGH: I mean, a lot of swing-state polls, if you're talking about Nevada, if you're talking about Georgia, if you're talking about North Carolina, they're not even close. Trump way ahead.

PBS's Favorite 'Republican' Claims the GOP Now Is an 'Autocratic Movement'

Former Mitt Romney strategist Stuart Stevens is senior adviser of the Lincoln Project, a never-Trump “Republican” outfit whose pathetic anti-GOP stunts and scandals have discredited it everywhere but in the mainstream media, where it remains a reliable source for smears of the modern-day Republican party as fascistic. Stuart took his familiar act to Tuesday’s edition of Amanpour & Co., which airs on PBS. Host Christiane Amanpour used Steven’s spicy quote in her show opener: Stuart Stevens: Now, it's been a lot of sleepless nights trying to come to grips with it, but the Republican Party now is an autocratic movement. (Stevens is a popular “Republican” in PBS-land. In October 2023 he pumped his then-new book The Conspiracy to End America on the PBS NewsHour comparing his old party to Nazis.) Stevens was interviewed by co-host Walter Isaacson, who identified Stewart as “part of the anti-Trump movement in the Republican Party.” What? He's a former Republican. Isaacson asked him if Trump being on trial would hurt or help his presidential campaign. Stevens had to admit the optics of Trump on trial could work in the candidate’s favor: "It's the grievance campaign. I am your retribution. The deep state is out to get us. What better proof that the deep state is out to get us than the deep state has me on trial.” Prompted by Isaacson, Stevens alleged Trump supported Russian dictator Vladimir Putin before getting to the money quote. Stevens: “And I've spent a lot of sleepless nights trying to come to grips with it, but the Republican Party now is an autocratic movement. And I think what you see in front of the Supreme Court, where they're actually trying to make the case that a president is above the law, it's just further proof that. It's why they -- the conservative movement is in love with Viktor Orban and Vladimir Putin.” Isaacson quoted from Stevens saying the Biden team has to be amazed at "how is this guy still in the race?" Stevens painted the GOP as racist. Stevens: You know, a lot of this ultimately has to do with race, Walter. We're a country that's headed to becoming a minority-majority country. If you're 16 years and under in America, you -- the majority are nonwhite. Trump's base is 85 percent white. And it's that reality that drives so much of the Republican Party's efforts to change election laws and to sort of curate the election.” Prodded by Isaacson, Stevens got more and more worked up, and, yes "alarmist." Stevens: ….it's difficult to talk about this without sounding alarmist, and language is one of the issues that, you know, we struggle with. But I think if Donald Trump wins this election, it will be the last election that we can recognize as a normal American election. I know these people. As bad as you think they are, they are worse. They want a different America, and they're open about it when you really listen to them, and that's why they embrace Russia so much. They look at Russia, and they say, OK. Russia, no nonwhite people in power. Putin says there's no gays in Russia. There's no women in power. Elections are performative, but not decisive. That looks pretty good. And they embrace that…. Excepting a question about anti-Trumpers, including Sen. Liz Cheney, journalist Isaacson just facilitated Stevens and his long, broad smear of one of America’s two main political parties. A transcript is available, click “Expand.” Amanpour & Co. 5/1/24 2:03:04 a.m. (ET) CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, HOST, AMANPOUR AND CO.: Stuart Stevens, a former Republican strategist, admits that he's still coming to grips today's GOP and its embrace of a man facing 91 criminal charges, and the grand old party's creeping authoritarian character, as he explains with Walter Isaacson. WALTER ISAACSON, CO-HOST, AMANPOUR AND CO.: Thank you, Christiane. And, Stuart Stevens, welcome back to the show. STUART STEVENS, SENIOR ADVISER, THE LINCOLN PROJECT AND AUTHOR, "IT WAS ALL A LIE": Great to see you, Walter. Thanks. ISAACSON: You've been a Republican strategist most of your life, worked for George Bush, Mitt Romney, and then have been part of the anti-Trump movement in the Republican Party. Now, you're watching him on trial. In some ways, he's running on the notion of grievance and persecution. Does this trial help him or hurt him? STEVENS: Well, you know, I mean, I think that the sort of headline on this is that Trump is still a viable candidate and he's on trial. That in itself is extraordinary. Look, I think if you're one of the smart people running the Trump campaign, and they do have smart professionals now, this isn't what your ideal scenario would have been. But at the same time, it's not disqualifying for Trump, which it would be for any other candidate I can think of. And what -- the essence of that is that Trump's campaign, particularly in this cycle, is based on being a victim. It's the grievance campaign. I am your retribution. The deep state is out to get us. What better proof that the deep state is out to get us than the deep state has me on trial. ISAACSON: And you say these are really smart people running the campaign. Are they going to use this to help this politics of grievance? STEVENS: Yes, they're going to use it to try to eat as a proof point. You know, if you have -- you have to get inside their heads, Walter, the whole Trump thing. So, in their world, Trump won the presidency, the White House has been stolen. And the only way that they can stop Trump, who was the legally elected president, they say, from winning again is to put them in jail. So, this is just that process of the deep state trying to take away from you, the voter, your right to choose your president, and they would say, restore democracy. It's sort of like the aliens built the pyramids. Once you understand that, everything else makes a lot of sense. You know, the problem is aliens didn't build the pyramids. But that's how they see the world and this fits into that worldview. ISAACSON: If Trump were not on trial, if there had not been all of these indictments, would he be in a stronger or a weaker position? STEVENS: I think that the indictments helped him in the primary because it then became necessary to support Trump in the primary to prove that what the Democrats were saying and they put in the same Democrats in the deep state are exactly the same. I don't think it is going to help him in the general election. I think that there's something that is going to be disconcerting and wearing the people to see a potential president of the United States, a former president of the United States on trial in multiple jurisdictions. ISAACSON: But wait, haven't people been saying this for a year or two that eventually wear down? STEVENS: Yes. Yes. But the audience has been -- the audience that has been voting has been that primary audience. And it was fascinating to see the split in the primary electorate that pretty much the threshold belief that if you voted for Trump, you believe that he won the presidency last time. Very few of Nikki Haley's voters believe that. The majority of the country doesn't believe that. So, I just think that -- you know, I've compared the Trump candidacy to somebody walking around with a paper bag full of water. I don't think it's going to leak, but I think there's a very good chance it's going to go -- and when it goes, it's going to be very hard to put the water back in the bag.   ISAACSON: Were you surprised that the Republican Party, not just a hardcore base, but a majority of people in the primaries, rallied around him that way?   STEVENS: Oh, Walter, you know, I had a going out of business sale with any optimism in the Republican Party. I think that we've seen a complete collapse of any moral authority of the party. And the people to blame are not Donald Trump. Donald Trump is just being Donald Trump. It's all of the people that you and I know, and I helped elect a lot of them, who before Trump, they wouldn't have had lunch with Trump. They wouldn't let Trump in their house. They know that he's destructive to democracy. They know he's not a conservative. They know that Putin helped elect him. And yet, they still support him. ISAACSON: Why is that? STEVENS: That is a profound question. And I asked myself that. And that led me to write this book, "It Was All a Lie." And what -- the only conclusion I come to that makes any sense to me, and I think it makes any sense at all, is that all of these things that we espoused as deep values, Walter, that the party held, character counts, strong on Soviet Union, strong on Russia, the deficit matters, all of these things, we said were values were in fact just marketing slogans. So, OK, that's not the case then. So, character really doesn't count. Sure, we'll support the candidate who supports Vladimir Putin in, you know, the largest war in Europe since World War II. I don't know how else to come to a conclusion because people don't abandon deeply held beliefs in a couple of years. And the party has just walked away from these.   You know, the Republican Party now doesn't really exist as a normal American political party in any kind of tradition. It exists to defeat Democrats. And, you know, that's how cartels operate. Nobody asks OPEC, what is your higher purpose? You sell oil. And, you know, it's not like a fun thing to admit. And I've spent a lot of sleepless nights trying to come to grips with it, but the Republican Party now is an autocratic movement. And I think what you see in front of the Supreme Court, where they're actually trying to make the case that a president is above the law, it's just further proof that. It's why they -- the conservative movement is in love with Viktor Orban and Vladimir Putin. ISAACSON: There's a group of people in the Republican Party who have, of course, pushed back Liz Cheney, most prominent among them, even Senator Mitt Romney, Former Vice President Mike Pence. Do you see the possibility that more and more Republicans like that will come forward between now and the election? STEVENS: I don't think there's many Republicans like them. I think if Trump is convicted it might make a difference with some. You know what – I think it's very interesting to look at, say, Chris Christie, who was a former client of mine. Loved the guy. Could not believe he endorsed Donald Trump in 2016. I remember standing at Atlanta Airport and seeing, you know, CNN and literally tears came to my eyes. It was like, how is this person that I love doing this. And I think he would say it was a mistake now, which is good. What he's going out there and saying now is what should have been said. But when you listen to Chris Christie, how do you come to any other conclusion but you have to support Joe Biden? Same with Asa Hutchinson, who ran in the Republican primary, former governor of Arkansas, another former client of mine, a really good and decent human being, and you may not agree with his politics. He has to support. Liz Cheney has to support Biden. Mitt Romney will support Biden. I think --   ISAACSON: Well, you think or he should -- STEVENS: I think they will. I think those two definitely will. ISAACSON: Do you think that Biden -- and Biden hadn't called them yet? Do you think Biden should reach out to all of them and create a Republicans for Biden committee? STEVENS: Sure. When the time is right. You know, if a prominent Republican came to me and said, I want to endorse Joe Biden, my advice, as wearing my political consultant hat, would be, that's great. I would wait. Because if you do it now, it's not going to mean as much as if you do it, say, during the Democratic Convention. And timing is pretty much everything in politics. So, I hope this will happen. If Trump is convicted, it may make that entry ramp a little smoother. But really, you don't need a conviction in any of these trials to know that Donald Trump should not be president. So, you know, it's just -- I mean, think about it, Walter, the Republican Party doesn't have room for a Cheney? Really? A Cheney? What do you do with that? And there is no Republican Party to go back to. And people just have to come to grips with that. There's a kind of false hope that somehow we can just look beyond Trump, and McConnell expressed a lot of this, and a lot of these sort of gentry Republicans have held their nose and say, well, you know, we're just going to be able to put Trump behind us. No, no. The party -- there is a need for a center right conservative party in America. That cannot be the Republican Party as it's currently construed.   ISAACSON: So, wait. What happens if there's a need for a center right party and the Republican Party has abandoned that? What do you see down the road?   STEVENS: I think 2032 is the best hope that you could have a sane center right party that will emerge. You know, pain is the best teacher in politics. Arguably, maybe the only teacher. And what needs to happen is Republicans need to lose, and they need to lose again and again. And then, out of some sense of survival, you could see a sane party emerging. You know, a lot of this ultimately has to do with race, Walter. We're a country that's headed to becoming a minority majority country. If you're 16 years and under in America, you -- the majority are nonwhite. Trump's base is 85 percent white. And it's that reality that drives so much of the Republican Party's efforts to change election laws and to sort of curate the election. ISAACSON: You talk about the politics of grievance and of anti-corporate, anti-state feelings. How does Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fit into this equation? STEVENS: It's a great question. I think it comes down to who RFK. Jr. is. If come October, and RFK Jr. is defined as a crusading environmentalist lawyer that took on big corporations, that guy's going to hurt Joe Biden. If RFK Jr. is defined as this wacky conspiracy nut who has said that there is no safe vaccine, which means he's basically the, you know, anti-polio vaccine candidate who believes -- has expressed these conspiracies about the CIA killing his father and how, you know, Prozac leads to school shootings, I think that guy will probably hurt Trump more. But, you know, if it was up to me, I would rather just have a straight race with no third-party candidates. It's a cleaner race. You have to make it a choice between Trump and Biden. And there are voters out there who don't like Trump, who are uncomfortable with Biden. If you give them any sort of socially accepted off ramp, my fear is that they'll take them. That was a great fallacy of a No Labels candidate. And all the candidates they talked about definitely would have just helped elect Donald Trump, which maybe is one of the reasons that ultimately, they didn't go forward. But, you know, in The Lincoln Project, we're out there defining Robert Kennedy for what he is, a conspiracy nut who's anti-vaxxer. I think that's what needs to be done. And I hope that's who he is in October. ISAACSON: The last few lines of your op-ed, let me quote them to you. You say, we should not normalize how extraordinary it is that Mr. Trump is still a viable candidate for president. The Biden campaign will watch the spectacle unfold asking, how is this guy still in the race? So, let me ask you, how is this guy still in the race? STEVENS: It goes, I think, to a fundamental hollowness that existed within the Republican Party that Trump brought to light. ISAACSON: But also, the American electorate? STEVENS: Well, you look at among Democrats, Trump is, you know, not getting a lot of support. But yes, you would have to say he is appealing to a dark side of America. And we've had other candidates who did that. George Wallace did it. We just didn't have him nominated by a major political party. The Democratic Party rejected George Wallace. The Republican Party embraced it. You know, I think that there has been, by the establishment of the Republican Party embracing Trump, it has given a permission structure for people who are troubled by a lot of Trump to say, well, he couldn't -- he must not be that bad. I think he's a little weird and all this, but, hey, my governor -- I know my governor better. My Senator, they're normal humans. They support Trump. And that is the failure of the party not to stand up to Trump. But look, if you're going to ask me if Donald Trump wins his next race, does it say something that's very, very troubling about the future of democracy? My answer overwhelmingly is yes. You know, it's difficult to talk about this without sounding alarmist, and language is one of the issues that, you know, we struggle with. But I think if Donald Trump wins this election, it will be the last election that we can recognize as a normal American election. I know these people. As bad as you think they are, they are worse. They want a different America, and they're open about it when you really listen to them, and that's why they embrace Russia so much. They look at Russia, and they say, OK. Russia, no nonwhite people in power. Putin says there's no gays in Russia. There's no women in power. Elections are performative, but not decisive. That looks pretty good. And they embrace that. So, the idea, you know, America is rapidly changing, non-college educated white voters have the largest declining demographic in the country, and they find it unsettling and troubling and they would like to stop that. And they will -- they are about the business of trying to change elections so that they reduce the power of those who see a different America. And that's -- the Electoral College facilitates that. Biden won by 7 million votes, but it's 45,000 votes to change hands in just exactly the right places Trump would still win. So, I think it's a race about the future of America. I think the cliche this is the most important race of our lifetime has never been more true. ISAACSON: Stuart Stevens, thank you so much for joining us again. STEVENS: Thank you, Walter. AMANPOUR: So, that was two Republicans, two former Republicans, talking about their party today.

Guess Which Outlet Internet Traffic Cop NewsGuard Is Applauding OpenAI for Partnering With

You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours seems to be NewsGuard’s attitude toward OpenAI. Gordon Crovitz, the Co-editor and chief of so-called media ratings firm NewsGuard, wrote an article praising OpenAI artificial intelligence ChatGPT’s use of “Trustworthy Journalism” in its answers. But trustworthy according to whom? Well, NewsGuard’s biased ratings system, of course. This comes just two and a half months after ChatGPT refused to answer which news sources are the worst and instead directed MRC Free Speech America researchers to look to NewsGuard ratings for answers.  “Trusting legacy media to train AI is just about as ridiculous as chickens trusting a fox to guard the hen house,” said Michael Morris, Director of MRC Free Speech America. “But that’s exactly what NewsGuard is asking users to do here, and that can only lead to one thing: a really bad day for the chickens.” In his recent article, Crovitz applauded OpenAI for its recent licensing agreement with The Financial Times (FT), which just so happens to have a 100/100 NewsGuard rating.  “The AI models are ‘trained’ on whatever they can find on the internet, so when people ask the chatbots about topics in the news, their responses are based on the news sources the models are able to access,” Crovitz wrote. “OpenAI just announced that the Financial Times is the latest news publisher to get a licensing agreement, which means that its ChatGPT will be able to use the highly regarded London-based source of financial and business news in its training data.”  FT has repeatedly shown its bias over the years including when in 2018 it made leftist billionaire George Soros its “person of the year.” The outlet has also propped up President Joe Biden when his bad economic policies predictably led to bad economic outcomes. “Unemployment rate in US falls unexpectedly to 13.3%,”  FT wrote in a headline. The Financial Times editor and columnist Edward Luce also parroted claims of the Russian collusion hoax when he was interviewed on MSNBC’s Morning Joe.  The AI platform is also reportedly negotiating similar licensing agreements with CNN  and Politico –which NewsGuard gave ratings of 80 and 100 respectively– along with News Corp. which owns a conglomeration of outlets, according to Bloomberg News.   Crovitz is also in no position to label what news is “trustworthy” as his own ratings firm has repeatedly shown bias and relaxed standards toward leftist media outlets while giving right-leaning media outlets low scores.  MRC Free Speech America has repeatedly shown that NewsGuard’s ratings system favors leftist media outlets. Using a media bias chart provided by AllSides in January 2023, the MRC exposed NewsGuard for giving a high average score of 91/100 to media on the “left” while slapping “a low average score of 66/100 to media on the “right”. This mirrored MRC’s previous studies which found very similar results. NewsGuard showed its true colors when The New York Times, TIME, Politico and Reuters each falsely reported that Israel was responsible for an airstrike on Al-Ahli hospital in Gaza. Those who did not just take Hamas’s health ministry at its word soon learned via U.S. intelligence assessment that the explosion was caused by a “failed rocket launch by militant terrorists,” as Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner (D-VA) put it. Despite the very public flub, Time, Politico and Reuters each continue to have a perfect 100/100 rating from NewsGuard. While NewsGuard docked The Times’s score in February and mentioned the Gaza hospital fake news that the leftist rag published, the ratings firm notably did not reduce the score due to its criteria that media outlets not “repeatedly publish false or egregiously misleading content.” Instead, NewsGuard lowered the media outlet’s score because The Times no longer “Handles the difference between news and opinion responsibly.” NewsGuard gave USA Today a perfect score, which did not even change after the outlet admitted to publishing 23 fabricated stories in 2022. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the CensorTrack contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Colbert Suggests Feds Will Monitor Women Under Trump, Attacks Him on Israel

CBS’s Stephen Colbert reacted to Donald Trump’s interviews with Time and Fox News on Wednesday’s edition of The Late Show by attacking him on issues ranging from abortion to Israel. Colbert noted that in the Time interview, “Trump tried to dodge any question at all about abortion by claiming he would leave it up to the states, but said he's fine with states monitoring pregnant women, so they don't get abortions.”     It would be more accurate to say Trump took a position of complete federal non-interference, “It’s irrelevant whether I’m comfortable or not. It’s totally irrelevant, because the states are going to make those decisions.” Regardless, Colbert raised the prospect of the invention of the menstrual cycle police, "Well, then why stop at pregnancy? Why not monitor women for their entire cycle? ‘Open up! Open up! It's the feds! It's gonna be a light day!’” Colbert followed up with a juvenile digression, “Not sure how I was holding that bullhorn, I’m not sure why I was talking into a hoagie. Light butt play. Light butt play. What do you think of that, Ed? Ed, what are you think about, what about you, Ed? You ever have light butt play? What about you, Doc?” Moving on, Colbert reported, “Trump also assured the nation that he's going to be way better at staffing this time around, saying, [TRUMP IMPRESSION] ‘The advantage I have now is I know everybody. I know people. I know the good, the bad, the stupid, the smart.’"  Reverting back to his normal voice, Colbert continued, to great amounts of applause, “You can just say ‘good’ and ‘smart,’ we already know you're pretty tight with the bad and the stupid. They're your sons.” Colbert also recalled that “yesterday, he also called into Fox News and weighed in on the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.” In the clip of Hannity, Trump explained that “We have to let Israel complete their war on terror. It's a horrible thing, but they have to do it and they have to do it fast.” There are some things that are unpleasant or miserable, but have to be done. The sooner you get it over with, the sooner the misery ends, but Colbert played dumb, “Yes, horrible things are only horrible if they aren't done really fast. ‘Kids, I am leaving you and your mom for my college intern, but it's okay 'cause I'm leaving in a jetpack. Pshhhh.’" While Colbert devoted portions of his Wednesday monologue to taking apart Trump’s platform, do not expect him to do the same when he takes his show on the road to Chicago and the DNC in a few months. Here is a transcript for the May 1 show: CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert 5/1/2024 11:45 PM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: Trump tried to dodge any question at all about abortion by claiming he would leave it up to the states, but said he's fine with states monitoring pregnant women, so they don't get abortions. Well then why stop at pregnancy? Why not monitor women for their entire cycle? "Open up! Open up! It's the feds! It's gonna be a light day!"  Not sure how I was holding that bullhorn, I’m not sure why I was talking into a hoagie. Light butt play. Light butt play. What do you think of that, Ed? Ed, what are you think about, what about you, Ed? You ever have light butt play? What about you, Doc?  Trump also assured the nation that he's going to be way better at staffing this time around, saying, [TRUMP IMPRESSION] "The advantage I have now is I know everybody. I know people. I know the good, the bad, the stupid, the smart." [NORMAL VOICE] You can just say "good" and "smart," we already know you're pretty tight with the bad and the stupid. They're your sons.  Now, yesterday, he also called into Fox News and weighed in on the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. DONALD TRUMP: We have to let Israel complete their war on terror. It's a horrible thing, but they have to do it and they have to do it fast. COLBERT: Yes, horrible things are only horrible if they aren't done really fast. "Kids, I am leaving you and your mom for my college intern, but it's okay 'cause I'm leaving in a jetpack. Pshhhh."

PROPAGANDA: CBS Airs Gazan Kids Thanking U.S. Campus Protester-Vandals

Tonight’s CBS Evening News dispatch from Gaza included a pretty blatant piece of propaganda: a group of children thanking American campus protesters for their “protests and solidarity”.  Watch as correspondent Ramy Inocencio introduces this moment of thanks to American pro-Hamas useful idiots and other leftists demanding that the universities accommodate their BDS demands. RAMY INOCENCIO: And for the first time, aid started flowing through a reopened border crossing destroyed on October 7th. As Gazans rallied to thank U.S. university students for their protests and solidarity.  The report was otherwise your normalish dispatch from Gaza. A mention of the tension between the Biden and Netanyahu administrations, respectively, over a potential Blinken-brokered ceasefire, allowing for prisoner exchanges. There’s Blinken fretting over a potential IDF invasion of Rafah, and Bibi saying he’s doing it no matter what. Petty standard stuff. There was also the quick interview of a hostage family wherein they firmly demanded something be done in furtherance of the incarceration of hostages. Again, pretty standard stuff. Standard stuff until the kids with signs get trotted out, with their entirely organic artwork and proper university logos. Totally spontaneous, I’m sure. Notice the children bring guided by their "adults" Seriously, who at CBS thought it was a good idea to air pro-Hamas and pro-student rioter propaganda? It is very brief but serves its purpose. Ultimately, the net effect of this video will be to embolden pro-Hamas protesters in the U.S. to ratchet up their efforts. An otherwise unremarkable report on the state of affairs in Gaza was made remarkable by the willful broadcasting of pro-Hamas propaganda. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on the CBS Evening News on Wednesday, May 1st, 2024: JAMES BROWN: Secretary of State Antony Blinken was back in Israel today for the seventh time since the war with Hamas began last October. Blinken is pushing hard for a stop to the fighting, but CBS's Ramy Inocencio reports from Tel Aviv, progress on a deal seems out of reach. RAMY INOCENCIO: Handshakes and smiles aside, in the quest for a cease-fire with Hamas, secretary of state Antony Blinken shot down Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's plan for a final Gaza invasion. ANTONY BLINKEN: We cannot, will not support a major military operation in Rafah, absent an effective plan to make sure that civilians are not harmed. INOCENCIO: But a Netanyahu advisor confirms to CBS News the prime minister is not backing down from his plan to attack Rafah. A more receptive welcome came from families of hostages pleading for a cease-fire to get all hostages home. AVIVA SIEGEL: I feel like I'm broken up into pieces. INOCENCIO: For Aviva Siegel, her American husband, Keith, is one of them. This proof of life video released just days ago. SIEGEL: And I know that Keith has had enough. Our family has had enough. Our country’s had enough. INOCENCIO: Aviva herself was a hostage released after 51 days. She, her daughter,and families of other American hostages had a face-to-face with Blinken. What was the feeling? DAUGHTER: Really grateful for what the United States has been doing since October 7th. INOCENCIO: Another sticking point to a cease-fire, aid to Gaza. The U.N. warns of impending famine. Blinken toured routes being ramped up and being built into the Strip, and for more. BLINKEN: It needs to be accelerated, it needs to be sustained. INOCENCIO: And for the first time, aid started flowing through a reopened border crossing destroyed on October 7th. As Gazans rallied to thank U.S. university students for their protests and solidarity.  And Antony Blinken left the region a few hours ago back to Washington. Israel hasn't confirmed it’ll send a delegation to any cease-fire talks. Hamas still hasn’t replied to Israel’s proposal. JB. BROWN: Thank you, Ramy.  

NBC News Is Only Network To Report On Suspected ISIS Border Crosser

The catastrophe along the U.S. southern border has all but disappeared from the corporate network evening news. A recent NBC News story demonstrates why networks must still report on the border, notwithstanding that issue driving President Joe Biden’s unfavorable numbers. Watch as NBC News correspondent Julia Ainsley describes a shocking scenario wherein an Uzbek crossed the border illegally in 2022, was released into the United States only to struggle to find him once it was known that he was a potential member of ISIS: JULIA AINSLEY: Tonight, among the record wave of migrants crossing the southern border, a suspected ISIS member who lived freely in the U.S. for nearly two years, two U.S. officials tell NBC News. 33-year-old Jovokhir Attoev of Uzbekistan crossed into Arizona in February 2022, where he was apprehended and vetted by both Customs and Border Protection and I.C.E. He was not on the U.S. terror watchlist and he was released into the U.S., those sources tell us. Then, in May 2023, Uzbekistan put out an international alert saying that Attoev was affiliated with ISIS and wanted there. But it took nearly a year for U.S. officials to figure out the suspected ISIS member was living freely here in the U.S. It is inconceivable that it would take the government almost a year to find a man suspected of being an actual terrorist. Compare that to the dispatch with which the government is able to locate random school board protesters, pro-life activists, or random grandmas walking the Capitol grounds on January 6th, and you begin to sense a real disconnect.  The report leaves viewers with some uncomfortable questions: how many more suspected ISIS terrorists have crossed, unvetted, into the United States? Of those, how many are known to the government and what is being done in order to be able to track them down? There is no answer for that, which is not good given the Biden administration’s proposal to bring Gaza refugees into the United States.  It is shocking that such a report would even make it to air, given the media’s propensity to cover for the administration’s failures. To their credit, NBC News reported an uncomfortable story- which is more than can be said for their competitors. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on NBC Nightly News on Wednesday, May 1st, 2024: LESTER HOLT: We're back with our NBC News report on the terror concerns at the U.S. border. We've learned a suspected ISIS member not only crossed into the U.S. illegally, he was also living here for quite some time before anyone realized it. Here's Julia Ainsley. JULIA AINSLEY: Tonight, among the record wave of migrants crossing the southern border, a suspected ISIS member who lived freely in the U.S. for nearly two years, two U.S. officials tell NBC News. 33-year-old Jovokhir Attoev of Uzbekistan crossed into Arizona in February 2022, where he was apprehended and vetted by both Customs and Border Protection and I.C.E. He was not on the U.S. terror watchlist and he was released into the U.S., those sources tell us. Then, in May 2023, Uzbekistan put out an international alert saying that Attoev was affiliated with ISIS and wanted there. But it took nearly a year for U.S. officials to figure out the suspected ISIS member was living freely here in the U.S.  U.S. Officials tell us DHS made the alarming discovery after reviewing Attoev’s application for asylum. Shortly after DHS connected the dots, ICE arrested him here, in Baltimore, just two weeks ago. Former Homeland Security officials tell us his case raises red flags about the vetting process for migrants after they cross the border. Should alarm bells be going off here? ELIZABETH NEUMANN: We are in the midst of a really volatile threat environment. Any time I see a gap in a system like we are seeing in this case, I do have concerns. Any time you have just a massive volume of people like we do, our systems are overwhelmed and we need more resources at the southern border to properly protect the homeland. AINSLEY: And it follows our exclusive report last month that a migrant U.S. officials say was affiliated with an Afghan terror group crossed the border and was released into the U.S. because agents lacked information to connect him to the terror watchlist. That man, Mohamed Harwin was arrested hours after our report aired. The FBI director recently alerted Congress, the agencies investigating whether ISIS has a hand in smuggling migrants across the southern border. CHRISTOPHER WRAY: There is a particular network that has -- where some of the overseas facilitators of the smuggling network have ISIS ties that we're very concerned about. AINSLEY: Two U.S. officials tell NBC News DHS has not yet concluded that Attoev is part of ISIS, but they are questioning him in detention. A DHS spokesperson tells us he remains in U.S. custody and there is no threat to public safety. Lester. HOLT: Ok. Julia. Thank you.  

NewsBusters Podcast: The Lingo Games with 'Pro-Palestinian Protesters'

One of the ways you can always sense media bias is the terminology that the media elite decides to adopt en masse. Colleges are being occupied by "pro-Palestinian protesters," and you can't (accurately) call them "anti-Israel," not to mention "pro-Hamas." Liberals paint other liberals as pro-everything good, and the conservatives are anti-everything good. Anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-government, anti-tax. All of this is messaging, like advertising slogans. This tendency is especially transparent on the "culture war" issues. Killing a baby is "abortion care." Seeking an amputation is "gender-affirming care." Florida adopting a six-week abortion ban is portrayed as very "restrictive." The media will use the word "protections" for whatever policies they support, like Democrats passing "protections for gender-affirming care." They'll call liberalized abortion law "protections," when the baby is clearly not protected.  Reporters casually pass along that leftists call trans surgeries "life-saving." They'll even call abortions "life-saving." On the PBS NewsHour, they filed a story that used the term "gender-affirming care" ten times, and nowhere in the report did anyone take exception to that term or anything else the transgender lobby is seeking to accomplish. It wasn't surprising, given the expert in the segment was NPR health reporter Selena Simmons-Duffin, who has filed one-sided stories in favor of abortion and the abortion lobby. Ex-NPR senior editor Uri Berliner appeared with Chris Cuomo on NewsNation and insisted “I think that really, NPR has a lot of soul searching to do about representing the country at large. Being a publicly funded news organization and really trying to represent this country in all its great diversity and viewpoints.” Berliner is no longer at NPR because almost no one in public radio believes that the taxpayer subsidies should encourage NPR to be fair and balanced. No one at NPR wants that, or if they do, they'll be sidelined like Berliner. Enjoy the podcast below, or wherever you listen to podcasts. 

Ex-NPR Editor: NPR Needs Some 'Soul-Searching' About Serving All Americans

Ex-NPR senior editor Uri Berliner appeared again on Chris Cuomo's NewsNation show on Tuesday night. “I think that really, NPR has a lot of soul searching to do about representing the country at large. Being a publicly funded news organization and really trying to represent this country in all its great diversity and viewpoints.” It should seem obvious that NPR is impervious to "soul searching" since they didn't want Berliner to work there any more after he raised his questions about viewpoint diversity. Cuomo asked about morning host Steve Inskeep and then other people at NPR saying Berliner "cherry-picked" his stories and got it wrong. "Do you think in retrospect that you should have done anything different?" Berliner said no, "not at all. You know, I think even in our news in NPR newsroom, since the story was published, they've decided to institute regular reviews of coverage, which I think is a positive sign. I also think there's a conversation in this country that's happening within the media, but also more broadly about the really sad level of trust of the media and the extent to which narratives are imposed in newsrooms, whether they are legacy media and they're left leaning or whether they're coming from the right, and I think there's a large group of people that are tired of it, and are just calling out the media for doing things that are increasing the polarization in this country, so I don't regret -- I don't have any regrets.” Cuomo said "I was moved that the media left this story alone," and they didn't want to have a real examination of NPR's content. "What does it mean for you going forward? " BERLINER: Well, I you know, I think there was that there was some a lot of positive stories, including, interestingly, from college newspapers supporting what I said, and saying it's vital. And, you know, and from reporters and columnists around the country, and I would say this story lasted a lot longer than I expected it to. I thought, you know, I would write this and there would be pushback in the newsroom and it would be, you know, be over in a couple of days. You know, the head of the newsroom [Edith Chapin], criticized the story, I think she did it in a fairly respectful way, I was suspended five days without pay. I didn't object to that I didn't seek a grievance from the union. And I thought it was gonna go away after that. But then the new CEO, Katherine Maher, she injected herself into the newsroom, and she attacked me publicly and personally, and I think that extended the story, especially when people started finding out more about her views, not just the tweets, you know about America, being addicted to white supremacy, or criticizing Hillary Clinton for using the words [inaudible]. More importantly, videos that surfaced where she talked about the First Amendment being a challenge and a tricky thing when you're trying to suppress information. This is when she was running, Wikimedia, which oversees Wikipedia. And I think that really extended the story a lot.” Cuomo expressed amazement that the serious complaints within NPR were about wanting to take it further to the left, not further to the center. 

Cuomo: Pro-Hamas Camps the ‘Intersection of Ignorance and Arrogance’

NewsNation host Chris Cuomo was on a tear this week; using his prime-time show to call out the anti-Semitic/pro-Hamas extremists encamped on college campuses across the country. He called the encampments the “frightening intersection of ignorance and arrogance” and raised the legitimate concern that the students were being radicalized into doing something much worse than occupying a building. In the hour before the NYPD busted up the encampment at Columbia University Tuesday night, Cuomo shared a soundbite from a press conference where one of the terrorist sympathizers demanded the administration give them food and water. “But this is like basic humanitarian aid asking for. Like, could people please have a glass of water?” the student whined. Cuomo rubbed his face in frustration (above) and asked: “Seriously? Seriously? You want to break the law and then get catering?” He correctly diagnosed the problem as “privilege” and noted “she wasn't even aware of it.” He argued that what we were seeing on these campuses was the “frightening intersection of ignorance and arrogance.” And speaking directly at the students, he called them out for wanting to “appropriate the suffering in Gaza as if that were you; just not the suffering part.” “What happened to hunger strikes, getting arrested, taking a prosecution for the cause? Change doesn't come easy. Change doesn't come without cost,” he told them off. “You are being treated with kid gloves and you better hope it stays that way.”     On Monday, Cuomo struck a similar tone when he called out the cowardly students for hiding their faces when they claimed their cause was so just: Who put them in this position? The kids should offer up their names. Don't hide behind the scarves. You want the light? Take the heat! Own it! Be accountable for your outrage. There’s nothing wrong with that. Yeah. You may get thrown out of school. What matters if it's a genocide? Right? If ‘we are Hamas,’ right? Don't hide! “Give up your parents’ names,” he also demanded. “‘Oh, they shouldn't have to answer for me.’ The Hell they shouldn't. I got one of you. If my kid was running around on campus doing what you guys are doing, I'd be answering for it. I promise you that.” The focus stayed on what the pro-Hamas students were capable of and Cuomo feared their radicalism could drive them to do things far worse. He recalled the case of John Walker Lindh, the American Taliban. “Well-to-do, converted to Islam as a teenager, went overseas, became radicalized, wound up helping terror organizations,” Cuomo recalled. “How do we know that people aren’t being radicalized today that it ends on campus? How do we know?” Cuomo cautioned that social media – particularly TikTok – was to blame for how Generation Z has seemingly taken up the banner of Radical Islam in mass. “We never had people shouting ‘We are the Taliban’ after 9/11…We didn't have social media, but we didn't have whoever is guiding these things and funding these things being as active, as well-equipped, and as effective as they are right now,” he said. The transcripts are below. Click "expand" to read: NewsNation’s Cuomo April 29, 2024 8:07:50 p.m. eastern CHRIS CUOMO: Who put them in this position? The kids should offer up their names. Don't hide behind the scarves. You want the light? Take the heat! Own it! Be accountable for your outrage. There’s nothing wrong with that. Yeah. You may get thrown out of school. What matters if it's a genocide? Right? If ‘we are Hamas,’ right? Don't hide! Give up your parents’ names. “Oh, they shouldn't have to answer for me.” The Hell they shouldn't. I got one of you. If my kid was running around on campus doing what you guys are doing, I'd be answering for it. I promise you that. That's my kid. Doesn't matter how old you are. You're not paying your way there. You're under somebody else's roof, somebody else's influence. And it's time they step up. And the people who are funding these protests. Where are you? Where are the organizations? The invisible hand that is motivating what we're seeing on social media, who is it, where are they? Where's the investigative reporting on that? This has to be exposed. And to the parents and to the people out there who say, “Hey look, these kids are angry, we saw it during BLM, it's going to be summer. This will dissipate. They're going to go home to their internships and all the other bull – B – you know, stuff they do.” Maybe, maybe not. I'll tell you why. I don't see it that way. My last point. Three words for you. That is a lesson from the past that I don't know that we learned judging by what I'm seeing right now. Johnnie Walker Lindh. Look them up; L-I-N-D-H. Young kid, I forget where he grew up. Maybe California, something like that. Well-to-do, converted to Islam as a teenager, went overseas, became radicalized, wound up helping terror organizations. Put in prison 17 years. Got out a few years earl, everybody got angry about it. How do we know that people aren’t being radicalized today that it ends on campus? How do we know? We never had people shouting “We are the Taliban” after 9/11. Right? Do you remember that? Are you old enough to remember? If not, not Google it. We didn't have social media, but we didn't have whoever is guiding these things and funding these things being as active, as well-equipped, and as effective as they are right now. How do you know it ends with talk? (…) April 30, 2024 8:03:34 p.m. Eastern PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER: But this is like basic humanitarian aid asking for. Like, could people please have a glass of water? CUOMO: [Rubs face in frustration] Seriously? Seriously? You want to break the law and then get catering? You talk about privilege. And she wasn't even aware of it. That is frightening intersection of ignorance and arrogance. You want to appropriate the suffering in Gaza as if that were you; just not the suffering part. What happened to hunger strikes, getting arrested, taking a prosecution for the cause? Change doesn't come easy. Change doesn't come without cost. Go look at what happened during BLM. How blacks and their allies were treated when they destroyed property. And that was in poor areas, let alone some fancy place like a rich college campus. You are being treated with kid gloves and you better hope it stays that way. (…)

Birth Control Pill Linked to Life-Threatening Complication

Wait  -so Big Pharma isn’t right all the time? After taking a birth control pill with progesterone, an Illinois woman began bleeding from her backside which almost took her life. This is the pill that is promoted by the same people who think abortion is safe. The patient’s pain became increasingly worse after taking the pills for only two months. She had terrible “cramps, debilitating nausea, and blood diarrhea,” The Daily Mail indicated. After three weeks of intense pain, she went to the emergency room and was “diagnosed with ischemic colitis, which is most often caused by increased blood clotting in the abdomen and intestines.” Doctors who treated the woman indicated that this was only the second case of its kind that they’d seen and that without circulation, parts of the bowl can die and therefore, the patient can too. Daily Mail linked to a recent study which concluded that the pill the woman was taking could lead to increased risk of blood clotting. Doctors told the patient to go off of the birth control pill and her symptoms improved in roughly two weeks. “IC [Ischemic colitis] predominantly affects young women, who are on hormonal contraceptives, particularly estrogen, being implicated,” the study indicated. It also brought up another case where a similar thing happened and concluded that while much more research is needed to confirm, it’s likely that the birth control pill contributed to the IC. Our case presents a unique scenario of biopsy-confirmed IC after the use of a progesterone-only contraceptive, the second documented case as per our literature review. The first case, reported in 1972 by Martin D. Gelfand, involved a multiparous woman experiencing abdominal cramping, bloody stools, and rectosigmoid erythema after initiating Depo-Provera, a progesterone-only contraceptive. In cases of contraceptive-induced IC, patients typically recover after discontinuing the hormonal contraceptive. Similarly, our patient had complete resolution of her symptoms within a few weeks of ceasing the medication. The sad part is, these types of pills are promoted and praised throughout many feminist groups and outlets. Planned Parenthood promotes the pill so it can make money  - but rarely, if ever, warns about the repercussions.  As the left tries to cover up any adverse side effects of these pills, TikTok has recently begun censoring videos that warn about those side effects. In an MRCTV article published last month, TikTok reportedly took down numerous videos that talked about women who developed severe hormonal imbalances, had a weakened sex drive, developed depression, gained weight, had heart issues, had issues with fertility later on and many more from the birth control pill. TikTok also removed advertisements for a detox regime from a wellness group called “28” who wanted to help women detox from the harmful chemicals of the birth control pill. With censorship like that, it’s likely the story of the poor woman who ended up in the hospital will not reach mainstream media. God forbid anyone’s actually informed about their health.

Nets Catch the Sads for Florida Curbing ‘Abortion Care’, Cheer It as ‘Key’ to 2024

On Wednesday, the “big three’ of ABC, CBS, and NBC had full stories on their flagship morning news shows to reiterate their joy over Biden regime being so “eager” to make “abortion care” “front and center in the fight for the White House” and “drive voters to the polls” with the latest case being the focus on Florida’s six-week pro-life law being “one of the strictest abortion bans in the United States.” As these round-ups usually go, ABC’s Good Morning America was the giddiest thanks to the team of co-host/former Clinton official George Stephanopoulos and chief White House correspondent/chief Biden apple polisher Mary Bruce. “Abortion rights fight. As Florida’s six week ban takes effect this morning, President Biden puts the issue front and center in the fight for the White House,” Stephanopoulos boasted in an opening tease. Later on with the chyron reading in part “Abortion Showdown Takes Center Stage”, Bruce gushed that her friends are “eager to put the issue of abortion front and center in this campaign, and today, sending the Vice President, Kamala Harris — t heir chief messenger on this — down to Florida”.     Bruce made sure to highlight Trump’s Time magazine interview and that gotcha question about states surveilling pregnant women and even did her President a solid by not playing a campaign video released overnight and instead reading a portion herself (since it’s littered with jump cuts thanks to Biden’s inability to string together coherent thoughts). “[T]he Biden campaign is hoping all of this will drive voters to the polls for them in November,” she later concluded, to which fill-in co-host Gio Benitez conurred it’s “[a] major issue to be sure.” Over on NBC’s Today, co-host Savannah Guthrie called Florida’s law an “abortion showdown” in a tease and said NBC will get into “[w]hat it means for millions of women” (as opposed to babies). During a segment about the raging anti-Semites creating chaos on college campuses, White House correspondent Peter Alexander told Guthrie they’ve distracted voters “away from the issues the Democrats want to talk about, issues like reproductive rights, issues more broadly about health care” and the Trump indictments. NBC then did the Biden team a solid by talking about what they want. Co-host Hoda Kotb relayed that abortion was “front and center today” (says who?) “as one of the strictest abortion bans in the United States takes effect in Florida.” Correspondent Marissa Para bemoaned the lack of access for “abortion care” in the Sunshine State and only footnoted the pro-life cause with sound from one of the law’s state House sponsors (who correctly declared “abortion is not health care”) (click “expand”): PARA: Clinics like the one you see behind me have been preparing for today. Today is day one of Florida’s new law banning abortion after six weeks of pregnancy and the vast majority of cases with some exceptions for things like incest and rape. But with former President Trump making controversial new comments to issue, Hoda, we are already seeing how much abortion rights will play a role come November. This morning, an abortion ban with ripples far beyond the Sunshine State. PRO-BABY KILLERS: Our body, our choice! PARA: After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, states began to form their own rules. Many women from surrounding states in the south, which have the strictest rules in the country, traveled to Florida seeking abortion care. Florida, now banning the procedure before most women know they are pregnant. Starting today, the closest drivable options for abortion care are North Carolina and Virginia. Florida clinics like A Woman’s World in Ft. Pierce have been working overtime, trying to squeeze in every patient over six weeks pregnant before it became a felony to do so.  A WOMAN’S WORLD MEDICAL CENTER OWNER CANDACE DYE: Last week, the phones were crazy. We couldn’t answer the phones fast enough. PARA: Supporters of the ban point out the law has exceptions for rape, incest, fetal abnormalities, and life of the mother. State Rep Mike Beltran, one of the bill’s sponsors, says the days of what he calls “abortion tourism” from other states are over. FLORIDA STATE REPRESENTATIVE MIKE BELTRAN (R): Abortion is not health care. There are many countries where abortion is illegal or more restrictive than the Florida rules. CBS Mornings also checked the box. Fill-in co-host Jericka Duncan teased in the Eye Opener a report on “Florida’s new restrictive abortion law tak[ing] effect today” and words from “ Florida doctor who’s bracing for the fallout.” Co-host Nate Burleson had the open to said segment: “A new abortion law goes into effect today in Florida, sharply restricting the procedure after six weeks before many women know that they are pregnant. That means almost every state in the south has severe limits on abortion In most, it’s nearly outlawed.” Political correspondent Caitlin Huey-Burns decried Florida putting to a stop the “influx of patients from out of state as it was one of the last remaining places in this region with fewer restrictions” and made an abortionist the focus of her piece (click “expand”): DR. SHELLY TIEN: There’s fear. There’s uncertainty. HUEY-BURNS: Jacksonville Dr. Shelly Tien stood ready to see patients until the stroke of midnight when Florida’s six-week abortion ban was set to take effect. TIEN: It is, in essence, a total and a complete abortion ban. HUEY-BURNS [TO TIEN]: As a physician, what is it like for you operating under these circumstances? TIEN: Sure, you know — and I — I think, you know, certainly, it’s — it’s stressful. We see physicians that are scared to take care of basic issues and we’ve seen patients turned away from emergency rooms, delivering in public floor bathrooms. I mean, really, really awful, scenarios. HUEY-BURNS: Florida’s new law includes exceptions for rape, intest, fetal abnormalities, and life of the mother. FLORIDA STATE REPRESENTATIVE DEAN BLACK (R): It’s a victory. HUEY-BURNS: State Republican lawmaker Dean Black voted for the six-week ban. BLACK: We think we have a good law, a compassionate law, a moral law. It can serve as a guide for other states. After quoting Trump’s comments about surveilling women and an excerpt of the Biden ad (which featured three jump cuts for two sentences), Huey-Burns touted Florida as some sort of battleground as the pro-life law “has attracted the attention of the Biden campaign” with Vice President Kamala Harris flocking to Jacksonville “as part of her nationwide reproductive freedom tour.” To see the relevant transcripts from May 1, click here (for ABC), here (for CBS), and here (for NBC).

Major Government Entity Follows US Lead Against Infamous CCP-Tied App

The European Union is the latest government entity to ponder canceling a Chinese government-tied app. Soon after President Joe Biden signed a bill giving TikTok a choice between Chinese divestment and a ban in the U.S., European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen took up the same question, according to Politico EU. Asked about the possibility of a TikTok ban during a European Union (EU) candidate debate, von der Leyen replied, “It is not excluded.” This comes as TikTok already faces multiple EU probes. Von der Leyen then bragged that the Commission had been “the very first institution worldwide to ban TikTok on our corporate phones,” adding, “We know exactly the danger of TikTok.” Other candidates at the debate did not commit either way, Politico reported. The outlet also noted that von der Leyen has avoided using the app during her campaign. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) owns a board seat and maintains a financial stake in TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance, and multiple reports claim data sharing with Chinese employees, raising security concerns. Both the EU and TikTok have an anti-free speech record, but TikTok’s Communist China ties could still land it in even more hot water in Europe. Politico noted two EU probes into TikTok. The first regarded a feature rewarding users who interacted with the TikTok Lite app. The Digital Services Act (DSA) probe triggered TikTok’s suspension of the feature. Another probe under the DSA is reportedly investigating whether or not TikTok failed to protect minors on the app. This probe could have a final penalty of temporary suspension of the app. Conservatives are under attack. Contact TikTok via email at communitymanager@tiktok.com and demand Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment and provide transparency. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Nationalists of the World, Unite?

The historian John Lukacs used to say all the old “isms” of politics were defunct. They’ve become “wasms,” except one — nationalism. Lukacs died five years ago, but the relentless anti-Israel protests on America’s campuses today testify to the truth of his insight. So does the attempt by authorities in the capital of the European Union bureaucracy to quash a “National Conservatism” conference two weeks ago. The mayor of Brussels was quick to order police to shut down the conference that brought speakers such as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Brexit mastermind Nigel Farage to his city. Naturally, he claimed he was only doing this to protect everyone from the threat of radical protesters wreaking havoc on the conference and city alike — as if preemptively censoring National Conservatives with government power was the only alternative to letting violent leftists silence them through private intimidation. Yet some might wonder why a “National” Conservative conference was being held in Brussels in the first place, with a distinctly multinational lineup of speakers from Britain, Poland, Hungary, France, the United States and elsewhere. Critics of National Conservatism — both the conference and the coalition associated with it since the first “NatCon” gathering in Washington, D.C., in 2019 — have often claimed there’s a contradiction in nationalists from different nations working together. Isn’t that really internationalism? The founder of the National Conservatism conference, the American-Israeli intellectual Yoram Hazony, answered that in the closing chapter of his 2018 book “The Virtue of Nationalism.” There he relates how in the aftermath of World War II — a conflict widely seen as originating in nationalism, though Hazony finds it a product of imperialism instead — two opposing responses to the problem of aggression arose. The European intelligentsia, and eventually many educated Americans as well, chose to reject nationalism in principle and place their hopes in new international institutions: the United Nations, the European Union and the abstract “international community,” as well as what’s now called the “liberal international order.” The other response was to reaffirm a defensive and lawful nationalism, above all the effort to create a Jewish state — Zionism. Hazony came to perceive the continuing growth of anti-nationalist ideology in elite European and American institutions (including our colleges and universities) as a long-term existential threat to Israel. Zionism is a form of nationalism, and if all nationalism is bad, then Zionism must also be rejected by the international community and the well-credentialed Westerners who think of themselves as its leaders. Yet the opposite was really true; if Israel was to survive as a nation-state, defenders of the Jewish state would have to affirm not only Zionism but nationalism in general. And Israel’s best allies wouldn’t be liberal internationalists but rather nationalist conservatives in different places. Even in democratic Western nations that fought the Nazis in World War II, such as Britain and the United States, liberals demonized nationalist-minded conservatives as bigots of every kind: xenophobes, racists and, of course, antisemites. Hazony recognized that the greater antisemitic danger now came from the left — the radical activists in the streets and the genteel bureaucrats in control of institutions like the European Union and U.N. agencies. His vision has been vindicated in the years since he published “The Virtue of Nationalism”: Not only has the left shown its antisemitic as well as anti-Zionist inclinations, but the nationalist right in much of Europe and elsewhere has proved to be strongly supportive of Israel in its time of crisis. Nationalist leaders such as Italy’s Giorgia Meloni and the Netherlands’ Geert Wilders, not to mention Donald Trump and Hungary’s Orban, are staunchly pro-Israel. Just as important, in Hazony’s analysis, they are in favor of the nationalist principle that makes Israel possible. On the other side of the ledger, the same frenzied students and cold-blooded bureaucrats who think Israel is worse than Hamas think Western nations are exceptionally wicked in comparison to the rest of the world. Today’s protests against Israel are part of a larger campaign against the nation-state itself: against national borders, sovereignty, the right of self-defense, cultural continuity and assimilation, and well-defined citizenship. Leftists long for a post-national world of administrative zones — not nations in any meaningful sense — overseen by enlightened experts whose authority doesn’t rest on the consent of any specific people, but who are ritualistically maintained in office by a well-managed fluid voting pool of identity constituencies and broken individuals. The French political scientist Pierre Manent argues that without nations, without some specific people in a particular place, there can be no democracy. Nationalism has its defects, and National Conservatism may not always remedy them. But if there’s going to be any democracy in the 21st century — in America, Europe, Israel or anywhere — there must be nations and nationalists willing to stand for them. Daniel McCarthy is the editor of Modern Age: A Conservative Review. To read more by Daniel McCarthy, visit www.creators.com

MSNBC Blames 'Bad Faith' GOP For Campus Chaos

Princeton professor and MSNBC contributor Eddie Glaude Jr. joined the Wednesday edition of Ana Cabrera Reports to discuss the chaos on college campuses. In Glaude’s upside down view of the world, it is not the anti-Semitic campers who are the problem, they just “want a better America,” but the “bad faith” Republicans condemning school administrations for tolerating it. Cabrera wondered, “I am curious, though, as to how you see these protests, Eddie, through a broader lens. Some have compared these college campus demonstrations to protests during the Vietnam War. Do you think that's an accurate comparison?”     The correct answer would have been, “No, that's ridiculous. There is no draft directly affecting these students and groups leading this, like Students for Justice in Palestine, are not anti-war, they are pro-war, just pro-the other side that happens to be losing.” That is not the answer Glaude gave, however. Instead, he went all in on the cult of youth: Well, you want to reach for the familiar in order to understand the current moment, and I get that, but I want us to -- I want us to view these protests within the context of our current moment, the current geopolitical context and that is we're in a period where our politics are heightened, that the conflicts within the country where it feels as if we're at each other's throats, these young people have concluded, many of them that America in so many ways is broken and they've come of age in so many ways, not only in terms of how-- we might describe them, Ana, as the catastrophic generation. He added, “They've come of age in the midst of school shootings, in the midst of economic collapse, in the midst of a pandemic, over a million folks are dead. So, these folks are arguing for a better America, a better world, and then they're witnessing the horror of Gaza. Even with the horror of October 7th, they're witnessing the horror of the consequences.” As a young person, the author feels compelled to add that young people in America today have never had to fight a world war (or any war for that matter, those who have gone to war were part of an all-volunteer force), never protested anything remotely close to Jim Crow, and have been blessed with tremendous advancements in medical care and technology (the author is very grateful for phone-based GPS). They are obsessing over one and only one conflict. They are not condemning China’s actual genocide of the Uyghurs. Every generation, past, present, and future has its own foreign policy crises and times of economic turmoil. Still, Glaude determined Republicans were the real problem, “let's be clear and just really quickly, Elise Stefanik, Republicans in the Congress are bad faith actors in this debate, and they're driving this and administrators should understand when they respond to them, these bad actors will eventually turn only them. We see this with the president of Columbia, they urged her to act in a certain way, she acted and they still called for her resignation. We need to understand our charge as educators and live that charge in relation to our students, not in the political climate of our current moment.” It is Glaude who is acting in bad faith because she only acted after she let the situation get out of hand. Here is a transcript for the May 1 show: MSNBC Ana Cabrera Reports 5/1/2024 10:13 AM ET ANA CABRERA: I am curious, though, as to how you see these protests, Eddie, through a broader lens. Some have compared these college campus demonstrations to protests during the Vietnam War. Do you think that's an accurate comparison? EDDIE GLUADE JR.: Well, you want to reach for the familiar in order to understand the current moment, and I get that, but I want us to -- I want us to view these protests within the context of our current moment, the current geopolitical context and that is we're in a period where our politics are heightened, that the conflicts within the country where it feels as if we're at each other's throats, these young people have concluded, many of them that America in so many ways is broken and they've come of age in so many ways, not only in terms of how-- we might describe them, Ana, as the catastrophic generation. They've come of age in the midst of school shootings, in the midst of economic collapse, in the midst of a pandemic, over a million folks are dead. So, these folks are arguing for a better America, a better world, and then they're witnessing the horror of Gaza.  Even with the horror of October 7th, they're witnessing the horror of the consequences and let's be clear and just really quickly, Elise Stefanik, Republicans in the Congress are bad faith actors in this debate, and they're driving this and administrators should understand when they respond to them, these bad actors will eventually turn only them. We see this with the president of Columbia, they urged her to act in a certain way, she acted and they still called for her resignation. We need to understand our charge as educators and live that charge in relation to our students, not in the political climate of our current moment.

Portland Church Vandals Make 252nd Attack on Catholic Church Since Dobbs Leak

Pro-aborts vandalized the St. Patrick’s Church in Portland, Oregon over the weekend making it the 252nd attack on the Catholic Church since the Dobbs decision was leaked in 2022. This is part of the left’s ongoing effort to proclaim that they want Roe reinstated and the option to kill innocent, pre-born babies at their leisure. Catholic church-goers were met with the messaging when heading to services at St. Patrick’s Church in Portland for Sunday mass.  “FUCK U My body My choice,” was spray painted on the once beautiful doors to the church as well as on the concrete outside the building, according to images shared on X by journalist Andy Ngo. Breaking: Those attending mass this morning at St. Patrick’s Church in northwest Portland, Ore. arrived to find it had been vandalized again with a pro-abortion message. (The door is still stain-bleached of a removed hateful message.) Multiple Christian houses of worship have… pic.twitter.com/YqPlP4LMOW — Andy Ngô 🏳️‍🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) April 28, 2024 Last week Catholic Vote reported on the 249th attack on a Catholic Church since the Dobbs leak. In Oklahoma, a suspect broke a statue of the Virgin Mary and one of the Holy Family at St. Joseph Catholic Church in Muskogee. According to CatholicVote’s violence tracker, there have been at least 252 attacks perpetrated against Catholic churches since May 2022 and there have been 417 attacks against Catholic churches in the United States since May 28, 2020. The list doesn’t incorporate violence against Christian churches or pregnancy centers, but I suspect that if it did, the number would be close to double since anyone who affirms the Bible’s stance on the sanctity of life has been under attack for years. The list does however show the gravity of this situation and how pro-aborts, unsurprisingly, turn to violence and aggression to show that they support abortion --- just like this weekend over in Portland. Ngo noted that the doors have been cleaned but are now bleach stained since they needed to be deeply scrubbed from the black spray paint. In response, some users called on the FBI in Portland to find and charge the vandals. “Maybe when you’re done arresting grandma for going for a walk you can arrest these people,” a user wrote, “a house of worship is a safe haven for pro life.” A different user noted that this was “heartbreaking” while another called the vandal(s) “soulless ghouls.” “If something like this was done to an abortion clinic it would declared domestic terrorism or a RICO violation. This act should be treated the same,” one more wrote on Ngo’s post. We’re about to reach two full years since the Dobbs decision was leaked and this sort of violence started. My hope and prayer is that it not only stops but that hearts are changed and minds are woken up to the realities of what abortion is.  

Networks WHINE About Columbia’s Pro-Hamas Camp Getting Busted By NYPD

Overnight, the anti-Semitic/pro-Hamas encampment at Columbia University was finally broken up after the NYPD outsmarted the barricaded protesters by breaching the second floor of occupied Hamilton Hall. But on Wednesday morning, the whining from ABC, CBS, and NBC was almost as bad as the shrieking coming from the terrorist sympathizers as they recounted the horror of the 100 people arrested without injury being loaded onto a bus for booking. “We were standing right here late last night as more than 100 police officers descended on Columbia University,” announced ABC correspondent Stephanie Ramos on Good Morning America. She seemingly tried to downplay the illegal break-in and occupation of Hamilton Hall by noting it’s “a building with a history of student takeovers.” Ramos spoke to a ridiculous college professor who didn’t even work at Columbia (she worked at Queens College) who praised the students for breaking the law to help stop a purported “genocide in Gaza”: RAMOS: What were your thoughts about those student demonstrators that pitched tents and set up that encampment demanding that the university divest from companies profiting from Israel? What are your thoughts on that? SUSAN BARANOWSKI: So, the students believe passionately in this cause and they're willing to break the all rules and risk sanctions to draw attention to the genocide in Gaza. And they are willing to come out here even though the university is punishing them for doing so.     There seemed to be a bit of emotion in the voice of correspondent Lilia Luciano during CBS Mornings. She recalled how she “saw dozens upon dozens of protesters in zip ties taken into city and police buses as their peers, protesters, and even faculty members cheered them on from the outside.” Luciano sounded as though she was taken aback by the “Dozens of NYPD officers in riot gear” entering the university “through locked gates, others seen here coming through a second-floor window of the building occupied by demonstrators Tuesday night.” She promoted an unnamed professor who was “upset” by the scene and who falsely asserted that “the military” had stormed campus to take the kids away: LUCIANO: Many faculty members were outside like this professor we spoke to who was visibly upset over seeing so many students handcuffed. UNIDENTIFIED PROFESSOR: I'm devastated that this is happening to every single campus in this country! By letting the military in, letting the police in! These are just students! Over on NBC’s Today, correspondent Erin McLaughlin huffed that “dozens of police dressed in full riot gear entered the campus;” and touted that “Crowds gathered outside of the university chanting and booing.” After griping about the “SWAT-style truck” used to circumvent the barricaded doors of the first floor and the 100 people taken into custody, McLaughlin played the now infamous clip of a Columbia student demanding the university give them “basic humanitarian aid” so they don’t “die of dehydration and starvation.” Instead of laughing at it as most sensible people did, since it was ridiculous, McLaughlin treated it as a serious matter. And the chyron for the report read "police clash with college protesters" despite the fact the students were the aggressors who were breaking the law and threatening Jewish students. The transcripts are below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America May 1, 2024 7:03:17 a.m. Eastern (…) STEPHANIE RAMOS: We were standing right here late last night as more than 100 police officers descended on Columbia University. Police clearing Hamilton Hall, which is right behind us, a building with a history of student takeovers. [Cuts to video] Overnight, hundreds of New York City police officers in riot gear moving into Columbia University. SWAT teams rolling in, one-by-one police officers seen filing in on an extended ramp into the second floor of Columbia’s Hamilton Hall. In the late night hours, police forming a line around the perimeter, clearing protesters, blocking the entrance. Once inside, going floor-by-floor, room-by-room. NYPD using flash banks. At least 100 people arrested, led away, hands tied behind their backs with zip ties and loaded onto a police bus. The university president allowing the NYPD to move in, saying the group who broke into the building includes students but led by individuals who are not affiliated with the university, and that the administration was left with no choice. (…) 7:05:08 a.m. Eastern RAMOS: What were your thoughts about those student demonstrators that pitched tents and set up that encampment demanding that the university divest from companies profiting from Israel. What are your thoughts on that? SUSAN BARANOWSKI: So, the students believe passionately in this cause and they're willing to break the all rules and risk sanctions to draw attention to the genocide in Gaza. And they are willing to come out here even though the university is punishing them for doing so. (…) CBS Mornings May 1, 2024 7:04:28 a.m. Eastern (…) LILIA LUCIANO: Yesterday, before police showed up here at Columbia, students received a shelter-in-place warning. Hours later, we saw dozens upon dozens of protesters in zip ties taken into city and police buses as their peers, protesters, and even faculty members cheered them on from the outside. [Cuts to video] Dozens of NYPD officers in riot gear entered Columbia University around 9:00 p.m. Some through locked gates, others seen here coming through a second-floor window of the building occupied by demonstrators Tuesday night. The officers entered Hamilton Hall at the request of the university. Inside police cleared barricades, conducted multiple arrests, eventually clearing the building. Police also began clearing the tent encampment that had been the symbol of the protests on campus for nearly two weeks. Then NYPD moved further north in Harlem toward a city college campus. We were there when dozens of officers breached a gate to clear the encampment and began arresting protesters. Dozens more students were loaded onto city buses and detained by the end of the night. Many faculty members were outside like this professor we spoke to who was visibly upset over seeing so many students handcuffed. UNIDENTIFIED PROFESSOR: I'm devastated that this is happening to every single campus in this country! By letting the military in, letting the police in! These are just students! (…) NBC’s Today May 1, 2024 7:03:50 a.m. Eastern (…) ERIN MCLAUGHLIN: The NYPD says it took them nearly two hours to clear Columbia University of protesters. I was there overnight as dozens of police dressed in full riot gear entered the campus. Crowds gathered outside of the university chanting and booing. This morning, police say more than 200 were arrested. [Cuts to video] Overnight, in New York City, a tense drama unfolding at Columbia University. Police in riot gear swiftly taking back a building occupied by antiwar protesters. NYPD officers using a SWAT- style truck to enter Hamilton hall by force. UNIDENTIFIED OFFICER: The building was very heavily fortified. MCLAUGHLIN: Police video showing officers clearing the building, eventually taking about 100 people into custody. (…) 7:05:38 a.m. Eastern MCLAUGHLIN: Students there, before the police came in, asking Columbia to allow food into the building. UNIDENTIFED PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER: Do you want students to die of dehydration and starvation? UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: So, it seems like you’re saying, ‘we wanted to be revolutionaries, we want to take over this building. Now, will you please bring us food and water.’ UNIDENTIFED PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER: Nobody is asking them to bring anything we're asking them to not violently stop us from bringing in basic humanitarian aid. (…)

EXCLUSIVE: Unearthed Emails Show Legacy Media Cozying Up to Disgraced Censorship Group

FIRST ON MRC: Never-before-seen emails reveal how several legacy media outlets closely aligned themselves with a disgraced censorship entity, accused of leading the censorship of Republicans and conservatives on social media. Documents reviewed by MRC Free Speech America indicate that certain leftist, legacy media outlets — including The Washington Post, The Guardian, ABC News, NBC News, Vice and others — collaborated closely with the anti-free speech Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), a now-defunct consortium of researchers and universities with ties to government agencies and embroiled in censorship controversies. Stanford University’s Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO), along with the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, led the effort to launch the EIP.  Tellingly, the EIP was created “at the request of” the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and “worked directly with” the DHS and the State Department’s Global Engagement Center to “monitor and censor Americans’ online speech” before the 2020 elections, according to the House Judiciary Committee. In response to these emails, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) called on the federal government to defund the massive web of anti-free speech entities, infamously known as the Censorship Industrial Complex. “We’ve obtained the secret reports showing how the Election Integrity Partnership worked closely with Big Tech to censor thousands of Americans,” Jordan said. “Other documents confirm that the EIP was created ‘at the request of’ the federal government. In other words, Big Tech, Big Academia, and Big Government teamed up to censor Americans before the 2020 election.” The emails, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request investigation by government watchdog Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT), suggest that the legacy media blindly relied on the EIP to reinforce their anti-free speech narratives. “It’s disappointing and, frankly, a little frightening that media outlets have taken up full membership in the Censorship Industrial Complex,” PPT President Michael Chamberlain told MRC Free Speech America. Little has been reported or known about the extent of the media’s involvement with the disgraced censorship group — at least until now. The Washington Post Calls Anti-Free Speech Researchers ‘My Fave People’ In one instance, Elizabeth Dwoskin, a Silicon Valley correspondent for The Washington Post, referred to EIP leader Alex Stamos, a former chief security officer at Facebook, and Stanford researcher Renée DiResta, as her “fave people” in an email dated April 1, 2022. According to the email, Dwoskin contacted EIP to propose “a potentially powerful collaboration” concerning alleged “disinfo” in the 2022 midterm elections.  The proposed collaboration, dubbed "The Megaphone Project," aimed to track individuals who raised questions about the 2020 elections and whether they still had platforms in the 2022 midterm elections. “What platforms are they using? Do they still have the megaphones they had in 2020? What are they saying in the run-up to 2022?” Dwoskin asked Stamos and DiResta.  Whether “The Megaphone Project” was initiated remains unknown. However, the proposal raises concerns about the impartiality of The Post's reporter, said MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider. “It is sickening that The Post sought to create a hit list against people who simply wanted to exercise their free speech rights,” Schneider said. “In the past, leftists have also done the same thing. Did The Post ever produce a similar blacklist? We doubt it. This only proves the legacy media are nothing but arms of the Democrat Party.” Dwoskin did not immediately respond to MRC Free Speech America’s request for comment. ABC News Mourns Rise of Parler: ‘Will We Ever Stop Misinformation?’ In another instance showcasing how legacy media outlets leaned on EIP to promote their anti-free speech agenda, ABC News reporter Laura Romero emailed professor and EIP mastermind Kate Starbird on Nov. 11, 2020, seeking comment regarding Parler, a pro-free speech platform. Rather than simply requesting Starbird's expert analysis on Parler, Romero, in a 257-word email, voiced her concerns that while Facebook and Twitter were cracking down on the “Big Lie,” Parler allowed Americans to freely express their views on the 2020 election. “Is this a cat and mouse chase?” Romero asked Starbird, alluding to Big Tech’s crackdown on free speech. The ABC News reporter pondered, “Will we ever stop misinformation from spreading?” without specifying who the “we” in her email referred to. In the same email, Romero suggested that she preferred “to hop on the phone to discuss this,” citing her busy schedule. Tellingly, Romero did not promptly respond to MRC’s repeated requests for comments or clarification. Romero ultimately published an ABC News article on Nov. 17, 2020, headlined: “‘Free speech’ social media platform Parler is a hit among Trump supporters, but experts say it won't last.” In the article, Romero accused Parler of disseminating “misinformation.” She supported her anti-free speech assertions by citing “experts.” Did The Guardian Rely on EIP for Legal Advice Following Project Veritas Threat? Amid a legal dispute between media activist group Project Veritas and EIP, attorneys representing then-Project Veritas President James O’Keefe filed a complaint against The Guardian. The newspaper had previously covered an EIP blog that labeled O’Keefe as a “repeat spreader” of “election misinformation” a year prior. Faced with a potential legal challenge regarding its coverage of O’Keefe, Eline Gordts, a West Coast editor at The Guardian, reached out to EIP, apparently seeking guidance on how to respond to Project Veritas. Project Veritas had initiated a lawsuit against EIP over an EIP blog published on Sept. 29, 2020 (and later covered by The Guardian). “O'Keefe's lawyers mention that they have filed litigation against EIP for defamatory content,” Gordts wrote to EIP researcher DiResta and Communications Director Michael Grass.  Gordts added, “As we're crafting our response, it would be very helpful to get a sense of your thinking around his allegations, what exactly they are suiting [sic] over and whether Project Veritas is suing or James O'Keefe.” Later in the email, she asked to “discuss this over the phone." In response, Stamos confirmed that Project Veritas had initiated legal action against EIP. He then offered Gordts access to EIP’s attorneys and provided communications advice for further comment. In response, Stamos confirmed that Project Veritas had initiated legal action against EIP. He then offered Gordts access to EIP’s attorneys, deferring to them for further comment. In statements to MRC, The Guardian spokesperson Matt Mittenthal vehemently denied that the newspaper had reached out to EIP for potential advice.  “An editor for the Guardian contacted the Election Integrity Partnership to verify Project Veritas's claim that it had sued EIP, a fact that could have bearing on our own reporting,” he claimed in an email on Wednesday. “Any suggestion of ‘coordination’ would be a gross mischaracterization of an editor doing her job.” Mittenthal said that Project Veritas did not threaten to sue The Guardian for its reporting of the EIP blog. He clarified that Gordst did not engage with EIP’s attorneys past Stamos’s comment. MRC’s Schneider said that such a coordination would have been highly unusual for a media outlet. “Not only did the media peddle EIP’s work blindly, but they seemed to be so entangled with EIP that they even wanted to secretly coordinate their dissembling in the courthouse. Their corruption does not end with election interference. It might also include obstruction of justice.” VICE News and The Post Ask: First Amendment Worse Than Russian ‘Disinformation’? One of the accusations raised by House Republicans against the EIP and its government ties is that the EIP conflated constitutionally-protected speech with alleged foreign “disinformation,” occasionally prioritizing the targeting of Americans’ free speech. VICE and The Post suggested that Americans’ ability to freely speak posed a greater threat to the nation than foreign interference. In September 2020, Vice commissioned a “big/special” election documentary with HBO, as indicated by Graham Brookie, an aide at The Atlantic Council’s Digital Foreign Research Lab (also part of the EIP, according to House Republicans). In an email to Starbird, Brookie forwarded a note, purportedly from Vice News, that stated, “While foreign interference is continuing in similar fashion to 2016, the primary issue is domestic misinformation.” It isn’t immediately clear whether such a documentary was ever videotaped or finalized. Not to be outdone by Vice, The Post's Dwoskin (mentioned earlier in this report) reached out to EIP about a briefing related to the 2020 election. In the email dated Nov. 4, 2020, Dwoskin posed the highly cynical question of whether Trump declaring himself winner was “a bigger test for the platforms than Russian disinfo, in terms of protecting threats to democracy?” On the same day, Dwoskin published a write-up for The Post headlined “Trump’s early victory declarations test tech giants’ mettle in policing threats to the election.” In it, she used a quote from Stamos to accuse Big Tech platforms of failing to act against so-called “repeat offenders” of “misinformation.” Neither Brookie, Vice nor Dwoskin immediately responded to MRC’s request for comment. NBC News to EIP: ‘Why YouTube Isn’t Adjusting’ In an email to Starbird, NBC News Correspondent Jake Ward whined about YouTube's alleged reluctance to follow the lead of other major Big Tech platforms in censoring Americans in the days leading up to the 2020 election. The subject line of Ward’s email, dated Oct. 26, 2020, read, “Why YouTube Isn't Adjusting.” Ward sought to interview Starbird to gain a “big-picture” perspective on how YouTube “handles itself.” Ward declared his intent to write a story on YouTube. “I'm putting a story together about why it is that YouTube has adjusted so little of how it handles misinformation as compared to Twitter and FB,” he wrote, extending an invitation to continue the conversation on Zoom. Ward, who has since left NBC News, did not immediately respond to MRC's request for comment. Ward’s concerns seemingly prompted action from YouTube, as the platform undertook a significant purge of content that allegedly violated the platform’s COVID-19 policies, resulting in the removal of over 500,000 videos. YouTube also moved to ban former President Donald Trump’s account for over three years, a decision ultimately reversed in March 2023. Despite Ward’s assertions about YouTube’s perceived inaction on censorship, its parent company, Google, faced scrutiny nearly four years later, following the release of an MRC Free Speech America report. The MRC report revealed that the tech giant intervened in U.S. elections at least 41 times, every time in favor of the most left-wing candidates. EIP to Fox News: No, Thank You? In contrast to EIP’s engagement with other media outlets, the organization appears to have been less receptive to a Fox News reporter’s inquiry about an EIP fact check of a Project Veritas video on alleged voter fraud. In an email dated Oct. 5, 2020, Fox News reporter Audrey Conklin reached out to Dr. Joe Bak-Coleman, one of the authors of an EIP blog that targeted Project Veritas. Such a blog was at the center of a now-settled lawsuit between Project Veritas and EIP. Bak-Coleman forwarded the email to Starbird and Stamos seeking advice. “Thoughts on how/if I should respond? My instinct is to just ignore it but I figured better to ask y'all,” Bak-Coleman wrote that same day. Starbird advised against responding, warning, “I wouldn't respond. I'm curious as to why they reached out to you and not Alex or me. Something to chat about at our next meeting.” Bak-Coleman chose not to respond to Conklin. Instead, Stamos intervened, stating, “I believe our post speaks for itself and we are going to decline further comment.” Legacy Media, Enemies of Free Speech? Reacting to these revelations, PPT’s Chamberlain criticized the legacy media’s role in endorsing EIP’s controversial work and, even worse, failing to uphold the principles of the First Amendment. “I’m old enough to remember when they would be the staunchest defenders of free speech, the First Amendment, and the search for truth,” Chamberlain told MRC. “Now it appears that instead of defending those principles they are more interested in defending the narratives they advance and defending themselves against upstarts and alternative outlets.” Chamberlain concluded with a sobering assessment: “There's profit and prestige in being an approved information gatekeeper.” But not all hope is gone, as Jordan and the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government are calling for legislation to defund these censorship-tied tools. “Our investigation continues but it’s clear that Congress must pass legislation that ends the censorship-industrial complex in all its forms, including the EIP,” Jordan told MRC. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Colbert Twists Sources To Spread Hysteria About Snipers At Colleges

Stephen Colbert spread hysteria about the anti-Israel encampments on college campuses on Tuesday’s edition of The Late Show on CBS. Making matters much worse is that Colbert took his own sources out of context in order to make his claims. First, however, Colbert had to set the scene, “The protests ramped up a couple of weeks ago, after students erected tents on Columbia University's main lawn to show solidarity with Gaza.” After being interrupted by applause from the audience, he continued, “and the university president took the controversial step of calling in the police to arrest those involved. Now, even if you don't agree with the subject of their protests as long as they are peaceful, students should be allowed to protest. It's their First Amendment right.”     You do not have a First Amendment right to illegal trespass. You cannot walk into the Ed Sullivan Theater. pitch a tent, and claim that is your new home until CBS meets your demands. Colbert would concede at the end “that overnight, protestors at Columbia broke into a campus building.” Still, he claimed “That is the kind of idealism you learn in college, it's one of the few college lessons you can use your whole life, unlike beer funneling, which you stop being able to do around 35, when your wife catches you.” Colbert wants to pretend that the demonstrators are simple peace activists and not anti-Semitic, but before you could tell him what groups like Students for Justice in Palestine really believe, he continued, “’Photos online show police snipers set up on the roofs of buildings at Ohio State University and Indiana University.’” When doing his monologue, Colbert will talk over screenshots of his sources. That last quote came from a Snopes article, but here is the full quote, “Two photographs circulated online in posts claiming that state police snipers had set up on the roofs of buildings at Ohio State University and Indiana University.” It also reads, “The OSU newspaper The Lantern reported that the people on the roof of the OSU building were initially using spotting scopes to watch protesters, but switched to rifles once arrests began on the green space below.” Colbert continued, “although ‘the Ohio State University administration stated that these were state police officers… which the school also employs during football games.’ "’What are you worrying about, students? The snipers are always there. For football games, women's volleyball, an acapella.’” The part of the Intelligencer article that Colbert’s ellipse took out was, “Ohio State administration stated that these were state police officers working as spotters, which the school also employs during football games.” Snopes also reported that at the time the videos went viral, there were no snipers at Ohio State (they never confirmed or disproved the Indiana claim), but after arrests began, “the two people on the roof had indeed switched to "long-range firearms as part of their protocol."  Colbert spread fake news about the timing of the snipers, he fed into the hysteria that implied that law enforcement that provides security for large crowd events has itchy trigger fingers, and he took his sources out of context to do it. Here is a transcript for the April 30 show: CBS The Late Show 4/30/2024 11:41 PM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: The protests ramped up a couple of weeks ago, after students erected tents on Columbia University's main lawn to show solidarity with Gaza, and the university president took the controversial step of calling in the police to arrest those involved. Now, even if you don't agree with the subject of their protests as long as they are peaceful, students should be allowed to protest. It's their First Amendment right. That is the kind of idealism you learn in college, it's one of the few college lessons you can use your whole life, unlike beer funneling, which you stop being able to do around 35, when your wife catches you.  And it's not just at Columbia. Yesterday, cops arrested at least 100 protestors at UT Austin. This morning, they arrested at least 30 protestors at UNC Chapel Hill. Yes, college administrators are using the classic de-escalation tactic of sending in heavily armed police and threatening to call the National Guard. Photos online show police snipers set up on the roofs of buildings at Ohio State university and Indiana University, although the Ohio State University administration stated that these were state police officers … which the school also employs during football games "What are you worrying about, students? The snipers are always there. For football games, women's volleyball, an acapella. You've been warned, guy who goes "Sha-doop shooby Doop." Buy a guitar!" Now, tensions right now are so high that overnight, protestors at Columbia broke into a campus building, which probably will not help their cause with the public.

White House Correspondents Dinner Was a FAIL: MRCTV’s Tierin-Rose Mandelburg on OANN

On Monday, MRCTV’s Tierin-Rose Mandelburg appeared on One America News Network’s In Focus with Alison Steinberg to talk about the failed White House Correspondents Dinner that took place over the weekend. Outside the event, as guests were arriving, large crowds of pro-Gaza protesters chanted and yelled at them. Obviously the guests, only caring for themselves, waltzed right in and didn’t bat an eye. (Remember, these elitists only cared about getting wined and dined by the president.) Steinberg hopes the video of the elitists ignoring the protestors gets people to wake up and realize that “None of these people care about you, they’re never going to [and] they’re never going to make the changes that you want to see.”     OAN then played a video from inside the dinner where President Joe Biden struggled to eat his salad.  The irony of it was that at the event, Biden claimed that his opponent, former President Donald Trump, was the six-year-old. I bet a six-year-old could use his fork properly. Related: MRCTV's Tierin-Rose Mandelburg on OAN: Dancing in the White House, Woke NPR & Travis Kelce A video clip was also played from the 2014 White House Correspondents Dinner where even President Barack Obama laughed at jokes poking fun of Biden’s mental abilities.  Yet, 10 years later, we’ve still got people thinking he’s fully capable of running our country. Follow us on Twitter/X:   Things That Need To Be Said: The World Is Taking Christians For Granted Christian prosecution is growing in prominence and is largely ignored, if not outright encouraged, by our leftist government. pic.twitter.com/gIxNLk2nUg — MRCTV (@mrctv) April 29, 2024

Column: The White House Correspondents Host a Biden Rally

It was remarkable breaking news, occurring live on CNN. The White House Correspondents Association hosted a dinner and a Biden for President rally broke out. It’s only natural that CNN loves live coverage of the White House Correspondents Dinner, where the anti-Trump media celebrate themselves for how essential they are to preserving democracy and how valiantly they warn Americans that Donald Trump is democracy's antonym. President Biden’s speech made some jokes about his age – it’s that safe spot where all the late-night comedians go. But he also showed nastiness: “Yes, age is an issue. I’m a grown man running against a six-year-old.” They loved that joke on CNN. Like last year, Biden thought it was funny to insist he doesn’t have to grant access to reporters, because “I do interviews with strong independent journalists who millions of people actually listen to, like Howard Stern.” Instead, he lectured them about how Trump “has made no secret of his attack on our democracy,” and the “free press” needs to make sure the voters have “the information they need to make an informed decision.” Biden thinks a pro-Biden media needs to deliver: “I’m sincerely not asking you to take sides, but asking you to rise up to the seriousness of the moment.” He clearly means the media need to underline Trump needs to lose. Biden ripped into Trump, ranting about January 6, spewing misinformation about Trump’s attention-grabbing way of speaking. “He said he wants to be a dictator on Day One….he promised a bloodbath when he loses again.” If you’re a low-information voter, you wouldn’t know Trump joked with Sean Hannity about being a dictator for one day, and he said our economy would be a “bloodbath” if Biden was reelected. You can scold Trump for his rhetorical red meat. But that doesn’t mean journalists and presidents should mischaracterize what he says. This is not how these dinners used to work. Twenty years ago at this dinner, when President George W. Bush was lining up against Sen. John Kerry, Bush didn’t say one negative word about his opponent or one negative word about the opposing party. He made gentle jokes about the press. He didn’t urge the networks to defeat John Kerry at the anchor desk. He talked about heroic reporters in war zones, and heroic soldiers. That’s not how it unfolded in 2024. The hired comedian, Saturday Night Live fake-news anchor Colin Jost, concluded his comedy routine by remembering his late grandfather, a Staten Island firefighter, who voted for Biden in 2020. “He voted for you, and the reason that he voted for you is because you're a decent man. My grandpa voted for decency, and decency is why we're all here tonight. Decency is how we're able to be here tonight. Decency is how we're able to make jokes about each other, and one of us doesn't go to prison after.” He then repeated: “So, Mr. President, I thank you for your decency on behalf of my grandfather.” Jost said this after Biden said his opponent was a six-year-old who would spur a bloodbath if he loses. He said this after he mocked Trump as “currently spending his days farting himself awake during a porn-star hush-money trial,” and the courtroom sketch artist makes Trump look like “the Grinch had sex with the Lorax.” At least CNN allowed their contributor Scott Jennings to sum up the evening: “We had Biden speak tonight, and then we had a Biden surrogate effectively speak tonight.”  It's no wonder CNN wanted to air the whole thing live.

MSNBC’s Alex Wagner Frets Campus Protests May Lead To Next Reagan Era

While discussing the ongoing NYPD clearing of the virulent anti-semitic protest at Columbia University, MSNBC host Alex Wagner and her guest, New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg, noticed the historic parallels between this moment and 1968- and where it ultimately led. Watch the aforementioned exchange, which closed the show’s live coverage of the protest clearing, as aired on MSNBC’s Alex Wagner Tonight on Tuesday, April 30th, 2024: ALEX WAGNER: Michelle, the- Hamilton Hall is- for people who are not familiar with the Columbia campus: in April of 1968, 56 years ago, hundreds of students seized the building during protests over the Vietnam War.  I do not think that was lost to the people who stormed Hamilton Hall. After a week- this is, again, in 1968, police entered through underground tunnels and cleared them out. Over 700 people were arrested. MICHELLE GOLDBERG: Right, and that’s remembered as a really dark chapter in Columbia's history, which is why it’s so breathtaking to see them repeated. WAGNER: But it does, you know- putting this in the broader context of what’s happening in American politics, I mean, when this began I think, for a lot of people all these campus protests had the echo of the 1960s. It feels like an inflection point for the country. We are barreling toward a presidential election. The country feels catastrophically divided on every- on every issue from basic facts to an actual policy vision-- GOLDBERG: A Democratic presidential convention in Chicago? WAGNER: Yes. Exactly, echoes of 1968 and I just wonder, you know, it’s hard to imagine that this is- that this imagery of the NYPD storming Columbia in this- in this moment is not going to reverberate in ways that we cannot yet see across the political divide. GOLDBERG: And I think we should remember what the kind of images of protest disorder did in the late 60s. Because even as the Vietnam War became increasingly unpopular, so did the antiwar protests. And it was in part the backlash to that as well as to urban crime that gave us not just Richard Nixon… WAGNER: Yeah. GOLDBERG: …but kind of un- except for a four-year oasis of Jimmy Carter, unbroken Republican rule until Bill Clinton. And so I would expect that we are already seeing the backlash to this, but I would expect it to be ferocious. WAGNER: Yeah. The late '70s were a period of retrenchment. And then 1980 saw Ronald Ragan and a conservative agenda that was fiercer, more focused and more effective than maybe any other conservative agenda in ways that we are still grappling with to this day. I mean, it’s the establishment. The Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society. Any number of right-wing organizations. A master plan to retake the judiciary. I mean, what we saw in the aftereffect of the Vietnam War was really a brand of conservatism, a new Right that the country had never seen before.  Upon watching the segment, one’s first instinct is to warn Wagner not to threaten us with a good time. She and Goldberg correctly note that the unrest of the late ‘60s reverberated through our politics for many years. In many ways, it is still doing so. Those students entered into our higher learning institutions and corrupted them into the Marxist indoctrination centers we see today. There is indeed a very bright through line between those protests and today’s protests. And it is interesting to watch Wagner and Goldberg squirm through their thought exercise. But they’re not entirely wrong. These protests will in fact reverberate in ways that are not yet clear to us. And they may well lead, much to Wagner’s dismay, to “a new Right that the country had never seen before.” The fact that this conversation is even happening on MSNBC air says much about the current moment.  

NY Times: GOP Calling Immigrant Surge an ‘Invasion’ Dehumanizing, ‘Could Stoke Violence’

New York Times national politics reporter Jazmine Ulloa has deputized herself to patrol the parameters of acceptable political discourse from her liberal perspective, attacked Republicans candidates again for daring to call the influx of immigrants across our southern border an “invasion,” in Sunday’s edition: “Talk of an Immigrant ‘Invasion’ Grows in Republican Ads and Speech.” As the elections loom, Ulloa’s hypersensitive language radar seems tuned only to the words of one political party. A campaign ad from a Republican congressional candidate from Indiana sums up the arrival of migrants at the border with one word. He doesn’t call it a problem or a crisis. He calls it an “invasion.” .... It was not so long ago that the term invasion had been mostly relegated to the margins of the national immigration debate. Many candidates and political figures tended to avoid the word, which echoed demagoguery in previous centuries targeting Asian, Latino and European immigrants. Few mainstream Republicans dared use it. .... The resurgence of the term exemplifies the shift in Republican rhetoric in the era of former President Donald J. Trump and his right-wing supporters. Language once considered hostile has become common, sometimes precisely because it runs counter to politically correct sensibilities. Immigration has also become more divisive, with even Democratic mayors complaining about the number of migrants in their cities. Democrats and advocates for migrants denounce the word and its recent turn from being taboo. Historians and analysts who study political rhetoric have long warned that the term dehumanizes those to whom it refers and could stoke violence, noting that it appeared in writings by perpetrators of deadly mass shootings in Pittsburgh, Pa.; El Paso, Texas; and Buffalo, N.Y., in recent years. If one truly wanted to police offensive and threatening language, Ulloa should look no further than a “pro-Palestinian” rally at the nearest “progressive” college campus. Republicans defend using the word and see it as an apt descriptor for a situation that they argue has intensified beyond crisis levels and one that could help sway voters. Ulloa extrapolated wildly, going from the word “invasion” to mass murder in three sentences flat. "Analysts" of "extremism" say the I-word suggests racism and anti-semitism. Analysts who study political rhetoric and extremism have continued to raise alarm that the word invasion and what they describe as similarly inflammatory language regarding immigration plays into replacement theory. The racist doctrine, which has circulated in far right-wing corners of the internet, holds that Western elites, sometimes manipulated by Jews, want to “replace” and disempower white Americans. The shooters in Pittsburgh, El Paso and Buffalo echoed the theory in online posts, and targeted Jews, Hispanics and Black people in their killings. She accused Donald Trump of “using language that invokes the racial hatred of Hitler” (Trump’s “poisoning the blood of our country” remark) before relaying concerns about “Republican fear-mongering about migrants" from a researcher at America’s Voice. America’s Voice is hardly a non-partisan one. Their main goal, according to the group’s website, is to “win reforms that put 11 million undocumented Americans on a path to full citizenship."

Intolerant Nancy Pelosi Yells at MSNBC's Katy Tur, Suggests She's 'a Trump Apologist'

Democrats and MSNBC watchers – which are pretty much the same thing – cannot tolerate anyone making a contrary point. On Monday afternoon, MSNBC host Katy Tur interviewed former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for almost 15 minutes. She asked the usual between-us-Democrats questions, starting with how much the Democrats can insure untrammeled abortion on demand if they can stay in power. Tur worried out loud that the anti-Israel protests on campus could hurt Democrats, as radical and violent protests at the 1968 convention helped elect Nixon. But Pelosi lost all patience with Tur at the tail end of an answer lasting two minutes and 40 seconds without interruption about how Biden is great: PELOSI: There are those who have real legitimate concerns about immigration, globalization, innovation, and what does that mean to their job and their family’s future? And we have to address those concerns. And Joe Biden is doing that. Created nine million jobs in his term in office. Donald Trump has the worst record of job loss of a president. So, we just have to make sure people know. Tur interjected with a fact: “That was during a global pandemic.” This inflamed Pelosi.   “He had the worst record of any president,” Pelosi repeated in anger, karate-chopping the air in Tur's face. “We’ve had other concerns in our country. If you want to be an apologist for Donald Trump, that may be your role, but it ain’t mine.” “I don’t think anybody can accuse me of that,” Tur said. Pelosi expects MSNBC hosts to be an apologist for Pelosi. Like Andrea Mitchell, Katy Tur hits the "Trending" bar on Twitter when the MSNBC base thinks they are so Republican they should just defect to Fox News. The big "Really American" account got out the flame emojis:  🚨If you only watch ONE video today, watch Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi stuffing Katy Tur into a locker for being "an apologist for Donald Trump" after Tur attempted to defend his abysmal job loss record. Extremely satisfying!🔥🔥pic.twitter.com/hPkVtfKr1o — Really American 🇺🇸 (@ReallyAmerican1) April 29, 2024 Tur closed out by asking about the House Democrats uniting against efforts by a few Republicans to remove current Speaker Mike Johnson, and then concluded with gushy thanks: "Thank you very much for joining us. It's really wonderful to see you in person. I appreciate it."

John Leguizamo Brings His Boring ‘Professional Latinx’ Act To The View

Actor/playwright/woke sermonizer John Leguizamo joined the bitter harridans at ABC’s The View, delighting them with his own performative bitterness and racial grievance. He was also there, ironically, to promote his own show on a new streaming platform called The Network. I say “ironically” because Leguizamo has achieved obvious professional success, transforming himself from comedic role player into Very Serious Actor, which belies his other career as professional racial grievance monger.      Watch as Leguizamo explains the sentiment that went into how he portrayed this latest character, as aired on ABC’s The View on Tuesday, April 30th, 2024 (click “expand”): JOHN LEGUIZAMO: Uh…because it's exactly what I wanted to do with this character. I didn't need people to like me. I didn't want them to like me but they needed to understand the sickness. ASUNCION CUMMINGS-HOSTIN: Yes. LEGUIZAMO: That's what I wanted them to understand. What it takes to be a Latin man in a country and wanting to pass and believing that if you pass and you do everything right that the system is going to take you, but it doesn't. It spits you right back out. WHOOPI GOLDBERG: That's right. LEGUIZAMO: So here he is, like when you watch on Fox News, you know, you watch and then they- when they're taking down our democracy they'll put up all this border stuff and who is the people perpetrating, grabbing the children and the moms are Latino patrol officers.  MULTIPLE THE VIEW PANELISTS IN MINDLESS AGREEMENT: Yes. LEGUIZAMO: So, that's the kind of character, that's how I related and got my -- JOY BEHAR: Important to tell. HOSTIN: It is. I have to echo Sara. I started it last night and I was up till 1:00 in the morning. LEGUIZAMO: Oh, you too? I'm sorry. My bad. HOSTIN: I couldn't stop watching it. I couldn't stop watching it. And my husband was watching it with me and we were so enthralled by this. And the issue of being Latino in this country, right? And so you say people are going to despise you as a character. I did despise you. LEGUIZAMO: Thank you, thank you. I want that. HOSTIN: Yeah. I did. I did. LEGUIZAMO: This guy is not a good guy. HOSTIN: He's not a good guy. He’s doing everything he can to assimilate, but hide his heritage… LEGUIZAMO: Yes. HOSTIN: … while brutalizing others for their heritage, right? So, what was that like as a Latino to take it on? LEGUIZAMO: Oh, it was -- it was painful, you know, to -- you had to take on all this rage. HOSTIN: Yeah. LEGUIZAMO: And then, you know, I'm snatching children from their parents and they're screaming and those screams would give me like PTSD when I would go home and be by myself, so it's hard to live with that, you know. You know, Latinos, I feel like Latinos are in a really good intersection right now in our culture because we're finally embracing and accepting that we're indigenous and accepting our Afro-Latino culture. HOSTIN: Yes, yes. (AUDIENCE CLAPS LIKE SEALS) LEGIZAMO: Because we were ashamed… HOSTIN: Yes. LEGUIZAMO: …and in denial. HOSTIN: Very anti-black for a long time. In our community. LEGUIZAMO: And anti-indigenous. The majority of us are indigenous. You know, I'm 26% indigenous and 5% Afro-Latino but, you know, my family is all like the whiter you are, the prettier you are, if your hair is straight but not too straight because then it's indigenous and add then you gotta add those European features- then you're beautiful. Everybody else, not so much. But we’re finally getting over that. I feel like we’re really coming to a place where we’re rejecting that. Hispanics have been here since before, and fought in, the Revolutionary War. This inconvenient fact is often buried by the left because it is inconsistent with the manufactured Latino identity, created in order to erase this community’s Spanish (and Christian) heritage and impose a new, political identity built around the flimsiest foundation: language. The absurdity of the artificial Latino identity is that, despite it being a wholly American construct, it seeks to permanently alienate a community that has been in America since before its founding. This is the identity that Leguizamo champions and defends and seeks to impose at every turn, depicting himself as an aggrieved outsider despite enjoying the fruits of Hollywood longevity, and deriding fellow Hispanics with whom he disagrees for the entertainment of fellow leftists and their audiences. Hence his spiteful remarks about Hispanics on Fox and Border Patrol agents. It could’ve been worse- he could’ve trotted out his “roaches for Raid” joke.  It is entirely fitting that the clip previewed on The View shows him demanding that his on-screen wife “fall in line”, because this is what Leguizamo does in real life. Case in point, his MSNBC special on the Hispanic experience in New York. While seated at the table with hip-hop legends Fat Joe and DJ Tony Touch, Leguizamo chooses to spend his time effectively hectoring his guests into usage of the term “Latinx”.   Never forget the time that John Leguizamo hectored hip-hop legends Fat Joe and DJ Tony Touch into using the term "Latinx" pic.twitter.com/WFm8ZUCLA3 — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) April 30, 2024   Leguizamo’s act, while acclaimed on leftist spaces such as ABC News product The View, is tired, boring, derivative, and concocted for the consumption of woke, mostly white elites- as opposed to the community he purports to champion and which he does not seem to understand. You may feel inclined to feel some sort of sympathy for the fact that we (and by “we”, I mean mostly the great Nick Fondacaro) have to watch this nonsense but, as Hyman Roth famously said to Don Michael Corleone: this is the business we’ve chosen.

CNN Frets ‘Escalation’ by Police Disrupted ‘Peaceful’ Students ‘Dancing’ for Hamas

During a rare moment Tuesday when CNN wasn’t obsessing over the first Trump trial, correspondent Dianne Gallagher used a live shot from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to fret police caused “a very intense escalation” with pro-Hamas students, whom she said were merely holding a “rally and silent vigil” with “dancing and chanting” amid their tent cities. Oh, and they had torn down the American flag at the center of campus and replaced it with a Palestinian flag. And, by the way, the mostly white pro-Hamas crowd repeatedly threw water bottles and other projectiles at black police officers. Gallagher ignored the latter because reasons. “What I can tell you is that this is a very intense escalation from how it has been for the past several hours,” Gallagher began, whining police had soured the vibes at what “was a rally and silent vigil for Palestine” and the raising of the Palestinian flag at a campus flagpole.       Alas, the fun and games were over when “a large group of police officers [came] down Polk Place and just sort of [came] for the students who had interlocking arms around this flag pole” to reinstall the American flag. “But with the force that this was done, pushing down students, some into these barricades that were placed up this morning after police cleared an encampment that had been here on Polk Place for about 90 hours,” she fretted. Adding the students being told early in the morning to disperse left them feeling uneasy because it had been such “a very peaceful encampment”, she revealed “about 30 people were detained” with the local district attorney telling her “that is mix of arrest and citations.” “The University of North Carolina says that they were in violation of negotiations that have been ongoing by putting tents back up on Sunday afternoon. The university students who were at the encampment told me today that they felt like there was no real negotiation with the university. They felt like this was more of a one-sided conversation,” she countered, giving more credence to the students. Explaining students told her “[t]hey had taken the tents down twice already” and “there had been no real discussion with the university”, she reiterated her supposedly neutral description of the “intense escalation from what we saw just 20 minutes ago or so” when “there were students dancing and chanting” to police arriving (in order to restore order). Gallagher never explained what the pro-Palestinian students were saying or what any of their signs read. Rather, she boasted what had been happening was “incredibly peaceful and very low key” with there even having been a “silent vigil” (click “expand”): We had lots of speakers out here earlier that we were listening to, roughly five or six hours after many of those people who were either arrested or cited were released. Now, they put barricades up after the encampment was cleared this morning, and we did see these protesters — you can see there’s a couple of skirmishes over here. We did see those protests or sort of remove those barricades after several hours of that — protests and silent vigil to come and take down the American flag, put up the Palestinian flag, and continue their chants.  Everything that we have observed today from about noon on has been incredibly peaceful and very low key for the most part up until we saw the officers run across this lawn here. That is really the most intense energy that we have felt. I’m — I’m gonna let you kind of look at what is going on again here, but it does appear they’re just trying to raise this American flag up. I’m gonna get my photographer westward to just sort of show the growing number of students that is starting to come here to Polk Place. Now, again, this is not what the situation necessarily looked like just a few moments ago here at the University of North Carolina. Exit question for CNN: If pro-Holocaust college students and their well-funded allies taking over campuses is “peaceful”, then what was Charlottesville? CNN Special Report: Trump Hush Money Trial April 30, 2024 2:40 p.m. Eastern ERIN BURNETT: And we are watching dramatic developments unfold at college campus protests nationwide right now, Wolf. WOLF BLITZER: I want to get right to CNN’s Dianne Gallagher. She’s on the scene for us at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. These are live pictures we’re showing our viewers right now, Dianne. Update our viewers. DIANNE GALLAGHER: Alright, I cannot hear on IFB anymore, but I’m assuming that you are on our pictures right now. What I can tell you is that this is a very intense escalation from how it has been for the past several hours. There was a rally and silent vigil for Palestine that occurred for several — after they — I don’t know if you can see right now — they’re taking the Palestinian flag down off the flagpole, which was put up there about 30 minutes or so ago by protesters. They took the American flag down, raised the Palestinian flag. About five minutes or so ago, we saw a large group of police officers come down Polk Place and just sort of come for the students who had interlocking arms around this flag pole. It appears they’re trying to remove the Palestinian flag and re-raise an American flag up on this flagpole here. But with the force that this was done, pushing down students, some into these barricades that were placed up this morning after police cleared an encampment that had been here on Polk Place for about 90 hours. The University of North Carolina sent an e-mail, sent out a paper statement basically warning the students at 5:37 this morning, they had to clear the encampment by 6:00 a.m. Many of the students we spoke with said that they were sleeping and did not know until some faculty came down about ten minutes before six to get out. According to the university, about 30 people were detained. I spoke with the district attorney. He said that is a mix of arrest and citations. Talking to students, they say that, again, they were very surprised by this. They felt that it had been a very peaceful encampment up to that point. The University of North Carolina says that they were in violation of negotiations that have been ongoing by putting tents back up on Sunday afternoon. The university students who were at the encampment told me today that they felt like there was no real negotiation with the university. They felt like this was more of a one-sided conversation. They had taken the tents down twice already, but there had been no real discussion with the university, those students say, about their demands of divestment and disclosure of finances. Now, they say that — that is why they put those tents back up on Sunday afternoon, what the university deemed as that violation for them to go and clear the encampment this morning. The students again saying there was no real honest negotiation, they felt, with the school and that was why they kept those up. Now, again, this is an intense escalation from what we saw just 20 minutes ago or so, there were students dancing and chanting. You can now hear other students coming and staying USA, USA. We’re seeing more students now come to Polk Place. This sort of green area where we’d actually been seeing sort a decrease in people out here. They were finishing for the day. We had lots of speakers out here earlier that we were listening to, roughly five or six hours after many of those people who were either arrested or cited were released. Now, they put barricades up after the encampment was cleared this morning, and we did see these protesters — you can see there’s a couple of skirmishes over here. We did see those protests or sort of remove those barricades after several hours of that — protests and silent vigil to come and take down the American flag, put up the Palestinian flag, and continue their chants. Everything that we have observed today from about noon on has been incredibly peaceful and very low key for the most part up until we saw the officers run across this lawn here. That is really the most intense energy that we have felt. I’m — I’m gonna let you kind of look at what is going on again here, but it does appear they’re just trying to raise this American flag up. I’m gonna get my photographer westward to just sort of show the growing number of students that is starting to come here to Polk Place. Now, again, this is not what the situation necessarily looked like just a few moments ago here at the University of North Carolina. BURNETT: All right, Dianne Gallagher showing us these images. You know, of course, at the beginning when we were seeing those police come in to try to reach voice that American flags, some of those images Diane had were really dramatic. Kids sort of being thrown out from that coordinate of police officers from what we could see, a few of them and now, chanting and it looks like a — police are re-raising that American flag. A very dynamic situation at UNC-Chapel Hill. Our Dianne Gallagher is there. We’re going to be checking back in with that here over these next few moments.

Tit for Tat? Apple Censors US Social Media Apps at Request of Chinese Gov’t After TikTok Ultimatum

Did Apple just help China retaliate against America’s possible TikTok ban? Apple has long invested heavily in Chinese markets, and, based on a recent report, the company is willing to exercise censorship to maintain those markets. Bloomberg reportedon April 18 that Apple Inc. had removed at least four social media services from its Chinese App Store, including two Meta-owned apps. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which Bloomberg called “one of the world’s most rigid internet censorship regimes,” demanded that Apple remove the apps over alleged “national security” concerns. Apple complied just after President Joe Biden signed a bill forcing TikTok to either relinquish its Chinese communist government ties or leave the country. The process of both bans have been ongoing, however. Bloomberg explained, “The orders come on the heels of a cleanup program Chinese regulators initiated in 2023 that was expected to remove many defunct or unregistered apps from domestic iOS and Android stores.” Mobile app developers were reportedly required to complete registration with the CCP by the end of March or be forced to cease operating. The censored apps are Meta’s Threads and WhatsApp, along with Signal and Telegram. In a statement obtained by Bloomberg, Apple claimed that it disagreed with the CCP’s demands but had to follow them. “We are obligated to follow the laws in the countries where we operate, even when we disagree. The Cyberspace Administration of China ordered the removal of these apps from the China storefront based on their national security concerns,” Apple stated, per Bloomberg. “These apps remain available for download on all other storefronts where they appear.” The dictatorial CCP’s “Great Firewall” has long banned foreign social media apps, including Facebook and Twitter (now X). Asia-Pacific news site The Diplomat, noted that Chinese users can be sentenced to years in prison for criticizing CCP officials. American companies’ operations in Communist China continue to be controversial, as do the operations of Chinese companies in America. President Joe Biden signed a bill a week ago that gives TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance a choice between selling TikTok or having the popular app banned. The CCP owns a board seat and maintains a financial stake in ByteDance, and multiple reports claim Chinese employees have access to U.S. TikTok user data, raising national security concerns.  Conservatives are under attack! Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

The Left Needs Therapy & After This, You Might Too

Welcome to Woke of the Weak, where I’ll update you about the most woke, progressive, insane, and crazy clips and stories that the left thinks is tolerable and well, point out why exactly they’re nuts. This week, we took a look at how much of the left would likely benefit from professional counseling…just not from the individual in the first clip where the user explained how he was a transgender lesbian who is also, somehow, a therapist.  I would not recommend hiring him to learn how to think properly. A different user used pink and blue sugar packets to explain that while he was assigned a blue sugar packet (a boy) he really feels like a pink sugar packet (a girl). He also insisted that doctors take an “educated guess” as to what your sex is when you’re born. The next transformer proudly showed off her double mastectomy to affirm her gender as a boy, while the next explained how he felt like he entered the water at the beach as a boy and emerged from it as a girl. A different freak yelled at kids and encouraged them to scream “free Palestine” while in his full-out drag queen costume. “If you’re a drag queen and you know it, shout free Palestine,” he said.   It’s likely those kids will grow up to be like the students at Harvard University who replaced the American flag with the Palestinian flag. Other Gaza protestors explained that they didn’t like white people. Unironically, those protestors were white. There were a few more freaks that we saw this week, too. The first of the trio was an individual who lurked around completely covered in green paint and called it fashion, another was a drag queen who dropped it low at a high school in New Mexico and the third individual talked about “her” built in strap on. Much of the left is struggling mentally and emotionally, and I think they could really benefit from some professional counseling. Honestly though, after seeing all that, I think I could too!

Reid Compares College Israel Haters To The Civil Rights Movement

MSNBC’s Joy Reid opened up Monday's The ReidOut with an unhinged monologue directed at those who are critical of the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic demonstrations on college campuses as she condemned those who seek an end to the illegal trespassing and compared the demonstrators to those who marched for civil rights back in the 60s. Reid claimed, “The government and university presidents want you to know that the right to protest is a farce. You can be tear gassed, shot with rubber bullets, tackled and thrown to the ground, and arrested. At Emory University, a shocking scene unfolded as Atlanta police and Georgia state troopers arrested protesters and released chemical agents on campus.” Explaining a video that was being shown, Reid continued, “At least two videos have emerged of Emory professors getting arrested. This is Professor Noëlle McAfee who will join us in a few moments. The use of police force against these protesters should alarm you, and it mirrors the violence that is happening in Israel, with police responding to anti-war protesters there as well.”     Of course, Reid omitted that McAfee was arrested for disorderly conduct and not simply for being at a protest. Moving right along, Reid went all in on the idea that young people must be taken seriously, not because they happen to have anything compelling to say, but because they are young, “Why would the state line up against our students who are the future? Especially young people like these, who are at some of the most prestigious universities in America, doing exactly what one is supposed to do in college, which is to think critically, stand up for what they believe in, and demand a better world.” No. First of all, they are not thinking critically, they are simply regurgitating what their professors tell them. Second, if what you stand for is bigotry, hatred, and historical and geopolitical ignorance, you should not stand up for what you believe in, but repent instead. Reid also wants to claim Israelis are being arrested for the same thing to neutralize allegations of anti-Semitism, but Israelis are protesting to bring home the hostages even if it means Hamas survives. These students are not doing that. In one of the photos Reid showed, someone was holding a sign that read "Zionism is ≠ not anti-Semitism,” but embarrassing double negatives aside, according to the State Department, under presidents of both parties, it is because anti-Zionism isn’t dislike of Benjamin Netanyahu, the current war, or Israeli administration of the West Bank, but the belief that Israel needs to be eradicated. Somehow, Reid’s rantings were about to get even worse, “Students who are speaking out against atrocities they are seeing abroad, a war where Palestinians are getting killed in air strikes in areas that the Israeli military designated as safe zones.” The fact that safe zones exist is proof of the protestor’s ignorance and lack of critical thinking. That Israel won’t let Hamas abuse them isn’t an indictment of Israel. Still, Reid rolled on, “They're watching children starve while workers bringing desperately needed food are killed by sniper drones. Potential war crimes so appalling that Israel fears its leaders could soon face arrest warrants from the International Criminal Court.  Israel fears the ICC not because it has committed war crimes, but because it doesn’t trust the ICC to be impartial. Still, Reid finally got to the heart of the matter, “These actions are what these young people are protesting. As they did in reaction to Vietnam and the Iraq War, and during the Civil Rights Movement and against South African apartheid.” There it is. There are no more legitimate civil rights battles to fight, so teaming up with anti-Semites is a small price to pay to satisfy their “Selma envy.”  Here is a transcript for the April 29 show: MSNBC The ReidOut 4/29/2024 7:05 PM ET JOY REID: The government and university presidents want you to know that the right to protest is a farce. You can be tear gassed, shot with rubber bullets, tackled and thrown to the ground, and arrested. At Emory University, a shocking scene unfolded as Atlanta police and Georgia state troopers arrested protesters and released chemical agents on campus.  At least two videos have emerged of Emory professors getting arrested. This is professor Noëlle McAfee who will join us in a few moments. The use of police force against these protesters should alarm you, and it mirrors the violence that is happening in Israel, with police responding to anti-war protesters there as well.  You have to wonder why. Why would the state line up against our students who are the future? Especially young people like these, who are at some of the most prestigious universities in America, doing exactly what one is supposed to do in college, which is to think critically, stand up for what they believe in, and demand a better world.  Students who are speaking out against atrocities they are seeing abroad, a war where Palestinians are getting killed in air strikes in areas that the Israeli military designated as safe zones. They're watching children starve while workers bringing desperately needed food are killed by sniper drones. Potential war crimes so appalling that Israel fears its leaders could soon face arrest warrants from the International Criminal Court. These actions are what these young people are protesting. As they did in reaction to Vietnam and the Iraq War, and during the Civil Rights Movement and against South African apartheid.

Networks BLACKOUT Columbia Students Wishing ‘Glory to All Our Martyrs’

Overnight, anti-Semitic/pro-Hamas extremists at Columbia – who’ve been chanting for the murder of Jews – took over an academic building. Come Tuesday morning, the liberal broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) hyped the development but conspicuously omitted the nastier details reported throughout the night: wishes for “glory to all our martyrs” (a.k.a. Hamas), assaulting other students who locked arms to stop them from breaking down the doors, and a report that they took a facility worker “hostage.” “Despite warnings of suspension and expulsion for students involved in the encampment here at Columbia University, some pro-Palestinian protesters set up more tents on campus and stormed that academic building overnight. They say it is all in support of Gaza,” boasted ABC correspondent Stephanie Ramos during Good Morning America. Adding: “Video capturing students slamming desks, breaking windows, and barricading themselves inside.” Over on CBS Mornings, co-anchor Gayle King tried to downplay the illegal occupation of Hamilton Hall by noting the “building has been occupied many times over the years.” But she did tout that the pro-terrorist mob “hung a banner renaming Hamilton Hall for a little girl killed in Gaza;” while ignoring their “intifada” banner. King also called it "the War on Gaza" as if the Palestinians didn't start the war with Hamas's October 7 terrorist attack. “Social media footage shows dozens of masked protesters using a hammer to take over Hamilton Hall, a building at Columbia University, just before 1 a.m. The group can be seen inside running around, with some placing chairs and tables in front of the doors, barricading themselves in,” reported CBS correspondent Tom Hanson.     For NBC’s Today, correspondent George Solis noted the “intifada” banner but failed to explain that it meant the targeted killing of Jews. He also framed the occupation of the building as just a response to university officials suspending students for not dismantling the encampment: Overnight, campus protests escalating. Demonstrators occupying a building at Columbia University smashing windows, barring the doors, and unfurling banners – including one reading intifada – after protesters circled the campus earlier in the night. The unrest coming just hours after the university started suspending students who refused to leave an encampment after a deadline had passed. All three of them used the “social media footage” that was going around last night, but they all sanitized their reports by refusing to show or mention some of the more heinous things that occurred during the seizure of the building. In addition to multiple reports that a message of “glory to all our martyrs” was put out by organizers of the encampment, there were videos of their leader Khymani James whipping up the crowd into a frenzy to violently assault three students who linked arms in an attempt to keep the mob from storming Hamilton Hall.   Here is video of him leading the mob to assault 3 students trying to protect the building. pic.twitter.com/du3OlsCqUo — AG (@AGHamilton29) April 30, 2024   James was supposedly expelled from the university after a video circulated online of him giving a blood-thirsty rant against Jews. Other videos showed 63-year-old “professional protest consultant” Lisa Fithian suggesting the students protecting the building were the “assholes” (above) and directing other students to flip large metal tables to barricade the doors.   BREAKING.🚨 All charges have been *DROPPED* against Pro-Hamas rioters who took over Hamilton Hall at Columbia University on Monday night. Columbia U. refused to let NYPD in despite protesters allegedly committing unlawful detention, vandalism & assault.pic.twitter.com/kwgFxWtmv6 — Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) April 30, 2024   Further excluded by the broadcast networks, Hen Mazzig, founder of the Tel Aviv Institute reported that the students held a university facilities worker “hostage” for a time   Protesters inside Hamilton Hall at Columbia University have hung banners reading “Intifada" after they vandalized and took over a university building last night. A Columbia facilities worker was “held hostage” as students occupied the hall. The university asked those "who can… pic.twitter.com/atUhOZq88G — Hen Mazzig (@HenMazzig) April 30, 2024   The transcripts are below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America April 30, 2024 7:02:58 a.m. Eastern (…) ROBIN ROBERTS: Take a look at the scene right now. Protesters on campus there in North Carolina. And then overnight protesters here in New York at Columbia barricaded themselves inside the school and now the university is taking more action. Stephanie Ramos is there on the scene for us. Good morning to you, Stephanie. STEPHANIE RAMOS: Robin, good morning. Despite warnings of suspension and expulsion for students involved in the encampment here at Columbia University, some pro-Palestinian protesters set up more tents on campus and stormed that academic building overnight. They say it is all in support of Gaza. [Cuts to video] Overnight, pro-Palestinian protesters gathering outside Columbia University's Hamilton Hall and then storming the building. Video capturing students slamming desks, breaking windows, and barricading themselves inside. Just after 12:30 a.m. this morning, dozens left the encampment and entered the hall. Students, defiant. Refusing to dismantle their encampment. PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER: You need to stop bombing. You need to stop the indiscriminate killing, massacre of Palestinians in Gaza. That's how you end the war. (…) CBS Mornings April 30, 2024 7:06:27 a.m. Eastern GAYLE KING: Now to breaking news overnight, a major escalation in the protest at Columbia University where demonstrators against the War on Gaza have now broken into a building on campus. The group hung a banner renaming Hamilton Hall for a little girl killed in Gaza. That building has been occupied many times over the years. Tom Hanson is there at a very tense moment with police standing by. Tom, good morning to you. It was tense all afternoon, yesterday. My heart was racing, watching that video on the campus yesterday afternoon. TOM HANSON: That is an understatement. Gayle, good morning to you. Protests at Columbia University continued well into the night after the school began suspending protesting students refusing to leave their encampment, but those demonstrations escalated to an outright occupation of this campus building just behind me. [Cuts to video] Social media footage shows dozens of masked protesters using a hammer to take over Hamilton Hall, a building at Columbia University, just before 1 a.m. The group can be seen inside running around, with some placing chairs and tables in front of the doors, barricading themselves in. They also took the second floor, unraveling the building and reclaiming the building as Hind’s Hall in honor of a six-year-old girl who was killed in Gaza this year. (…) NBC’s Today April 30, 2024 7:03:28 a.m. Eastern (…) GEORGE SOLIS: Tensions here at Columbia University reaching a fervor pitch. Columbia Public Safety officials issuing that public advisory to most students and faculty urging them to avoid campus today after demonstrators took over the building on campus. It comes as that deadline for the voluntary dispersement of the encampment here on campus came and went. All this, as the campus clashes continue nationwide. [Cuts to video] Overnight, campus protests escalating. Demonstrators occupying a building at Columbia University smashing windows, barring the doors, and unfurling banners – including one reading intifada – after protesters circled the campus earlier in the night. The unrest coming just hours after the university started suspending students who refused to leave an encampment after a deadline had passed. (…)

Lessons From Other Campus Protests

The year was 1966 and Ronald Reagan was running for governor of California. A major part of his platform was to “clean up the mess at Berkeley” and other college campuses throughout the state that were experiencing protests and strikes over issues that included the military draft, civil rights and “women’s issues.” While not on a scale of the pro-Hamas, anti-Israel, anti-America and Jewish hatred we are witnessing now on several college campuses, Reagan’s response could instruct current college presidents and admissions officers to quell the unrest. The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History has preserved Reagan’s remarks and later actions as governor. In a campaign speech, Reagan said many leftist campus movements had transcended legitimate protest, with the actions of "beatniks, radicals and filthy speech advocates" having more to do "with rioting, with anarchy" than "academic freedom." He faulted university administrators and faculty, who "press their particular value judgments" on students, for "a leadership gap and a morality and decency gap" on campus, and suggested a code of conduct be imposed on faculty to "force them to serve as examples of good behavior and decency." Morality, good behavior and decency appear to be electives, not requirements, on too many of today’s university campuses whose “students” (and apparently not all are students) are now running the institutions of what might be called lower learning. Six months after becoming governor in 1967, Reagan wrote a letter to Glenn Dumke, chancellor of San Francisco State College, who opposed the unrest occurring on many California campuses. In it, Reagan condemned “these people and this trash” who used “the excuse of academic freedom and freedom of expression” to justify continuation of the protests. “We wouldn’t tolerate this kind of language in front of our families.” He called on Dumke to “lay down some rules of conduct and promised “you’d have (all the) backing I could give you.” We need to hear more of this type of talk to counter the anarchists and hatred of Jews and Israel and support of terrorist organizations on today’s college campuses. Even more than talk, action is needed. Writing in The Wall Street Journal, Ira Stoll says the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Open Society Foundation headed by George Soros have been contributing hundreds of thousands of dollars to leftist organizations that funnel money to groups that are behind these campus upheavals. At a minimum the IRS should take a look at their tax-exempt status to see if they have violated regulations pertaining to what is allowable for nonprofits. The government should also look at whether any of those shouting antisemitic and anti-American slogans are here on student visas. If they are those visas should be revoked and the students deported. Others who are found guilty of giving aid and comfort to terrorists should be expelled. Some wealthy donors to Columbia University and other schools have pledged to withdraw financial support if order and decorum are not restored. All of this feeds the view that America is coming apart. Where are the leaders like Ronald Reagan who label this behavior for what it is and then do something about it? Reagan ended his letter to Dumke with a question that should answer itself: “Hasn’t the time come to take on those neurotics in our faculty group and lay down some rules of conduct for the students comparable to what we’d expect in our own families?” If that time had come in 1967, surely it is long past due in 2024.

Game Over: How Sweet Baby Inc.'s ‘Inclusion’ Push Is Ruining the Video Gaming Industry

What used to be an escape from an overly politicized world, the video games industry is slowly being reshaped in part by a development and consultation studio infecting the bloodstream with corporate liberalism run amok with a scam company operating as a way to bolster one’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) credentials. Sweet Baby Inc. was founded in 2018 and works with video game studios to help "diversify" their new releases. The company's mission statement speaks volumes, reeking with buzzwords: Founded in 2018, Sweet Baby Inc. is a narrative development and consultation studio based in Montreal and working around the globe. Our mission is to tell better, more empathetic stories while diversifying and enriching the video games industry. We aim to make games more engaging, more fun, more meaningful, and more inclusive, for everyone. “Empathetic,” “diversifying,” “more inclusive,” and “for everyone.” The only thing missing is the talk of multiple genders. Sweet Baby Inc. also claims that "you need diverse voices to solve diverse problems." To achieve alleged problems, they offer writing, narrative, representation, and development. In other words, pretty common components for a development consultant. But as far as representation goes, one can only assume they mean no white characters. When a former Sweet Baby Inc. employee was presented with a design for a white character, she wrote, "fuck white people," on the graphic: Dani LaLonders SWEET BABY INC graduate, her employee designed a white character and she responded back with "F*CK WHITE PEOPLE" pic.twitter.com/wZ2Tlk9Y9b — BadSoundingSentences (@BadSoundingS) April 28, 2024   If that’s what bringing representation to video games looks like, surely they must excel in writing, narrative, and development! Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed: Valhalla, Sony's God of War: Ragnarok, and Warner Bros. Games' Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League, are some major titles recently released that Sweet Baby Inc. has had their hand in making. Their scope of consultation goes beyond those studios and also includes the likes of Valve, Electronic Arts, 2K Studios, Xbox Game Studios, Square Enix, Wizards of the Coast, and many others. However, not every company has great success when going woke. Unfortunately for the crew at Mimimi Games, they consulted with Sweet Baby Inc. on Shadow Gambit: The Cursed Crew, and after costs outweighed their revenue, they closed their doors. Many people pointed to Sweet Baby Inc. as the reason why Mimimi Games shut down. With DEI tainting the world around us and now tainting the virtual world, one man who goes by Kabrutus, created a website that detects DEI in video games. The site, deidetected.com, is a spawn from a Steam curator list titled "Sweet Baby Inc detected," which is simply a list of games available on the Steam marketplace. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less. The curator list currently has over 350k followers and has garnered attacks on Kabrutus and others from Sweet Baby Inc. employees.  But supporters of this shift in video games are trying to reframe the Sweet Baby Inc. backlash as a hate movement: They are trying to reframe the Sweet Baby Inc. backlash as a hate movement. Yes it was...on their part. Don't let them forget SBI started it and never apologized. https://t.co/dsDDZ15hTS pic.twitter.com/klPpWHyLQq — Grummz (@Grummz) April 24, 2024 These attacks come as no surprise when the Co-Founder of Sweet Baby Inc. had this to say at Game Developers Conference 2019: The Co-Founder of Sweet Baby Inc Kim Belair proudly explains the method she uses to force bosses at game studios to censor, alter, and "diversify" game projects she feels are problematic - "Terrify them" aka threaten them with the anger of the cancel culture mob. pic.twitter.com/eFJZeKqSZd — GamesNosh (@GamesNosh) March 4, 2024 So why are studios still working with Sweet Baby Inc.? I think in order to get the proper funds from share holders, certain things need to be checked off. Consulting sweet baby inc might be one of them — Mightykeef (@MightyKeef) April 24, 2024

PolitiFact Slaps False Label On Johnson's Criticism Of Columbia

Amid the encampment at Columbia University, PolitiFact slapped the “false” label on Speaker Mike Johnson on Monday for declaring that the school advised Jewish students to stay away from campus. The only problem is that Johnson never explicitly claimed that they did, but rather that was the unstated implication of their hybrid learning plan. Louis Jacobson writes, “Later, during an April 24 CNN interview that aired after his Columbia visit, Johnson said he was standing up for "Jewish students who are in fear of their lives, who were cowering in their apartments right now, who are not coming to class. In fact, the administration recognized the threat was so great, they canceled classes. Now they've come out with this hybrid idea. ‘Well, if you're Jewish, maybe you do want to stay at home. Maybe you'd be better off for you.’” The NewsBusters write-up of that CNN interview can be found here. As for Jacobson, he continues, “Johnson called this attitude ‘so discriminatory. It's so wrong in every way. The responsibility of a university administrator is to keep peace on campus and ensure the safety of students — job No. 1.’" He also writes, “Johnson’s comment prompted an April 25 post from a new account on X from the Columbia Journalism School devoted to fact-checking statements about the Columbia protests” and “The post quoted Columbia University's provost’s office, saying, "The university administration has not issued any directives or specific instructions to Jewish students about avoiding campus or taking classes remotely." Jacobson goes on to cite President Minouche Shafik stating her preference was for students who live off-campus to stay home. As for that CJS account, they have managed to fact-check one Israeli professor and counter-protestor, Shai Davidai, for saying the protests prove Hamas is on campus claiming "There is currently no evidence of any member of Hamas on Columbia's campus" as if Hamas's ideology is absent or that no member of the faculty has ever praised Hamas. They also shamed Punchbowl/NBC's Jake Sherman for claiming that an anti-Semite was at Columbia when he was, in reality, just down the street. They can't be bothered to check any of the protestors incendiary claims about genocide, however. Still, there is also a significant discrepancy in Jacobson’s article versus the CJS. The CJS account claimed Johnson “suggests” the Columbia administration advised Jewish students to stay home, whereas Jacobson used the more definitive “said.”  It is common for people to paraphrase others when they believe that they are trying to get away with saying something odorous in a polite way. Columbia explicitly advising Jewish students to stay home would be a P.R. disaster, meaning Johnson’s paraphrase was his way of citing what he thought the administration was really saying by their refusal to end the encampments against Israel and Zionists, which is just anyone who thinks Israel should exist. Jacobson conceded that there was a Columbia-affiliated rabbi who urged Jewish students to stay home, making it possible that Johnson simply confused the rabbi with the administration. If that is true, then Jacobson should’ve written another one of PolitiFact’s explainer articles that do not feature the truth-o-meter. Speaking of the truth-o-meter-free explainer articles, Joe Biden has explicitly compared Republicans to Jim Crow, which Republicans, of course, deny. However, Jacobson couldn’t be bothered to pull out the truth-o-meter for that Biden claim, instead writing, “Some historians say Biden’s rhetorical point was justified as a way of highlighting the dangers of backsliding from hard-won voting rights.”

Scarborough Backtracks on Protesters: I Was Only Mocking 'White Woke Pampered Elitist' Kids

It wasn't exactly a mea culpa. But on today's Morning Joe, Scarborough did a modified walk-back of his strong criticism that we noted yesterday of campus protesters and the failure of administrators to discipline them, and how it will all lead to Biden  losing in November.  Scarborough mentioned that after his comments yesterday, he had received critical comments from "well-intentioned" critics who said it was right to protest the Vietnam War, and right to protest Israel's war after the October 7 slaughter by Hamas. So he backtracked to suggest he only meant to mock rich white kids. [?] I'm certainly not saying this of all the student protesters that are out there. And certainly not children of Palestinian families who have lost loved ones through the years in this war, in this conflict. I will say, though, among, again -- and I've spoken with some of them. I want to be careful. But among these white, woke, pampered, elitist -- I'm not supposed to use that word. Let's say children from wealthy families that decide, as Dr. Brzezinski said so many years ago, that they're going to play radical for a weekend and then go home to Mommy and Daddy's mansion, there's a complete ignorance about the complexities of this issue.   Why did Scarborough single out "white," woke, elitists? Surely there are black and brown woke elitists who are cluelessly protesting on campus. Why does Scarborough give them a pass, hmmm? Sounds like Scarborough is between the same rock and hard place as Biden: wanting to express solidarity with Israel, but without overly offending his left-wing base.  Willie Geist then came in repeated everything Scarborough just said. "You go, guy!" Both Scarborough and Geist stressed that they have been very critical of Netanyahu's handling of the war -- which would seem to be required at MSNBC.  To their credit, Scarborough and Geist did express that Jewish students don't feel safe on campus, and described how clueless many of the protesters are, with no understanding of the genocidal implications for Jews of "from the river to the sea," or of the generous two-state deal that Israel offered the Palestinians 2000, but which the Palestinians peremptorily rejected.     Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 4/30/24 6:11 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: I had a lot of nice, wonderful, well-intentioned people that watch this show, love this show, write me yesterday, and I wrote a lot of them back, called one or two back, saying, you know, Joe, the Vietnam war was a bad war, Joe; you were talking. And this Gaza thing, we understand the kids and what they're doing. I understand, obviously, the protest to an unjust war. And we've, of course, been bitterly critical of Netanyahu's response in Gaza. So we understand all that. I'm curious what your thoughts are on -- and we're going to talk to Jonathan Greenblatt in one moment -- but how you balance that with not just outside agitators but also a rising sense of antisemitism on college campuses and social life. And I will tell you, I know, I know first-hand from friends and family members that Jews are being pushed to the side socially. And, and that, that woke white girls and boys coming from elite families are telling their friends that they can't hang out with Jewish friends.  And I could go on. I've been -- and maybe one of the reasons I was engaged as I was yesterday is, I've been hearing about this now for three, four, five, six months. Where Jewish students don't feel safe on college campuses. And this isn't a bubble wrap or snowflake moment. This is people talking about genocide, screaming at them as they try to go to their English class on campus. . . .  You know, Willie, the thing is, and I'm certainly not saying this of all the student protesters that are out there. And certainly not children of Palestinian families who have lost loved ones through the years in this war, in this conflict. I will say, though, among, again -- and I've spoken with some of them. I want to be careful. But among these white, woke, pampered, elitist -- I'm not supposed to use that word. Let's say children from wealthy families that decide, as Dr. Brzezinski said so many years ago, that they're going to play radical for a weekend and then go home to mommy and daddy's mansion, there's a complete ignorance about the complexities of this issue. Now, of course, if you listen to the show, you would understand many of the complexities of this issue, because we have been really tough on Israeli officials that come on this show. We have asked why they've continued to allow illegal settlements in the West Bank over the decade. Why they have continued to fight against a two-state solution for peace. Why they have done what they have done in Gaza. Why they did with Hamas, why Netanyahu was Hamas' ally leading up to October the 7th. So, it is very complicated. That's lost, though, in a lot of those things. And when you start talking about even West Bank settlements with a lot of these students, their eyes glaze over. They -- because that's not in the TikTok video. Again, I'm not saying this about all the students. But I will tell you, I'm saying it about a hell of a lot of students I have spoken with. When you go, well, you know, in 2000 there was an Oslo Accord where Bill Clinton had gotten together, and they were giving 97% of the West Bank to the Palestinians, and the other 3% they were going to make up with Israeli land. And they had figured out, you know, a capital in East Jerusalem. And they sit there with their eyes glazed because they have no idea what happened in this peace process, what happened through the years. They just, they see something on TikTok, and they're like, Israel bad, and Hamas good. And they go out and they start shouting at Jews -- some. WILLIE GEIST: Yeah, and you don't even have to go that deep. You can ask, what does it mean to chant, from the river to the sea, and they don't know.  And then when you tell them what it is, and we've seen this from reporters asking some of them --again, not all of them. Some of them have a deep understanding of this -- they don't understand that that means the elimination of the State of Israel and the people who live within that state. So, I've been having a lot of these same conversations as you, Joe. So if you watch our show, you know how critical we've been of Netanyahu, of the prosecution of the war. That we grieve and mourn for children and women who have been killed in this war, that are starving in this war. It's a terrible, terrible thing. But that does not give kids on college campuses license to chant, from the river to the sea, and to say that Jewish kids should not exist, in some cases, at Columbia, for example.

Velma Season 2 Adds Anti-Catholic Bigotry to Its Hatefest

Last year, Max released Velma, an animated adult "reimagining" of the Scooby Doo franchise that became one of the most hated series in the history of television. On Thursday, April 25, Max premiered a second season of Velma that is almost as bad as the first. Produced by Mindy Kaling, Velma is riddled with unfunny hostility toward men, particularly white men as embodied in Velma's doofus version of Fred (Glenn Howerton). Fred is a dumb and infantilized character who is routinely mocked. Season two's plot is about a serial killer targeting white middle-aged men. The killer chops off the victims' penises. Season One ended with a horrifying scene in which Velma twerked over the corpse of Fred's mother after she was killed in an accident. Season two's violence is no less vulgar. In this new season, Fred becomes attracted to Catholicism and larps as a fake priest. His newfound interest in Catholicism, which he uses to promote his "spooky stuff hunting business," becomes a launchpad for insulting the Catholic Church. After Velma (Mindy Kaling) rigs a school lottery to get paired with Fred for an activity, her violation of school tradition somehow turns into dialogue on Catholics. Fred: I know you rigged this, Velma. If there's one thing rich people know, it's cheating. Velma: There are more important things than tradition. Fred: No, there aren't. Look at the Catholics. We used to control the world. But then, Martin Luther was all like, 'Let's ignore traditions.'  And now, we only control Boston and the Supreme Court. Velma: Exactly. Tradition, religion, superstition. When you remove the fun hats and free wine, they're just about controlling people with fear. The local church priest is a drunkard who is secretly part of a government conspiracy that created a super-villain. The priest becomes one of the men murdered and castrated by the villain. The series also mocks the sacrament of confession. Fred sits in the confessional and pretends to be a priest, but instead falls in love with the old lady on the other side of the screen confessing her sins.  In contrast to the moronic "Catholic" characters, an occultist heroine named Amber (Sara Ramirez) befriends members of the mystery-solving group and proves to be smart and intuitive. Amber is "non-binary" and uses "they/them" pronouns. She is a proud "witch" who draws pentagrams and practices seances.  Like season one, the plot of Velma's second season is too convoluted to unpack and nearly impossible to either follow or care about. Dialogue tosses in casual references to anti-capitalism and random praise for left-wing heroes like Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayer and former First Lady Michelle Obama. There is little rhyme or reason to these woke insertions.  Velma has zero redeeming qualities even by the standards of contemporary television. Its audience score on Rotten Tomatoes as of April 30 is 11%. Max had heavily promoted the first season of Velma, but this second season dropped with little fanfare. Considering how little the streaming service marketed the second season, a third installment seems unlikely. If so, good riddance. The series is unredeemable.

Daily Caller: White House 'Corrected' Biden Remarks 148 Times So Far This Year

As we've pointed out how the networks typically ignore egregious gaffes by President Biden, Daily Caller White House correspondent Reagan Reese reports "White House communications staff has had to correct President Joe Biden’s public remarks at least 148 times since the beginning of 2024, a review of official White House transcripts shows." The White House website posts transcripts whenever Biden gives a speech or takes questions. Reese explained the Caller looked at 118 statements, speeches and chats with reporters spanning from Jan. 1 to April 24. Communications staffers frequently correct, add to or alter Biden’s official remarks "to either bring them into compliance with official White House policy or, in some cases, reality, a Daily Caller analysis showed. In several cases, official statements had to be changed to convey the exact opposite of what Biden actually said." [Emphasis ours.] “It was then, through no — through my American Rescue Plan — which every American [Republican] voted against, I might add — we made the largest investment in public safety ever,” the White House transcript of Biden’s March State of the Union address read. ....“We must be honest: The threat to democracy must be defended [defeated],” another State of the Union excerpt reads. Reese noted the hilarious Ron Burgundy-style Biden gaffe last week, reading too much from the Teleprompter. The Biden seemingly read the word “pause” off his screen, but the original White House transcript of the president’s remarks did not include the word “pause” — it said “(inaudible).” An updated version of the transcript now includes the president’s “pause” as well as the “(inaudible).” “Four more years, PAUSE.” Biden reads the instructions on the Teleprompter, which are always clearly marked, usually with lots of parentheses, meaning ‘dummy don’t say this part, is a command!’ Feel confident with this guy at the wheel??? pic.twitter.com/RUXA5jUkZM — Steve Cortes (@CortesSteve) April 29, 2024 For comparison, the Caller looked at a few transcripts of Trump's big events in 2020 to see how many edits or corrections the Trump staff made. (Some could argue Trump surely thinks every speech is the best ever, and wouldn't want staffers correcting it.) For the State of the Union, Biden staff made 13 edits, to zero for Trump staff. For the Earth Day speech, eight edits for Biden, zero for Trump. For the National Prayer Breakfast, eight edits for Biden, while "the Trump White House adjusted the transcript once when the former president missed one word in a quote." The Daily Caller’s analysis does not include times that the White House altered transcripts without indicating there was a change -- "stealth editing." Some had to adjust a claim on history: “I kept my promise to appoint the first Black [woman] Supreme Court justice,” the White House transcript reads from a Feb. 22 campaign reception. PS: This addition of "historic" was curious:  One White House transcript from Biden’s March 9 campaign event adds “historic” in front of a reference to Vice President Kamala Harris. “Because unlike Donald Trump, I know who we are as Americans.  (Applause.)  It’s why I promised to have an administration that looks like America.  (Applause.) The most diverse Cabinet and administration in American history led by a [historic] Vice President,” the transcript reads.

MRC’s Schneider on Newsmax, Blasts Columbia U. Pres: She’s on ‘Side of These Hamas Protesters’

MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider made clear that Columbia University’s limp-wristed response to protestors is a choice to surrender to the pro-Hamas mob.  On the April 27 edition of Newsmax’s Saturday Report Schneider blasted Columbia University President Nemat (Minouche) Shafik for her response to anti-Semitic protests on her campus. “Look, this president has made it very clear that she is on the side of these Hamas protesters,” Schneider told Newsmax anchor Rita Cosby. “I think her own academic writing shows that she is very biased in favor of these radical terrorists.” Some of the groups at the center of these campus protests such as Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) are heavily funded by leftist billionaire George Soros. Soros gave $525,000 to JVP between 2017 and 2022 and $350,000 to JVP Action.  According to the New York Post, activists trained by Soros-funded organizations are currently involved in similar protests at several universities. He is also a huge donor to Columbia University. Soros’ Open Society Foundations has given $7,150,272 to Columbia University from 2016-2022.  In response to a question from Cosby, Schneider made clear that much of what is going on at Columbia is not protected speech. “Conduct is not speech. And so, when these students have been violating the law, engaged in battery and assault—that’s a crime,” he added, before suggesting that the protestors were also trespassing. Ultimately, Schneider held Shafik responsible for the chaos, anti-Semitism and support for terrorism on Columbia University’s campus: “The president of Columbia is in violation of the law too,” he said, explaining that Shafik had run afoul of the Civil Rights Act. “She is a lawbreaker as well. So, I can understand why these members of Congress are calling for her resignation.” Schneider fleshed this point out after the interview, stating, “Jewish students have civil rights protection not to be harassed on campus and not to be denied the benefits that they have earned and paid for.”  The Civil Rights Act prohibits harassment on the basis of religion, but Shafik has presided over relentless harassment of Jewish students, as alleged by several students. The situation at Columbia University is bad enough that a rabbi associated with Columbia University advised Jewish students to stay home rather than come to school.  The Civil Rights Act also demands equal education opportunities for students, something that Columbia is currently failing to offer to Jewish and pro-Israel students on campus. This failure has led to several major donors, including Patriots’ owner Robert Kraft, announcing that they will no longer donate to the university.   Read More! NY Post Exposes Campus Activists Trained by Soros-Funded Group Conservatives are under attack! Contact ABC News (818) 460-7477, CBS News (212) 975-3247 and NBC News (212) 664-6192 and demand they report on campus anti-Semitism.

‘We Need You’ as ‘Mamala’; Here’s the Worst Moments From Drew Barrymore’s Kamala Chat

Vice President Kamala Harris’s taped interview with actress-turned-daytime-talk-show host Drew Barrymore aired Monday and while it was a brisk watch, it nonetheless remained a gag-tastic abomination as Barrymore sat Indian-style on her curvy couch and held hands with Harris as she gushed over the awkward far-left politician as America’s “Mamala” and someone the country “respects so much” who can be “a great protector”. Well, unless you’re talking about unborn babies, (real) Christians, or those who possessed marijuana back when she was San Francisco district attorney. Because, in those cases, forget about it.     At the end of the first block, Barrymore almost broke down as, after Harris talked about her blended family with Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff and his daughters from his first marriage and that his girls call her “Mamala”, she proclaimed Harris should adopt the title for the whole country: Well, that’s a great segue to say that I keep thinking in my head that we all need a mom. I’ve been thinking that we really all need a tremendous hug in the world right now, but in our country, we need you to be Mamala of the country.  Amid raucous cheers and applause, Harris awkwardly drank it in like a villain receiving new powers: “I know. Yeah. I mean, yeah. Yeah, no.” Barrymore kept laying it on thick: “And as a woman who respects so much and wants to share and wants to be confident and has no ounce of meat that has competitiveness. When we lift each other up, we all rise.” Harris’s bizarre infatuation with herself was on display as she responded to these compliments with, “that’s exactly right. That’s right, that’s right.” She finally said more than words of affirmation (for herself) after Barrymore called her “a great protector (click “expand”): Well you know, part of it is, I think that sadly over the last many years, there has been this kind of perverse approach to what strength looks like, which is to suggest that the measure of one’s strength is based on who you beat down, instead of what we know the true measure of your strength is based on who you lift up...You know, and — and if you ever want to measure, if you ever just want some indication — objective indication of your individual power, see what you can do to help other people, people in need.  What — and it could be, you know, just a simple act, including just taking some interest and actually listening to how people are feeling and to sincerely — sincerely have some interest and care and concern about their well-being or their suffering. And I think we all know that’s what we want in each other. That’s what we want from leaders, but let’s be intentional about it and open about saying, you know, that’s really what strength looks like. And that’s the kind of strength that we want. In the next block, Barrymore sounded off about her ongoing but futile life on the dating scene and asked if Harris could help find her a man because “you are Mamala” and Harris’s marriage to Emhoff was thanks to a friend setting them up. After a block with taped questions from Emhoff about their dating history, the show was almost over and, with the time left, Barrymore told Harris, “I appreciate you more every single day. Not only thank you for going out and championing on behalf of all of us, but thank you for being the mother, the woman, the sister, and the daughter.” Once again, Harris couldn’t seem to accept a compliment (even attributing her to being a mother when she has no children of her own) without being weird: And friend and I love my — and I just — it’s really important. I think most of us — I — I will speak for myself. I could not do anything that I do on a daily basis, much less have arrived at this point, without an extraordinary network of friends. I mean, my best friend from kindergarten is still one of my best friends. Harris added she “mentor[s] a lot of young women mostly, but young men also, and I say...choose to be around people who love you, who care about you, who are going to be honest with you.” The Vice President then brought up how “my staff, for example, sometimes they’ll show me little things that just amuse me” such as “apparently, some people love to talk about the way I laugh”, but it was clearly Harris brought up not because it amused her, but it leaves her seething. Barrymore cheered her up: “Oh, yes! I love your laugh!” Harris defended her awkward, Disney villain-like cackle by saying she has her “mother’s laugh and I grew up around a bunch of women, in particular, who laughed from the belly”. “I think it’s really important for us to remind each other and our younger ones, don’t be confined to other people’s perception about what this looks like,” she concluded. With time running out and brain cells having been destroyed long before this, Barrymore gushed as she wrapped before signing off, “I love your laugh and I love that message.” To see the relevant transcript from April 29, click “expand.” The Drew Barrymore Show [via WJLA] April 29, 2024 3:06 p.m. Eastern DREW BARRYMORE: Well, that’s — VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: You have to sort that out. BARRYMORE: — a great segue to say that I keep thinking in my head that we all need a mom. I’ve been thinking that we really all need a tremendous hug in the world right now, but in our country, we need you to be Mamala of the country. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] HARRIS: I know. Yeah. I mean, yeah. Yeah, no. BARRYMORE: And as a woman who respects so much and wants to share and wants to be confident and has no ounce of meat that has competitiveness. HARRIS: Yeah. BARRYMORE: When we lift each other up, we all rise. HARRIS: That’s exactly right.  [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] That’s right, that’s right. BARRYMORE: However, we need a great protector. HARRIS: Yeah. Well you know, part of it is, I think that sadly over the last many years, there has been this kind of perverse approach to what strength looks like, which is to suggest that the measure of one’s strength is based on who you beat down, instead of what we know the true measure of your strength is based on who you lift up. BARRYMORE: Yes. HARRIS: Right? BARRYMORE: Yes. HARRIS: You know, and — and if you ever want to measure, if you ever just want some indication — objective indication of your individual power, see what you can do to help other people, people in need. What — and it could be, you know, just a simple act — BARRYMORE: Yes. HARRIS: — including just taking some interest and actually listening — BARRYMORE: Yes. HARRIS: — to how people are feeling and to sincerely — sincerely have some interest and care and concern about their well-being or their suffering. And I think we all know that’s what we want in each other. That’s what we want from leaders, but let’s be intentional about it and open about saying, you know, that’s really what strength looks like. And that’s the kind of strength that we want. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] (....) 3:13 p.m. Eastern BARRYMORE: However, getting to know each other first through questionnaires felt really exciting to me. HARRIS: Yeah. BARRYMORE: And we’ve lost the art of that. So there’s a college that has a blind questionnaire. HARRIS: Mmmm. BARRYMORE: [A]nd then they match you up with one person and you meet. And the success rate apparently is phenomenal. We just did a story about it. HARRIS: Have you tried it? BARRYMORE: I would like that opportunity. I never really got to go on a blind date, funny enough. I know. If someone set you up to — to I never have asked anyone to set me up. I never want to burden anyone with that, but you are Mamala. [LAUGHTER] If anyone comes to mind. HARRIS: Okay, okay. BARRYMORE: I don’t know. I don’t know. I’ve never asked anyone. HARRIS: I’m going to about it. BARRYMORE: Oh my goodness. HARRIS: I’ll think about it. (....) 3:26 p.m. Eastern BARRYMORE: I appreciate you more every single day. Not only thank you for going out and championing on behalf of all of us, but thank you for being the mother, the woman, the sister, and the daughter HARRIS: And friend and I love my — and I just — [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] — it’s really important. I think most of us — I — I will speak for myself. I could not do anything that I do on a daily basis, much less have arrived at this point, without an extraordinary network of friends. I mean, my best friend from kindergarten is still one of my best friends. AUDIENCE: Awww. HARRIS: And I think — and again, I mentor a lot of young women mostly, but young men also, and I say to them, you know, it’s really important — and I say this to everybody — choose to be around people who love you, who care about you, who are going to be honest with you. Like, girl you need a mint, you know? [LAUGHTER] People — BARRYMORE: Deb! HARRIS: — who will be like, you know, if you if you trip and fall, they’ll laugh with you, but then they’ll pick you back up and push you back out there. You know, you were asking me earlier about what it means to be, like, the first woman, and you know, it’s funny because people still got to get used to this, right? I mean, my staff, for example, sometimes they’ll show me little things that just amuse me. Like, apparently, some people love to talk about the way I laugh. BARRYMORE: Oh, yes. HARRIS: Ok. BARRYMORE: I love your laugh. HARRIS: Well, let me just tell you something. I have my mother’s laugh. BARRYMORE: Awww! HARRIS: And I grew up around a bunch of women, in particular, who laughed from the belly. They laughed. They would sit around the kitchen and HAD — drinking their coffee telling big stories with big laughs. You know, I’m never going to be hahahaha. Like, that’s just — [LAUGHTER] — I’m not that person and I think it’s really important for us to remind each other and our younger ones, don’t be confined to other people’s perception about what this looks like and who you — how you should act in order to be, right? It’s really important. It’s important. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] BARRYMORE: I love your laugh and I love that message.

Stelter Acknowledges Anti-Semitism At Columbia, Urges No Judgement

Former CNN media correspondent Brian Stelter returned to the network on Monday’s CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip to acknowledge that while there have been insistences of anti-Semitism among the Columbia campers, “we should try to remain as free of judgment of the students as we can” because he, his fellow panelists, and most of his viewers used to be students as well. Stelter was responding to National Review’s Reihan Salam, who took a radically different approach, “When you look at the Columbia campus, when you look at the UCLA campus and a number of other campuses, what you have is really violence, intimidation, harassment that has become really systematic and really quite terrifying.”     Not only did Salam go after the students, he also condemned the feckless school administration and the professors who support the students: If you're someone who's at home and you're watching this unfold, then I think that you're thinking a lot about our supposedly elite institutions, institutions that are meant to lead our society, that are meant to be exemplars of knowledge and truth seeking, instead descending into this chaos because you have university leaderships that do not have backbone, that have not actually demonstrated real viewpoint neutrality. You have faculty members at Columbia who are cheering on students who are, again, just harassing, intimidating, threatening other students.” This did not sit well with Phillip, who tried to divide the demonstrators into good guys and bad guys and contended that crackdown efforts are also targeting the former, “I do want to -- I mean, what is happening at Columbia, I mean, we have a little bit more visibility there. But there is a sense in which, now, and I think this is part of the point we were trying to illustrate, is that there are a lot of protesters who are doing none of those things that you just described and they're still being dragged off of the campus and put in handcuffs. So, both things are happening at the same time.” Illegal trespassing and encampment is still illegal, even if you're not being violent or chanting anti-Semitic slogans. Nevertheless,  Stelter concurred, “This is happening across the country. And we're not hearing about all these other campuses where this is happening at the same time. I think it's right to criticize university leadership, but I think we should try to remain as free of judgment of the students as we can because many of us were students a long time ago. Students, it's a time for education. Education can be learned in a very hard way. Some of these students are getting a very hard, but very real education.” Two things. First, the idea that college students should be free of judgment because they’re young and prone to make bad choices should only go so far. The idea that mass murder is wrong should not be something that a 20-something-year-old adult, who happens to be college student, needs to learn. Second, Stelter ignored Salam’s vital point about the faculty’s role in this. It’s one thing to say students should be better educated, but when the educators praise October 7, the education itself becomes the problem. Stelter continued by claiming most demonstrators are just honest, upstanding people, and we need more like them, “I don't think these young people mostly are seeking global media attention. Some definitely are, by the way. Some definitely are. And there have been some hateful slogans chanted. But there are a lot of students now caught up in this who are not seeking that attention, who are just with their classmates. And, by the way, Bill Maher's right when he says that, you know, there's some narcissism that comes with activism. But I think as a country, we're better off with more protests, not less, as long as the safety concerns are acknowledged.” No, we’d be better off with better protests, not more. Here is a transcript for the April 29 show: CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip 4/29/2024 10:13 PM ET REIHAN SALAM: When you look at the Columbia campus, when you look at the UCLA campus and a number of other campuses, what you have is really violence, intimidation, harassment that has become really systematic and really quite terrifying. And if you're someone who's at home and you're watching this unfold, then I think that you're thinking a lot about our supposedly elite institutions, institutions that are meant to lead our society, that are meant to be exemplars of knowledge and truth seeking, instead descending into this chaos because you have university leaderships that do not have backbone, that have not actually demonstrated real viewpoint neutrality. You have faculty members at Columbia who are cheering on students who are, again, just harassing, intimidating, threatening other students. ABBY PHILLIP: I do want to -- I mean, what is happening at Columbia, I mean, we have a little bit more visibility there. But there is a sense in which, now, and I think this is part of the point we were trying to illustrate, is that there are a lot of protesters who are doing none of those things that you just described. BRIAN STELTER: That's right. PHILLIP: And they're still being dragged off of the campus and put in handcuffs. So, both things are happening at the same time. STELTER: This is happening across the country. And we're not hearing about all these other campuses where this is happening at the same time. I think it's right to criticize university leadership, but I think we should try to remain as free of judgment of the students as we can because many of us were students a long time ago. Students, it's a time for education. Education can be learned in a very hard way. Some of these students are getting a very hard, but very real education. I don't think these young people mostly are seeking global media attention. Some definitely are, by the way. Some definitely are. And there have been some hateful slogans chanted. But there are a lot of students now caught up in this who are not seeking that attention, who are just with their classmates. And, by the way, Bill Maher's right when he says that, you know, there's some narcissism that comes with activism. But I think as a country, we're better off with more protests, not less, as long as the safety concerns are acknowledged.

7 Times Big Tech Censored Content Exposing Radical Islamic Extremism

Big Tech has not only run cover for leftists, but, over the years, it has censored content exposing radical Islamic extremism. From 2018 to April 2024, individuals discussing or providing evidence on radical Islam have found themselves facing various forms of censorship on Big Tech platforms. These include financial censorship, deleted content and locked accounts. From communist Chinese government-tied TikTok to Google, Meta, PayPal and Amazon, below are seven examples of Big Tech censoring information on radical Islamic extremism and its destructive aftermath. Instagram and TikTok targeted videos exposing Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, atrocities.Soon after the devastating Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attack on Israeli civilians triggered an ongoing conflict, actor Nathaniel Buzolic accused Meta-owned Instagram and communist Chinese government-tied TikTok of censoring content that served to shield radical Islamic extremism. Buzolic told Fox News that Instagram shut down his account no fewer than three different times for videos about the Hamas atrocities. He also said TikTok accused him of spreading “false information” and took down a video the actor shared of a child being kidnapped in Gaza. TikTok actually even boasted about removing 500,000 videos related to the Hamas-Israel war. Buzolic, who is strongly pro-Israel, insisted that “pro-Palestinian propaganda” cleverly manipulates Big Tech platforms. TikTok’s parent company is ByteDance, in which the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) controls a board seat and maintains a financial stake. Google’s chatbot downplayed evidence of radical Islamic terrorists raping Israeli women. MRC Free Speech America exclusively caught Google’s biased artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot, Gemini, whitewashing the sexual violence carried out by Hamas on Oct. 7. When asked about documented evidence of Hamas rape of Israelis during the heinous terror attack, Gemini pontificated, “Some people believe that these allegations are credible, while others believe that they are politically motivated.” A Google spokesperson subsequently confessedGemini gave the wrong response and needed to be fixed, stating, “Gemini got this wrong and missed the mark on this important and sensitive topic.” Facebook censored show for exposing threat of radical Islamic terrorism in the U.S. Meta-owned Facebook censored Front Page Magazine Editor and Glazov Gang show host Jamie Glazov’s account in April over an interview headlined “Oct. 7 Coming to the USA?” Glazov and his guests talked about reports that terrorists have infiltrated America due to the border crisis. In contrast to this censorship, Meta’s Oversight Board issued a 2023 decisionthat the term “shaheed” or martyr, often used by Muslims to refer to individuals killed while engaging in terrorism, was usually protected by freedom of expression. But Glazov, according to Front Page Magazine, was accused of violating “community standards” and threatening “the security of people on Facebook.” YouTube removed a video of the 9/11 radical Islamic terrorism attacks on the 20-year anniversary. Google-owned YouTube removeda video posted on Sept. 11, 2021 by ACT for America associate Emma Blair. The videodisplayed footage from the 2001 terror attacks on the United States, along with archived audio recordings of people trapped both in the Twin Towers and on the hijacked planes. In a notice to Blair, YouTube claimed that the video violated its violent criminal organizations policy, though the platform added it wouldn’t be levying a strike against her channel. YouTube later reversed its decision, and restored the video to Blair's channel. Amazon de-listed a book on alleged subversive radical Islamic extremist activity. In Sept. 2023, Amazon removed RealClear Investigations reporter Paul Sperry's 2008 book titled “Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives have Penetrated Washington.” Users who click the link that formerly led to his book, are met with a notice reading, “Sorry we couldn't find that page[.] Try searching or go to Amazon's home page.” Sperry decried the censorship on X (formerly Twitter), saying, “Amazon has secretly de-listed my bestselling book, 'Infiltration' (exposing how Saudi Embassy set up terror fronts and mosques around the Beltway) after I broke stories about the conflicts and biases of the Nat'l Editor & Fact Checker of the Wash Post, owned by AMAZON.”  PayPal and GoFundMe financially censored a website focused on reporting radical Islamic terrorism. PayPal shut down the account for Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch in 2018, Spencer told MRC Free Speech America. “PayPal banned Jihad Watch in 2018 but reinstated us after a public outcry,” Spencer stated. He suggested that this was only one of multiple instances of Big Tech censorship against the site, however. GoFundMe also censored Jihad Watch, banning the site from utilizing its services. Spencer further detailed that other platforms, including Amazon, Google, Patreon, Facebook and Twitter, have also censored the website. Front Page Magazine says Google restricted its advertising revenue over a report on a Muslim terrorist attack. Front Page recently reported that Google Ads censored the magazine when it rejected the outlet’s application to use the Google AdSense advertising program. The tech giant reportedly accused Front Page of “dangerous or derogatory content,” according to a March 2024 FrontPage Magazine report. The outlet reported that one of the articles Google objected to was a 2021 piece, “Remember The San Bernardino Fourteen,” which provided details about a devastating and deadly 2015 terror attack in California. The article also argued that the terrorists’ radical Islamic beliefs were a key factor in driving the attack.

CBS News Panics Over Battleground DOOM Poll

CBS News has added a latest installment to their ongoing series of panicked items conveying the current state of the race: a recap of their own poll showing former President Trump garnering greater trust on the economy in three key battleground states: Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. The poll was covered as part of White House correspondent Weijia Jiang’s daily wrapup. Watch the report in its entirety, as aired on CBS Evening News on Monday, April 29th, 2024: NORAH O’DONNELL: The race for president is coming into sharper focus with the CBS News Battleground Tracker poll showing President Biden and former President Donald Trump running neck and neck in three key states. CBS's Weijia Jiang has details from the White House. WEIJIA JIANG: Tonight, the Biden campaign is facing warning signs in the key swing states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. JOE BIDEN: You are my ticket to The White House. You, Pennsylvania. It's not hyperbole. JIANG: Rising prices have made the economy a top concern for voters. And in a new CBS poll, when asked if they would be financially better off under Biden or Trump, voters chose the former president by a sizable margin in each of the three states.  Registered voters in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania believe that they would be better financially off if Trump wins. How do you explain that?  KARINE JEAN-PIERRE: The pandemic caused inflation to rise, caused damages to the supply chain. And so that's why the president took action and we also understand that prices are still too high. They’re still too high. JIANG: More than 60% of voters in the three battlegrounds say that the economy was good during the Trump administration. DONALD TRUMP: We’re going to have a big victory. The polls are looking tremendous -- Michigan and Wisconsin. JIANG: The former president will campaign in those two states Wednesday, when his so-called hush money trial takes the day off. Still lagging behind Biden in fundraising, Trump had a private meeting Sunday with his primary rival, Florida governor Ron DeSantis, who has told allies he’s willing to raise money for the man who attacked him relentlessly. TRUMP: We’re up by 40 points over DeSanctimonious. JIANG: As Trump continues his search for a running mate, sources say one contender’s stock has dropped. South Dakota governor Kristi Noem. She’s under fire for revealing in a new book that she shot her dog Cricket after it misbehaved on a hunting trip, killed some chickens and bit Noem herself.  Governor Noem is defending her actions, citing a South Dakota law that says that dogs that attack and kill livestock can be put down. She said the animal had bitten people before and that she was being a responsible parent, dog owner, and neighbor. Norah. O’DONNELL: Weijia Jiang, thank you. It is telling that the report opens with President Joe Biden begging for votes in Pennsylvania. What is different is that there is no covering this poll by meeting with voters from each of these states. When Jiang rattles off the poll’s findings, there is no sense of what the voters are thinking. The only perspective offered is that of the White House, as Jiang plays back her question to White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, who proceeded to offer platitudes on inflation: KARINE JEAN-PIERRE: The pandemic caused inflation to rise, caused damages to the supply chain. And so that's why the president took action and we also understand that prices are still too high. They’re still too high. This was the only perspective that aired outside of Jiang’s reporting. The report then shifted to gossip, namely the purported Trump-DeSants meeting in Miami, and reports of South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem’s dog-killing past.  The big takeaway from this story, though, is the sense of nervousness over the CBS poll, and voters in each of these swing states passing judgment on inflation and Bidenomics, despite the media’s best efforts to Protect the Precious.

NBC Does Another Bidenomics-Related Story With No Mention Of Biden or Bidenomics

If you watch closely, a new theme is emerging among the corporate media: the publication of stories related to the economy which describe something that is worse now than four years ago due to Bidenomics, without ever mentioning President Biden or Bidenomics. The most recent example comes via NBC News in a report on the current advantages of renting versus home ownership. Watch the report in its entirety, as aired on NBC Nightly News on Monday, April 29th, 2024 (click “expand”):   LESTER HOLT: It's an age-old question, and so many people are asking it in this tight housing market. Should you rent or buy a home? CNBC's Diana Olick now with a new report just out about that, and it may surprise you. DIANA OLICK: Claire Murray has been renting for almost a decade. The 30-year-old pharmaceutical researcher says she can afford to buy a home but isn't sure it's the right investment for her. CLAIRE MURRAY: I have seen the economy change. I have seen the house market really balloon up in a way that kind of scares me from buying a home right now. OLICK: Home ownership has become so expensive that renting a home is now cheaper than buying one in all 50 of the largest U.S. cities, according to a new report from Bankrate. ALEX GAILEY: Buying a home is pretty expensive due to high mortgage rates, high home prices, and there's also a lot of competition in the market because there is low inventory. OLICK: The monthly mortgage payment for a median priced home, which is around $412,000, was $2,703 as of February of this year. That includes property taxes and insurance. Compare that to the national monthly rent of $1,979, which includes renter's insurance. That's a 37% gap between the two. In some cities that gap is even wider including San Francisco, Seattle, Salt Lake City, Austin, Denver and Dallas. Cities with the smallest gaps, though still more expensive to own, include Detroit, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Cleveland, St. Louis and Tampa. It's all giving today's renters a different take on the so-called dream of home ownership. MURRAY: I think renting can also be a good financial decision. And I don't know if society's always viewed it that way. OLICK: While the math shows renting is cheaper, it doesn't factor home appreciation into the equation. Historically, home prices have gone up over time, making home ownership one of the best ways to build wealth. Lester. HOLT: Diana Olick. Thank you.  The most recent instance of such stellar Biden-protective reporting came a little over a week ago, when CBS Weekend News ran a story on the high costs of auto ownership: from vehicle prices to the cost of even basic car insurance. This report went the entirety of its time without ever mentioning Biden or Bidenomics, as if the inflation that caused car (and insurance) prices to skyrocket just happened organically. We now see the same dynamics at play in this report that sells being a renter, and not actually a homeowner, as a net positive. Why is being a renter suddenly more advantageous than home ownership, which at one time was considered fundamental to individual attainment of the American Dream? Due to the high cost of home ownership, to  wit: high prices and high costs of insurance. And what happened to make home prices skyrocket? Why did insurance get so expensive? We never hear those answers to problems that are presented to the viewer as calamities disembodied from the current environment. There is no mention of the effects of inflation on the costs of home ownership, on the increase in construction and compliance costs, or on today’s high mortgage rates. How much of the tightness in the inventory market is caused by homeowners hanging on to their low rates from nearly a decade ago? We aren’t told. “Biden” and “Bidenomics” emerge unscathed from this report. Once again, the media go into "Protect the Precious" mode in order shield President Biden from any accountability over his performance on matters pertaining to the economy. to The title “Regime Media” is well-earned.  

NewsBusters Podcast: The Self-Love Flows at Reporter Party with Biden

The White House Correspondents Dinner airs live on CNN, with hours of journalists honoring themselves and how essential they are to America and to democracy. Who needs this? At dinners like this, they suggest they work in the noblest profession, and somehow it isn't encrusted with egotism and self-righteousness. We all know the way this works. The White House Correspondents Association typically hires a leftist comedian no matter which party is in control of the White House. Because leftist comedians are the ones who leftist journalists think are funny. This year it was Colin Jost, a fake-news anchor on Saturday Night Live. Back in 2009, the WHCA brought in Wanda Sykes to honor the Obamas and to rip Rush Limbaugh to compare him to Osama bin Laden and the 9/11 hijackers and say "I hope his kidneys fail." In 2017, comedian Hasan Minhaj called Donald Trump the "Liar-in-Chief" and said to the press, "You are his biggest enemy -- journalists, ISIS, normal-length ties. And somehow, you're the bad guys. That's why you gotta keep your foot on the gas." This year, it was President Biden that was telling all the reporters in the room that they have to get tougher on Trump, because he said he would be a dictator on Day One and he "promised a bloodbath when he loses again." Biden had zero-fear of the "fact checkers," since they're all assigned to monitoring Trump on a daily basis.  He joked about being a dictator to Sean Hannity, and his "bloodbath" was what Biden would do to the economy in a second term. Biden told the media he wasn't asking them to take sides....and yet democracy was at stake, so they better take sides. The next day, ABC's George Stephanopoulos uncorked a passionate Democrat editorial at the start of the show, touting how "no American president" faced criminal trials and other legal troubles, warning against how this could be "numbing" for voters (because Trump isn't losing by 30 points like they want). He couldn't talk about how all of Trump's prosecutors are Democrats desperately trying to bankrupt Trump or put Trump in jail, preferably before the election.  Enjoy the podcast below, or wherever you listen to podcasts.   

Google Invests in AI Education as it Unleashes ‘Secret Weapon’

Google just announced a massive investment in training Americans to use its biased and anti-free speech artificial intelligence. Big Tech giant Google proudly declared its AI education investment in an April 26 release. Beneficiaries of these funds include the Institute for Veterans and Military Families (IVMF) and Goodwill, which are each expected to train American military members, veterans and civilians in AI skills. The problem? Google’s AI and search engine both have a track record of giving anti-free speech and woke results, so much so that the tech company is not a trustworthy source of AI training. “Together with our partners, we want to make sure everyone can take advantage of the opportunities AI will provide,” the release declared. “That’s why today we are announcing a $75 million Google AI Opportunity Fund, made possible with support from Google.org, our philanthropic arm.” The release added, “Through this fund, Google.org will work with nonprofit, education, and other sectors to train one million Americans of all backgrounds and provide them with AI skills at no cost.” Google is actively trying to get people to use its AI but it is not willing to reveal exactly how it works behind the scenes.  As MRC Free Speech America VP Dan Schneider pointed out, Google’s AI is also closed source, meaning its source code is kept secret. So even if IVMF and Goodwill train Americans using Google AI, people won’t be able to see fully what they’re using. Schneider highlighted the dangers of this: “Users can become involuntary tools for Google’s political purposes. This is Google’s secret weapon.” This comes on the heels of studies MRC Free Speech America released illustrating the Google AI’s leftist bent.  MRC caught Google’s Gemini promoting leftist climate propaganda and justifying censorship on Earth Day. MRC researchers queried, “Is climate information free speech under the First Amendment?” Gemini pontificated in reply that “Incitement to Violence” and “Fraudulent Speech” or “Speech intended to mislead for personal gain — can be restricted.” The AI did not then clarify how climate information could potentially fit into the categories it listed. In March, MRC released a report on a whopping 41 times that Google has engaged in election interference since 2008. Google's AI Gemini (formerly Bard) displayed bias this election cycle, refusing to answer prompts about two of Biden’s worst weak spots; namely, the Democrat president’s mental health and the ongoing border crisis. Google’s search engine also buried the campaign websites of Joe Biden’s 2024 presidential opponents. Will Google’s AI funding only exacerbate the bias and censorship inherent in its own technology? Conservatives are under attack. Contact Google at 650-253-0000 and demand it be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

ABC Boasts Crackdowns 'Hardening the Resolve' of Pro-Hamas Students

The anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas encampment continued to spread to other university and college campuses like a disease over the weekend and ABC correspondent Trevor Ault responded on Monday by boasting that crackdowns were “hardening the resolve” of the student extremists. He even suggested that they were the ones being threatened and not the ones causing the problems. Right at the top of the segment, Ault and fill-in anchor/transportation correspondent Gio Benitez bantered about how the crackdown seemed to be having the opposite effect on the encampments: BENITEZ: And here at home, amid the Israel/Hamas War there is growing unrest on college campuses. Police arresting hundreds of people this weekend at protests there with high schoolers making their decision on where to go to college in just two days. Trevor Ault is at USC in Los Angeles with more on this. Good morning, Trevor. AULT: Good morning, Gio. So, the heightened response from police and from universities seems to really only be hardening the resolve of a lot of these protesters. And what's especially notable is we have people on all sides here, outside and inside the demonstrations who say they don't feel safe.     Without showing any of the anti-Semitic incidents caught on camera, particularly the videos of students chanting for the murder of Jews, Ault portrayed the anti-Semites as victims of unfair characterizations and free speech crackdowns: AULT: Saturday demonstrations from Northeastern to Indiana, Washington University in St. Louis, and Arizona State, many demanding their schools divest from companies believed to be profiting from the war and calling for a cease-fire. Several accusing police and their universities of infringing on their right to protest. PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER 1: We want to feel supported by our institution and we want to feel like they're meeting us. PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER 2: We will not be leaving until those demands are met. AULT: Cornell University suspending several students. School officials also accusing some protesters at rallies on campus of chanting anti-Semitic phrases. Ault also tried to cast doubt on who could be behind pro-Hamas vandalism. “Officials at USC accusing some demonstrators of harassment and vandalism, ‘say no to genocide’ painted on this statue,” he gawked. Yeah, it’s a real mystery, Trevor. Who could have spray-painted that? Meanwhile, over on NBC’s Today, correspondent Erin McLaughlin hyped how pro-Hamas extremists tore down an American flag and replaced it with a Palestinian one. “At Harvard, protesters put up Palestinian flag where an American flag would fly,” she said. ABC concluded the segment with Ault seemingly suggesting that the students weren’t responsible for what they were doing. “And it has been noted that some of the people at these campus demonstrations, including some arrested, are not students,” he argued. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America April 29, 2024 7:09:08 a.m. Eastern GIO BENITEZ: And here at home, amid the Israel/Hamas War there is growing unrest on college campuses. Police arresting hundreds of people this weekend at protests there with high schoolers making their decision on where to go to college in just two days. Trevor Ault is at USC in Los Angeles with more on this. Good morning, Trevor. TREVOR AULT: Good morning, Gio. So, the heightened response from police and from universities seems to really only be hardening the resolve of a lot of these protesters. And what's especially notable is we have people on all sides here, outside and inside the demonstrations who say they don't feel safe. [Cuts to video] This weekend, hundreds of protesters arrested at college campuses across country. Pro-Palestinian demonstrations escalating further, along with counter-protests and the police response to these accelerating tensions. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: I support the right for people to protest, always, as they should have. I think it brings in a lot of outside, like, antagonists. AULT: Saturday demonstrations from Northeastern to Indiana, Washington University in St. Louis, and Arizona State, many demanding their schools divest from companies believed to be profiting from the war and calling for a cease fire. Several accusing police and their universities of infringing on their right to protest. PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER 1: We want to feel supported by our institution and we want to feel like they're meeting us. PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER 2: We will not be leaving until those demands are met. AULT: Cornell University suspending several students. School officials also accusing some protesters at rallies on campus of chanting anti-Semitic phrases. At UCLA Sunday, pro-Israel demonstrators holding a counter-protest. PRO-ISRAEL PROTESTER: They don't know what is going on in Gaza. They don't know what is going on. And they need to learn. AULT: Thousands showing up. The university saying a group breached the barrier separating the two groups leading to some violent altercations. The LAPD issuing a citywide tactical alert through the weekend. Officials at USC accusing some demonstrators of harassment and vandalism, “say no to genocide” painted on this statue. And this morning, with no end in sight for these demonstrations, more and more colleges and universities grappling with how to move forward. KIM WEHLE (ABC contributor, University of Baltimore School of Law): Public universities and colleges and the police don't have the right to stop a message. They have a right sometimes to stop the manner in which the message is being conveyed. Hate speech is not protected. There are certain kinds of speech that are protected, but protesting the government's involvement in a conflict overseas is classic first amendment protected activity. [Cuts back live] AULT: And it has been noted that some of the people at these campus demonstrations, including some arrested, are not students. And here at USC, still, the students, the faculty, the staff, they all still have to show their ID just to get on campus.

WashPost 'Fact Checker' Glenn Kessler Aids Biden, Throws Four More Pinocchios at Trump

On Monday morning, Washington Post "Fact Checker" Glenn Kessler was tossing his "Four Pinocchios" Liar rating at Donald Trump again, this time over rent-support payments for migrants in the Democrat-run state of Michigan. In recent months, Kessler has emptied a bucket of Pinocchios on Trump and his aides, but he's conveniently avoided throwing a single Pinocchio at Joe Biden, not even when Biden blamed Trump for massive Covid deaths: "We lost over 1,200,000 people because of the slow start in all this [vaccination] process.”  Kessler ruled in February that "Biden’s phrasing is sufficiently subtle that a link is not so easily established." That's ridiculous. It looks like Glenn Kessler (D-D.C.). This was Monday's headline:  Trump and allies say Biden pays rent for ‘illegals’ in Michigan. Not true. Kessler established the federal government is assisting Michigan with rental subsidies, but it depends on what the meaning of "refugee" is. The federal government, through the Office of Refugee Resettlement, a unit of the Department of Health and Human Services, has long provided hundreds of millions of dollars a year to states and nongovernment organizations to help refugees transition to life in the United States. The Office of Global Michigan supports such efforts in the state, and in October launched the Newcomer Rental Subsidy program. Under this initiative, for up to 12 months individuals who qualify may receive as much as $500 a month in rental subsidies. Kessler repeatedly relies on 'the state" of Michigan to rebut the Trump camp, downplaying this is a Republican-Democrat fight in Michigan.  The state says these qualified applicants include refugees, asylees, people with special immigrant visas who helped the U.S. government overseas, victims of human trafficking, Cuban and Haitian entrants, Afghan nationals and Ukrainians granted humanitarian parole. These are all people legally in the United States.... the state says that it will not consider any application with a pending defensive asylum hearing.  Then he relies on "the state" to break down their rental-subsidy handouts, with this loaded summary: "In any case, more than half of the people who have been approved for rental subsidies are Afghan and Ukrainian refugees — a far cry from the murderers that Trump claims are overrunning the country." Kessler also lined up the Biden administration to rebut Trump: "An HHS spokesman said the refugee office funds could not be used for asylum seekers....A White House spokesman also disputed Trump’s claims in a statement." None of these statements were going the be challenged by Kessler. They were just going to be repeated.  Conservatives on Twitter mocked Kessler's conclusion:  The link to Biden is even more dubious. This is a state program that has received federal grant money, but there is no indication that Biden is even aware of it. So it’s absurd to run ads that claim Biden is paying rent for immigrants who are in the country illegally. Trump and MAGA Inc. earn Four Pinocchios. Kessler has repeatedly defended Democrats when Republicans make claims about the Democrats providing benefits to illegal immigrants. After all, it is an election year. 

Texas Attorney General Sues Biden Admin. For Title IX Misuse

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton just sued the Biden Administration for its unlawful use of Title IX to allow trans-identifying males the ability to compete in women's sports and use women’s bathrooms in public schools. In early April, the Education Department revealed new regulations that would prohibit schools from being allowed to protect biological girls sports and safety. The new regulations are set to take place in August, hence Paxton’s decision to sue the Biden Administration with the help of America First Legal (AFL). The new requirements would expand the definition of the word “sex” to include a student’s self-professed “gender identity.” Now, any educational program that receives federal funding like K-12 schools, colleges and universities will be required to adhere to the wishes of any student who identifies as a gender that isn’t scientifically accurate. Essentially then, a male student who claims to be transgender and identifies as a girl, would be welcomed into all spaces dedicated to actual girls.  The Department of Education formally amended the Code of Federal Regulations to adhere to the new rule.  A Press Release from Paxton’s office released Monday indicated that: This rule violates existing federal law, ignores the Constitution, and denies women the protections that Title IX was intended to afford them. The Biden Administration has exceeded its authority and radically distorted the meaning intended by Congress when the law was made. Further, the changes would fundamentally transform the educational atmosphere of publicly funded educational institutions, forcing communities to capitulate to unscientific gender ideology and putting girls and women at risk in K-12 schools and on college campuses. The new regulations also note that it would be considered “harassment” to use someone’s biologically accurate pronouns if they choose to live with a delusional sense of identity. Texas will not allow Joe Biden to rewrite Title IX at whim, destroying legal protections for women in furtherance of his radical obsession with gender ideology,” said Attorney General Paxton. “This attempt to subvert federal law is plainly illegal, undemocratic, and divorced from reality. Texas will always take the lead to oppose Biden’s extremist, destructive policies that put women at risk. America First Legal’s president Stephen Miller noted how this lawsuit is needed in order to protect young girls: Biden’s new Title IX regulation is a vile obscenity: it forces women and girls to share locker rooms and restrooms with men. It forces them to call a he, a she, and to pretend in every way that a man is a woman, humiliating, degrading, and erasing women. This is an abomination, and as outside counsel for Texas we will battle this regulation in court with all the legal fight we can bring. It must be defeated for the sake of American women and for the sake of our daughters. It’s really sad that we’re still having this fight when one slide clearly cares about the safety of young girls and the other cares about pushing an agenda.

Don Lemon Shows No Remorse for Trump-Russia Probe, Mocking MAGA in WILD Interview

In an interview posted Friday with The Intercept’s Ryan Grim and Federalist editor/National Journalism Center (NJC) director Emily Jashinsky, former CNN host Don Lemon showed zero regret or remorse for CNN’s Trump-Russia obsessions, mocking Trump voters as Boomer rubes, and insisted CNN had no liberal bias. Grim and Jashinsky scored the Lemon interview as the first long-form sit-down for their show Counter Points as part of the Breaking Points network, helmed by Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti. The pompous liberal journalist couldn’t even fully engage with the two questions about whether he felt like he had more freedom to cover topics now that he’s in independent media versus his days inside corporate media and, in a follow-up, whether he was restricted at CNN. Lemon’s arrogance came out as he bragged he “probably had the most editorial freedom on — on my own network than anyone” perhaps in part due to the airtime (before admitting, yes, having an independent show has helped him foster “community” and better engagement with viewers). After an amusing exchange when Lemon refused to engage with Jashinsky’s questions about whether his comment about Nikki Haley being past “her prime” truly outraged CNN bosses or was just an excuse to fire him, Lemon strongly pushed back when Grim next asked him whether he agreed CNN missed the ground swell on the far-left for Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 2020.  In essence, Lemon told Grim to stop whining and get over it since Sanders supporters were likely why Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton (click “expand”): I didn’t necessarily think CNN was — was left. I thought that CNN was about facts. I think CNN has the best journalists in the world, but I also think — you asked me what my editorial meetings were like. I mean, we, no one was trying to push Bernie Sanders, at least in my editorial meetings and I would — I would venture to, to speak for the network now. Well, I’ll speak for myself. I don’t think that anyone was trying to push Bernie Sanders out. I think that Bernie Sanders may have had sort of — this sort of — sort of outsized influence with a certain segment of the Democratic Party. But all polls in 2016 pointed to Hillary Clinton, all polls in 2020 and public sentiment pointed to Joe Biden. And so, what was shocking, I think, to myself was the — the reaction from Democrats to the nomination of Hillary Clinton instead of Bernie Sanders in — in ‘16, especially in 2020. You know, I — I couldn’t get to gauge it because I didn’t get to go to the conventions. I think that was around, you know, because of COVID. But here’s a shocking thing. (....) [T]he public wanted Hillary Clinton. They didn’t want Bernie Sanders. So, I say that to say when, after all of, you know, Republicans did not love Donald Trump. They held their nose and they voted for him, all of the Never Trumpers, all of the people, you know, from Ted Cruz on down, when he became the nominee, everyone got behind him. When we were at the convention, it was Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump. It wasn’t Jeb. It wasn’t, you know, Cruz, it wasn’t Rubio, it wasn’t any of those people. By the time we got to the Democratic convention and Hillary Clinton was a nominee, people were yelling, Bernie, Bernie and we were like, what the hell is going on? So, I think that Bernie Sanders, that — that — that wing of the Democratic Party actually did as much if not more damage to Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump. (....) I think Bernie Sanders is a fantastic politician, but I do think that there is a lesson in it for Democrats that you have to get behind the person who is the actual nominee and you cannot have sour grapes of the person who did not become the nominee. That’s how the process worked. So, I know that people are upset and they’re upset about the progressive wing and they don’t think it gets covered enough, but this is where we are. The nominee — or the person is Joe Biden, the nominee or the person then was Hillary Clinton. I think the Bernie Sanders progressive wing of the party should have gotten behind — should have gotten behind them. And that’s the reason — one of the reasons — the main reasons that we’re in the predicament that we are now and that we had a Trump presidency. (....) Bernie Sanders was not going to win....Republicans fall in line. Democrats fight each other. Democrats usually wet the bed. I — I’m sorry, but Bernie Sanders was not the nominee nor was he ever going to become the nominee. And I know that people are upset by it, but that’s the truth. It’s the same thing for Republicans. Nikki Haley is not the nominee. She’s not gonna become the nominee. Donald Trump is a nominee, regardless if you like it or not. The guy is in court and guess what? Republicans are going to fall in line. Jashinsky then confronted Lemon over the infamous 2020 segment with Rick Wilson and Wajahat Ali in which they mocked Trump supporters as moronic “Boomer rubes.” Jashinsky called it “a low point, honestly, in media coverage of Donald Trump” and wondered if Lemon regretted “seeing other Americans through that lens”. Lemon flatly denied he participated in any of that demeaning behavior, claiming he only laughed about the idea Americans couldn’t find Ukraine on a map: Truly remarkable exchange in the Don Lemon interview on 'Counter Points' when @EmilyJashinsky and @RyanGrim asked about Lemon's infamous January 2020 segment (https://t.co/rLV6JVKz7G) laughing about MAGA supporters with Rick Wilson and Wajahat Ali. Zero remorse. Jashinsky:… pic.twitter.com/OUxhoytJiz — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 26, 2024 Lemon’s scoffing even brought Grim to push back and fact-checked Lemon’s claim from earlier that 2020 polls always had Biden as a lock for the Democratic nomination (click “expand”): GRIM: [T]o the point about the polling that, that you mentioned —  LEMON: I mean, you can’t say that —  GRIM: — oh, just one point — LEMON: — you can’t say that. GRIM: — on Joe Biden’s polling. Joe — Joe Biden was not polling ahead. You — you had said that Joe Biden was pulling ahead. Joe Biden was in the toilet the entire time. He finished fourth in Iowa, fifth in New Hampshire, got annihilated in — in Nevada — LEMON: Where was he by the time — where was he by the time got to the convention? GRIM: — yeah. And — and then he — he won after, you know, $175 million in — in free media between Nevada and South Carolina. And then he wins Super Tuesday and he won the nomination, no doubt about it. LEMON: Yeah. GRIM: But he wasn’t polling ahead, uh, before that. Jashinsky drew even more defensiveness from Lemon when she wondered if the press had made any strides to understand Americans outside their corporate liberal bubbles, adding Lemon himself was still somewhat in one since his new studio was on Park Avenue. Also in the clip above, Lemon’s skull was so thick he denied Park Avenue was any sort of elite bubble because it’s still “part of America” and argued the media do “a great job of — of — of talking to people from, you know, from all parts of the country”. Lemon somehow poured out even more elitist drivel when he claimed Trump supporters and Bernie supporters were far too “overrepresented” in the media and people like Grim and Jashinsky should get over it: Another WILD exchange in the Don Lemon interview on 'Counter Points' with @EmilyJashinsky and @RyanGrim was when Lemon claimed corporate media do “a great job” making all voices heard. In fact, he said, it's MAGA supporters and Bernie voters who are “overrepresented” in the… pic.twitter.com/t9kk55DLgC — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 26, 2024 Later, he strongly took exception to Grim’s analysis on CNN being an establishment Democratic Party “mouthpiece” since it’s “only because of the Republican side and mostly Donald Trump and the MAGA wing of the Republican Party, the facts were not on their side” (click “expand”): Don Lemon to @RyanGrim on the notion of CNN having become DNC-TV: “I — I — I don’t like that. I don’t believe in that whole — I don’t believe in the premise of — of — listen, I’m not trying to be confrontational. I don’t agree with the premise of what you’re saying and when… pic.twitter.com/HvA44cvmuB — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 26, 2024 The interview ended with more barbs being thrown when Jashinsky flatly told Lemon that CNN’s “Russia coverage was not great,” but Lemon said that’s only “your opinion” because “the Russia coverage on CNN was — was good” and the media in general having done “the best jobs that they could”. Further, he told her to both stop “Monday morning quarterback[ing]” what happened and falling into the trap of many “people” who “romanticize the time that we were in, like people romanticize, you know, COVID.” Grim threw one more jab, asking whether CNN had “ever said that there actually was not, never proven collusion between the Trump campaign and the” Russians. Lemon initially said “You’ll have to ask CNN”, but then dove in head-first by falsely claiming that’s not true and there were indeed “accounts of collusion”. Amazing. To see the relevant transcript from April 26, click here.

Hostin Backs Pro-Hamas Camps: ‘Anti-War Protests’ Against ‘Apartheid’

Finally, back from their spring break, Monday was the first day the liberal ladies of ABC’s The View were able to spout off about the anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas encampments sweeping across college campuses. Staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) didn’t disappoint as she threw her lot in with the students chanting for the murder of Jews. She decried those who told the truth about the students and whined about the anti-Semitic designation. Most of the other co-hosts (Alyssa Farah-Griffin, Sara Haines, Ana Navarro) denounced the antisemitism on full display at the encampments and wanted it gone. But when it was her turn to speak, Hostin bloviated about how “we need to shift the framing of these college protests” and call them “anti-war protests” instead of “pro-Palestinian protests.” She championed their calls for schools to boycott, divest, and sanction Israel, suggesting they could be as successful as the campaigns against South African apartheid: I think college campuses have been the place for anti-war protests for as far as I can remember. I think recent protests haven't even reached the scale of the major student protests that we saw in the late 1960s against the Vietnam War or even the 1980s against South African’s [sic] -- South Africa's practice of apartheid. We saw calls during apartheid to divest from South African companies, and that was very successful. Nelson Mandela said he believed that's what led in many respects to, you know, South Africa being freed from that system. “The students are telling me, this is a humanitarian crisis,” she proclaimed as if pampered Ivy Leagues students who want the student debt they signed up for canceled knew anything about the real world. She parroted the long-debunked claims from the Hamas Ministry of Health that 35,000 civilians “mainly women and children” have been killed, and the United Nations’ unsupported claims of Israeli “war crimes.”     She ridiculously asserted that no one has acknowledged that Palestinians “are people.” Hostin rounded out her support for the anti-Semites by whining about using that term. She insisted that people who use “antisemitism” to describe the protests are “far-right” with “authoritarian leanings” who oppose free speech. “They don't want students on these campuses to voice their opinions,” she decried She received backup from moderator Whoopi Goldberg, who assumed a Jewish-sounding name when she entered show business. According to Goldberg, any media reports about the rampant rabid antisemitism in the encampments were just “clickbait.” Without evidence, she suggested that outlets were just recycling images of antisemitism from one location and claiming it was at multiple places. “Part of our problem is the media takes what is the best clickbait. So, you see the same posters or you see the same people, but you don't see the folks who are doing peaceful stuff and saying, here's what we want to do,” she asserted. “I would caution the media to be very careful about what they're doing, and how they're handling this because what they seem to be doing is pushing a narrative,” she scolded outlets. But as NewsBusters reports proved,  last week, liberal media outlets largely carried water for the anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas encampments. While faux-conservative Navarro denounced the antisemitism, she did scold them for thinking about hurting President Biden in November. “There is not one group that anybody is protesting over that will be better off under Donald Trump. So, be very careful that you don't cut off your nose to spite your face by not showing up to vote in November,” she warned. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 29, 2024 11:07:51 a.m. Eastern (…) ANA NAVARRO: The only thing I want to remind Americans though as they're protesting is, you know, and we heard it. We've heard it. We heard them call Joe Biden, you know, a genocidal assassin and all sorts of things. There is not one group that anybody is protesting over that will be better off under Donald Trump. So, be very careful that you don't cut off your nose to spite your face by not showing up to vote in November. Because the first thing that Donald Trump did when he became president was issue a Muslim ban. And if you think not showing up to vote is not going to help Donald Trump get elected and Donald Trump will give Palestine any justice, I want what you're smoking. [Applause] SUNNY HOSTIN: I think it's, you know, I think we need to shift the framing of these college protests in fact, in my view. I think college campuses have been the place for anti-war protests for as far as I can remember. I think recent protests haven't even reached the scale of the major student protests that we saw in the late 1960s against the Vietnam War or even the 1980s against South African’s -- South Africa's practice of apartheid. We saw calls during apartheid to divest from South African companies, and that was very successful. Nelson Mandela said he believed that's what led in many respects to, you know, South Africa being freed from that system. And so I think these are anti-war protests, and I think it's very distressing -- distressing that we are framing these as pro-Palestinian protests or pro-Israeli protests. These are anti-war protests, and what they are -- the students that I have spoken to at many of the ivy league schools and a student I did speak to at Emory – where a professor was thrown to the ground simply for asking the police, what are you doing to these peacefully protesting students? The students are telling me, this is a humanitarian crisis. What we also don't talk enough about is the fact that 35,000, mainly women and children that are Palestinians have been murdered. What we also don't talk about, I think enough is that for some reason the discussion of against Israel's policies which the U.N. has called war crimes, which the international criminal court is investigating as war crimes. What we don't say is these are people, these are civilians, and we must protect them. Even President Biden at this point has said, you have gone too far. So, it has never been in my life, in my career, the – criticizing policies of government is equated with anti-Semitism. And that, I think, is a far-right -- it comes from the far-right. It comes from the authoritarian leanings, where they don't want students on these campuses to voice their opinions because they want to change the narrative going forward. And I think we have to be very, very careful about that. WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Since I haven't said anything – I'm sorry, I do have to do this. [Pauses] It is one of the great rights as an American to stand up and say something's wrong. Regardless of what your color is, if you are a woman, man, it doesn't matter. And we must teach our people how to be on the lookout. Part of our problem is the media takes what is the best clickbait. So, you see the same posters or you see the same people, but you don't see the folks who are doing peaceful stuff and saying, here's what we want to do. I would caution the media to be very careful about what they're doing, and how they're handling this because what they seem to be doing is pushing a narrative that people are pushing against, which students are pushing against which I'm thrilled to see because I like when students get mad and say, “we want a change made.” (…)

Church Volunteer Accused of Sexual Assault of 15-Year-Old

An Arkansas teacher was arrested Wednesday for allegedly sexually abusing a 15-year-old boy she met at a church beginning in 2020.  Reagan Gray, a volunteer at the Immanuel Baptist Church, allegedly sent nude photos to the young boy after hunting down his cell number on the church’s WhatsApp group. Gray, 26, was a teacher at the Little Rock Christian Academy and volunteered at the Immanuel Baptist Church. The boy didn’t attend the school, but was part of the church's student ministry where Gray volunteered. According to local news THV11, the child’s parents discovered text messages on their son's phone in 2020. They told the senior pastor about the abuse and he had Gray removed from the student ministry and required her to undergo counseling from the church. At the time, Gray maintained that her relationship with the boy wasn't "physical."  That didn’t last long. According to the same report, Gray returned to the ministry and continued pursuing the relationship with the boy, which she later confessed was “sexual in nature.” According to local news KARK, the boy and Gray met in her car and apartment. She allegedly sent nude photos to him daily and expected some to be sent in return. Mirror reported that Gray performed oral sex on the boy but did not have intercourse with him “in order for [him] to stay pure.” Gray was charged with a single felony count of sexual assault of a teenager after turning herself in to Little Rock police this month. She was released on a $20,000 bond and her court date is set for June 17. Oddly enough, former president Bill Clinton had once praised the church where Gray and her victim met. Back in 1993, Clinton, who was born in Arkansas and lived for a time in Little Rock, tearfully thanked the congregation just days before starting his first term as president. Related: Calif. Teacher Pleads No-Contest to Raping 14-Year-Old Student “Were it not for this church…I believe it would be virtually impossible (that) I would be going to Washington next week as president. And I am absolutely certain I would be less prepared for the job,” Clinton told parishioners at the time.  Hate to say it but, with a man like Bill Clinton praising a congregation for his campaign success given his second term's...er...less-than-"happy" ending, it’s not surprising that another alleged sexual abuser just cropped up in the same circle. Follow us on Twitter/X: MRCTV's @Schineman joins @AlisonOAN to talk John Legend & Hillary Clinton being drug out by the media to bash Trump. pic.twitter.com/YvSKUOmEAm — MRCTV (@mrctv) April 25, 2024

NY Post Exposes Campus Activists Trained by Soros-Funded Group

The New York Post has unearthed some important information about some of the anti-Semitic pro-Hamas campus protests across the nation.  In an April 26 article, New York Post reporter Isabel Vincent broke down not only the funding behind anti-Israel groups involved in campus protests but also revealed that some of the activists were trained to lead such protests by a Soros-funded group. “At three colleges, the protests are being encouraged by paid radicals who are ‘fellows’ of a Soros-funded group called the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights (USCPR),” Vincent wrote.  She added, “USCPR provides up to $7,800 for its community-based fellows and between $2,880 and $3,660 for its campus-based ‘fellows’ in return for spending eight hours a week organizing ‘campaigns led by Palestinian organizations.’ They are trained to ‘rise up, to revolution.’” Vincent went on to say that the USPCR received $300,000 from Soros’ Open Society Foundations. Soros has a long history of funding anti-Israel causes. In 2007, the leftist billionaire made an absurd comment about the terrorist group, saying that America and Israel “must open the door to Hamas.” Soros also gave $525,000 to Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) between 2017 and 2022 and $350,000 to JVP Action.  Recently, Soros-funded anti-Israel groups JVP and MPower Change organized protests of a deal between Google and the Israeli government. During the same month, Soros-funded groups mounted a campaign to sanction a unit of the Israel Defense Forces, as Israel battles Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip.   SEE MORE: Fox Business Host Maria Bartiromo on Soros-funded groups training anti-Israel activists Soros did not react well to the exposé. In a statement posted on X (formerly Twitter), the Open Society Foundations accused the New York Post of continuing “its practice of mixing distortion and unsubstantiated insinuations in attacking George and Alex Soros and the Open Society Foundations.” Conservatives are under attack! Contact ABC News (818) 460-7477, CBS News (212) 975-3247 and NBC News (212) 664-6192 and demand they report on Soros’s funding of anti-Israel causes.

NPR Cheers Pro-Hamas Campus Agitators: 'Getting Closer to Their Demands?’

National Public Radio’s coverage of the anti-Israel agitators who’ve taken over progressive college campuses while spouting violent rhetoric at Jewish students has been no better than its tax-funded partner PBS (both outlets reside under the taxpayer-supported auspices of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.) NPR’s Friday coverage flattered the protesters, suggesting they were laser-focused on concrete demands that their respective colleges cease financing Israel, while ignoring their vocal support for Hamas terrorists, demonstrated by praising the October 7 massacre of Israelis and reciting eliminationist chants like “From the river to the sea.” Friday’s Morning Edition program aired “Protests against the war in Gaza intensify at Columbia and other universities” without a single mention of the despicable rhetoric from the protests, nothing about the ongoing anti-Semitic ranting and toddler-like tactics when confronted by police, only enthusiasm for the alleged success of the protests. Here’s your tax dollars at work, producing bias by omission: A MARTINEZ, co-host: It's been a week since Columbia University called in the police to clear an encampment of anti-war protesters on a campus lawn. And what a week it's been. LEILA FADEL, co-host: More than a hundred students were arrested that day. And since then, the student demonstrations against Israel's war in Gaza have only intensified. They spread to universities across the country and led to hundreds more arrests. Adrian Florido reported from New York: "For days, protest leaders and university officials have been in negotiations over the encampment's future. The university wants it gone, but the hundreds of students in the camp say they're staying put until their demands are met." Martinez took the protesters seriously: Now, you mentioned that the students are refusing to clear the encampment until their demands are met. What are those demands? Florido sounded empathetic: The big one is divestment. They want Columbia to sell off the stock it owns in companies that do business in Israel and that, the protesters say, are enabling Israel's war in Gaza and its operations in the West Bank." He featured a soundbite from grad student and organizer Ray Guerrero, "who says that if Columbia pulls its money from these companies, other institutions might follow. And that could bring pressure to bear on the Israeli government.…." Martinez asked how the protests would affect graduation ceremonies. ADRIAN FLORIDO: Well, here at Columbia, the encampment is smack in the center of where the school holds its main graduation ceremony. And in fact, all around the encampment, workers are already basically putting up the stages and scaffolding for that event. It's part of why protesters suspect they're about to be removed by force. At USC, the main graduation ceremony has been canceled. And that could happen at other schools because these students showing up to protest say they're not going anywhere. No concern was voiced over the hate chanters ruining a milestone event for those students (suckers) who attend college for the education – cruelly, many of whom also missed out on high school graduation in 2020 because of COVID restrictions. That's one human-interest angle NPR chose to ignore. Note: This story was also included on “Up First.”  a popular NPR podcast delivering brief daily highlights of NPR’s coverage, and introduced there in the most supportive fashion imaginable: “As protests and arrests continue at college campuses across the U.S., are the students calling for divestment in Israel getting closer to their demands?”

Scarborough Scolds: College Administrator Failure To Quell Protests Could Elect Trump!

Joe Scarborough started today's Morning Joe with a rant against weak college administrators who are failing to put down pro-Hamas campus protests. Scarborough's central beef was that their fecklessness could lead to . . . the election of Donald Trump! Scarborough analogized today's situation to that of the student protests of the 1960s that led to the election of Richard Nixon in 1968 and "five more years of war." As if "Happy Warrior" Hubert Humphrey would have ended the Vietnam war more quickly? And in a bit of ultimate scaremongering, Scarborough dropped the usual End of Democracy bomb: "Let's see if they're now going to elect Donald Trump for, I don't know, maybe the last election in American history. If so, good job. Way to go. Way to go!"  Does Scarborough seriously believe that? And was Scarborough's rather authoritarian rant about the need for college administrators to enforce discipline and rules, or else "leave!", sincere? Or was it simply the reflection of his partisan angst that the campus turmoil could lead to the defeat of his phone buddy, Joe Biden? Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 4/29/24 6:03 am EDT MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Also ahead, the latest on the protests over Gaza that are spreading to more and more college campuses. And, we're going to have an exclusive, first look at Forbes' list of the new Ivies, universities who are poised to replace the elite institutions, in part because of their handling of the protest. It is a much bigger story. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Even before, even before these protests. MIKA: This is a trend. SCARBOROUGH: And I've got to say, just the absolute weakness of the administration, the cowardice of the administration, and, unfortunately, on these elite colleges, having people that are now running these elite colleges on faculty boards that, that, that burned down college campuses in the 1960s, that were responsible for the election in part of Richard Nixon in 1968 because of the chaos on college campuses, because of the chaos in Chicago.  And they gave America Richard Nixon and five more years of war. Good job. Let's see if these administrators, the ones that, like, tried to levitate the Pentagon in the 1960s with Abbie Hoffman. The ones who took over presidents' offices in the 1960s, that, that trashed college campuses. Let's see if they're now going to elect Donald Trump for, I don't know, maybe the last election in American history. If so, good job. Way to go. Way to go, by not being able to discipline students that violate your rules. You either have rules or you don't have rules. You either have standards or you don't have standards. And if you can't live by them, leave!  And let's get some adults in these universities that actually teach students that there are consequences when they break the rules, when they break the laws, and when they spout genocidal chants over and over again.

Are Journalists 'Anti-Authoritarian' as They Seek to Banish Conservative Views?

On Friday, Associated Press media reporter David Bauder looked at recent internal newsroom debates that went public, "Journalists taking the critical gaze they deploy to cover the world and turning it inward at their own employers." He cited Uri Berliner's essay on NPR, NBC dumping RNC chair Ronna McDaniel, and a fight at The New York Times over a story on sexual assault by Hamas.  Journalism as a profession attracts people who are anti-authoritarian, who see themselves as truth-tellers. Many believe the way to make an organization better is by criticizing it, said Tom Rosenstiel, co-author of The Elements of Journalism and a professor at the University of Maryland. “We’re taught to hold power to account,” said Kate O’Brian, president of news for the E.W. Scripps Co. There's one difference in these controversies: Berliner was basically forced out for exposing the Left. The other controversies were the Left enforcing their wokeness. Bauder summarized that "NPR management says he is wrong. But Berliner quickly became a hero among conservatives who hold the same belief." The AP reporter doesn't identify most of the rebels in these controversies as leftists enforcing a new ideological hard line (that Berliner was protesting):  A generational change also has emboldened many young journalists. In his own classroom, Kaplan sees more young journalists questioning traditional notions of objectivity that keep them from expressing opinions. Many believe they have the right to state their beliefs and support causes, he said. “Now you have journalists that are advocates,” Rosenstiel said. “That reflects something of a culture war that is happening inside of journalism.” Debates over coverage of the Trump administration had a similar galvanizing effect. “There are some journalists who say, ‘I’m not interested in covering conservatives because they are not interested in the truth,’” Rosenstiel said. See? There it is. The Woke Left doesn't believe in debates. They call it "bothsidesism" and insist debates be shut down, that contrary opinions somehow make "marginalized" people feel "unsafe." Are these journalists "anti-authoritarian" when they only want one side to be published? They clearly believe conservatives should become the "marginalized," now and forever. This was what happened when New York Times staffers had a fit over their newspaper posting an op-ed by Sen. Tom Cotton on using National Guard troops to suppress violent rioting.  One of the most prominent thinkers on this issue, [leftist] journalist Wesley Lowery, has written that some defenders of objectivity are more interested in inoffensiveness and appearance, less so on journalistic rigor. “In pursuing objectivity, we silence the marginalized,” a Harvard student, Ajay V. Singh, wrote at the height of the debate. “In silencing the marginalized, we tip the narrative of ‘truth’ into the hands of the powerful.” The logic there is bizarre: quote conservatives, and you "silence" someone else? Wesley Lowery wrote a book with a conspiracy-theory title, They Can't Kill Us All. In Lowery's world, he thinks no one should be allowed to protest they don't want him dead, they just oppose his paranoid views. When you represent "racial justice," then you can intimidate journalists out of quoting the "anti-justice" side.

REVISIONIST HISTORY: CBS Sunday Morning Sugarcoats Dan Rather’s Legacy

On CBS This Morning, correspondent Lee Cowan ran a lifetime achievement profile of disgraced anchor Dan Rather that seemed weirdly valedictory. But the profile omitted the most significant detail of Rather’s legacy at CBS. Watch as Cowan and Rather whitewash the document controversy that led to Rather’s downfall at CBS, and established him as the father of Fake News- as aired on CBS Sunday Morning on Sunday, April 28th, 2024 (click “expand”): DAN RATHER: Dan Rather, CBS News, became sort of all part of my name. A part of my identity. LEE COWAN: And you have interviewed how many presidents? RATHER: I'd have to count. Every one since Truman. COWAN: Gosh! This is the first time he has appeared on this network since. RATHER: Without apology or explanation. I miss CBS. I’ve missed it since the day I left there. COWAN: Even at 92, how and why he left still stings. RATHER: In the heart of every reporter worthy of the name, Lee, there is a message that news, real news, is what somebody somewhere, particularly somebody in power, doesn't want you to know. That's news. COWAN: And that's what got him into trouble. TOM BROKAW: NBC News in depth tonight, the black eye at CBS News. Today, CBS News anchor Dan Rather and the news division… COWAN: In 2004, Rather filed a report for 60 Minutes 2 that questioned George W. Bush's service record in the Texas Air National Guard. RATHER: Tonight, we have new documents and new information on the president's military service… COWAN: But the documents on which Rather and his producer based their reporting could not be later authenticated. RATHER: It was a mistake. CBS News deeply regrets it. Also, I want to say personally and directly, I'm sorry. COWAN: Was that the lowest point for you, you think? RATHER: Of course it was the lowest point. I gave CBS News everything I had. They had smarter, better, more talented people, but they didn't have anybody who worked any harder than I did. CBS’s Lee Cowan tells us one firehouse within sight of Ground Zero has had its heart cut out. COWAN: I’d only been at CBS a few years by then, during which Dan Rather had kindly and unexpectedly taken me under his wing and made me feel welcome.  You told me once it's not the question, but it's the follow-up. That that's… RATHER: Yes. Well, that’s true. COWAN: That's more important? RATHER: I hope you’ll not be following up today. COWAN: Minus the suspenders and his cigars, Rather remains just as I remember him. An intently curious… RATHER: I'll ring you back in about ten. Thanks. COWAN: Thoughtful, well-read skeptic who wants nothing more than to wear out his shoe leather chasing the next headline.   Cowan does his level best to retcon Rathergate into an authentication problem. But the MRC remembers. As Rich Noyes noted: Just eight weeks before election day, in a September 8, 2004 report on 60 Minutes, Rather claimed “new” evidence showing Bush received “preferential treatment” during his Vietnam-era service in the Texas Air National Guard. “Newly discovered documents spark new questions,” Rather hyped that night on his CBS Evening News. “CBS News has exclusive information, including documents, that now sheds new light on the President’s service record.” The documents in question were supposedly from Bush’s commanding officer, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, typed on his office typewriter decades before computers and word processors became common in the workplace. It didn’t take long before observers on the Internet highlighted how the “newly discovered documents” looked more like something whipped up in Microsoft Word using the default Times Roman font than on an early 1970s typewriter. It wasn’t an authentication problem but a forgery. A forgery in service of a cheap hit job eight weeks before Election Day, back when there was still such a thing as Election Day.  Rathergate ended up being a seminal moment inasmuch as what was then known as “new media” confronted and exposed blatant news, and took down a heretofore unassailable mainstream media giant.  Cowan and CBS ignore that discrepancy in order to accommodate their valedictory item. Such a blatant omission of history is as much of a fakery as was Rathergate, which is Rather’s ultimate legacy. No matter how hard CBS and Cowan try to spin otherwise.  

HYSTERICAL: Stephanopoulos Opens ‘This Week' With ‘Stakes’ Editorial

ABC This Week host George Stephanopoulos opened today’s broadcast with an editorial that can most charitably be described as hysterical, as he pontificates over “what’s at stake” in the 2024 presidential election, and how that colors his coverage of the election. Watch the opening editorial in its entirety as aired on ABC This Week on Sunday, April 28th, 2024: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Good morning, and welcome to This Week. Until now, no American president had ever faced a criminal trial. No American president had ever faced a federal indictment for retaining and concealing classified documents. No American president had ever faced a federal indictment or a state indictment for trying to overturn an election, or been named an unindicted co-conspirator in two other states for the same crime. No American president ever faced hundreds of millions of dollars in judgments for business fraud, defamation and sexual abuse. Until now, no American presidential race had been more defined on what's happening in courtrooms than what is happening on the campaign trail. Until now. The scale of the abnormality is so staggering that it can actually become numbing. It's all too easy to fall into reflective habits- to treat this as a normal campaign where both sides embrace the rule of law, where both sides are dedicated to a debate based on facts and the peaceful transfer of power. But that is not what's happening this election year. Those bedrock tenets of our democracy are being tested in a way we haven't seen since the Civil War. It's a test for the candidates, for those of us in the media, and for all of us as citizens. It appears that Stephanopoulos took President Joe Biden’s Nerd Prom speech to heart, followed Biden’s call, and chose to Regime harder. The program did not lead with polls, or scandals, or foreign policy matters, but with “what’s at stake”.  In a sense, Stephanopoulos isn’t wrong. This is a unique time inasmuch as no American president had ever had elements of state and federal offenses Frankensteined into felony charges against him.  No American president has ever been prosecuted by his successor. No American president has ever left the border as wide open as has the current officeholder. And this is all happening against the backdrop of Americans having their government weaponized against them, such as pro-life activist Mark Houck, among many others. But Stephanopoulos doesn’t address those unique historical circumstances. They are not favorable to the reelection of Joe Biden and, therefore, are insufficiently cognizant of “what is at stake”. The Title “Regime Media” is well earned.  

NERD PROM 2024: Biden Commands The Regime Media To Regime Harder

As he closed his remarks to the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, also known as Nerd Prom, President Joe Biden directed the media to lean further in his direction in covering the 2024 presidential election. Watch as Biden closes his remarks by issuing the “what’s at stake” clarion call: JOE BIDEN: On the third anniversary of January 6th, I went to Valley Forge and I said the most urgent question of our time is whether democracy is still- is still the sacred cause of America. That is the question the American people must answer this year. And you, the free press, play a critical role in making sure the American people have the information they need to make an informed decision. The defeated former president has made no secret of his attack on our democracy. He said he wants to be a dictator on Day One. And so much more. He tells supporters he is their revenge and retribution. When in God's name have you ever heard of another president say something like that? And he promised a bloodbath when he loses again. We have to take this seriously. Eight years ago. It could have written off as just Trump talk. But no longer. Not after January 6th. I'm sincerely not asking you to take sides, but asking to rise up to the seriousness of the moment. Move past the horse race numbers. The gotcha moments. And the distraction, the sideshows that've come to dominate and sensationalize- sensationalize our politics. And focus on what's actually at stake. I think in your hearts, you know already what’s at stake.  The stakes couldn't be higher. Every single one of us has roles to play- a serious role to play in making sure democracy endures. American democracy. I have mo- my role, but with all due respect, so do you. In the age of disinformation, credible information that people can trust is more important than ever. And that makes you, and I mean this from the bottom of my heart- makes you more important than ever. So tonight, I'd like to make a toast. To a free press. To an informed citizenry. To an America where freedom and democracy endure. God bless America. Nerd Prom, live-tweeted by our very own Curtis Houck, embodies everything that is wrong with the media (and Washington, more broadly) today. On the one hand, the press claim to be free and independent. On the other, you have this grotesque spectacle, reminiscent of the excesses at Versailles, wherein the media show themselves to be palace courtiers whenever Democrats are in power. And so we come to Biden’s speech. It is surreal but not at all surprising to watch this president, whose administration has been sued on First Amendment grounds and tried to control free speech via an Orwellian-named “Disinformation Governance Board”, headlining an event celebrating the First Amendment.  Equally surreal, the idea that Biden feels the need to direct the coverage accorded to him by an already-pliant and sycophantic media. Biden’s utterance of “I’m sincerely not asking you to take sides” has a ring similar to that of “with all due respect” which, when uttered, means that someone is about to get disrespected. Biden’s “I’m sincerely not asking you to take sides rang just as hollow.  Biden took January 6th and used it both as framing device for his closing remarks and as the basis for which journalists should take his side. He commanded the media to abandon coverage of his sagging poll numbers (“the horse race numbers”) and his gaffes (“the gotcha moments”). It bears noting that the latter ask is weird because the media already don’t cover his many gaffes. Biden commands the media to abandon these things and focus on “what’s at stake”, which at this point is code for his reelection. It is further galling to hear Biden talk about “the age of disinformation” after willfully repeating the well-debunked Day One Dictator and Bloodbath Hoaxes on stage. Predictably, none of the gushing post-Nerd Prom coverage, mostly consistent of Sunday show types congratulating themselves for making it to set on time, bothers with a fact check. Biden’s remarks were a disgusting spectacle, even by Nerd Prom’s disgusting spectacle standards. Far from defending the First Amendment, Biden called for further consolidation of the media in his camp- a rather ominous threat to free speech and to the free press- even if those in attendance couldn’t help but clap like seals as they raised their glasses.  

PBS NewsHour Again Takes Side of Pro-Hamas Campus Agitators: Just Like Vietnam?

Thursday’s PBS NewsHour covered the hate virus spreading on progressive college campuses nationwide of agitators threatening Israel and Jewish students. Of course, that’s not how PBS saw it, painting those pro-Hamas protesters as standing in the honorable shoes of the 1960s campus rioters that changed the course of American involvement in Vietnam. PBS also took on a University of Vanderbilt president who dared punish students for the violent invasion of a campus building. Anchor Amna Nawaz relayed the good news, from tax-supported PBS’s perspective. Nawaz: Campus protests against Israel's war in Gaza are continuing to grow across the U.S. The University of Southern California announced today it's canceling its main commencement ceremony next month. Encampments are now in place in at least 20 colleges, and hundreds of demonstrators have been arrested in the last several days at multiple schools, including the University of Texas, Ohio State and Emory University….These incidents are just the latest in a series of pro-Palestinian demonstrations unfolding on campuses from coast to coast and beyond, including universities in Paris, Cairo, and Sydney. Some in the U.S. say they want their universities to cut financial ties with Israel. She neutralized concerns of threats against Jewish students Nawaz: Jewish students across the country have said they feel unsafe amid the demonstrations and after being targeted by hate speech and antisemitic symbols. But some are taking part in the protests… Nawaz hosted Vanderbilt University Chancellor Daniel Diermeier, who earlier this month penned an op-ed for the conservative editorial page of the Wall Street Journal on his school’s crackdown on student disruptors that clearly didn’t please PBS, which described his school as a place “where dozens of students have faced suspension, expulsion, and even arrest for their participation in recent protests on campus.” Nawaz took the side of the violent students: "There was a late March incident. Some 27 students or so forced their way into a closed administration building. I understand a campus security officer was injured during that incident. Most of the students had to be escorted out. Four were arrested, is my understanding. Help us understand the line for you. Why were those students arrested and some expelled?" Diermeier explained that his campus has hosted peaceful protests for months, but these students “forced their way into a closed building” and “ran over a security officer” before trying to invade his own office, then sat in a hallway for hours before finally being arrested after refusing to disperse. Nawaz was lawyerly in response: "So the line for you was the physical violence part of it. Had the building been open, you're fine with students entering and sitting in, in protest, in other words?" Has Nawaz seen the video of the frankly pathetic Vandy students she's supporting so strongly, whose freedom to act like spoiled toddlers was so cruelly infringed? After Diermeier explained the issue was disruptive conduct, Nawaz again jabbed from the left. Nawaz: You said in your op-ed that free speech is alive and well at Vanderbilt. But there was an open letter by several members of your faculty that disputes that. They say the administration has been excessive and punitive in its response to student protests. They say the rules seem arbitrary. And they say the criterion that protests must not disrupt university operations, as you say, is perniciously vague and expansive. What do you say to that? After Vanderbilt’s president again defended his university’s response, Nawaz weighed in again on behalf of the disruptive protesters: Nawaz: ….Many would say the purpose of protests is to disrupt. The next night, Nawaz again discussed the “expansion of college protests and encampments” and used more soundbites from protesting students, this time skipping the anti-Semitic threats and slogans entirely and comparing these hateful protests to the takeover of college campuses during the Vietnam War, while pretending that divestment from Israel was the main thrust of the new agitators. (Comparisons to Vietnam War protesters are almost always positive in PBS land.) Nawaz: Many say today's demonstrations echo college protests movements of the past, including against the Vietnam War….As protests of Israel's war in Gaza spread to campuses across the country, some see parallels between today's demonstrations and college protests in the past. These segments in support of anti-Jewish campus disrupters were brought to you in part by BNSF Railway. Transcripts are available, click “Expand.” PBS NewsHour 4/25/24 7:28:18 p.m. (ET) Amna Nawaz: Campus protests against Israel's war in Gaza are continuing to grow across the U.S. The University of Southern California announced today it's canceling its main commencement ceremony next month. Encampments are now in place in at least 20 colleges, and hundreds of demonstrators have been arrested in the last several days at multiple schools, including the University of Texas, Ohio State and Emory University. Amid police confrontations, multiple arrests and large demonstrations, Emory University today became the latest flash point in a wave of pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses. Early this morning, at Boston's Emerson University, violence erupted as police cleared a student encampment. More than 100 were arrested. Authorities say four officers were injured. That followed this clash at the University of Southern California. Officers there say protesters refused to remove their encampments. The protesters say they were provoked. Student Protester: What we just saw was an act of USC acting aggressively and failing to defend, and, in fact, being the aggressor against its students. Amna Nawaz: By nightfall, more than 90 people were taken into custody. Incidents are just the latest in a series of pro-Palestinian demonstrations unfolding on campuses from coast to coast and beyond, including universities in Paris, Cairo, and Sydney. Some in the U.S. say they want their universities to cut financial ties with Israel. Former USC Student: We want the university to disclose its financial holdings and divest from its relationships with financial institutions. And we want the university to recognize and acknowledge to its student body that there is a genocide happening to our families in Gaza. Amna Nawaz: Officials at Columbia University yesterday extended talks with demonstrators to clear the campus, where, that same afternoon, House Speaker Mike Johnson was booed after his remarks. Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA): The cherished traditions of this university are being overtaken right now by radical and extreme ideologies. They place a target on the backs of Jewish students in the United States and here on this campus. Amna Nawaz: Jewish students across the country have said they feel unsafe amid the demonstrations and after being targeted by hate speech and antisemitic symbols. But some are taking part in the protests… Protesters: Free, free Palestine! Amna Nawaz: … which continue to spread to more campuses and show no signs of ending soon. The protests have also reached Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, where dozens of students have faced suspension, expulsion, and even arrest for their participation in recent protests on campus. Joining us now is Vanderbilt University Chancellor Daniel Diermeier to discuss his school's approach, which he outlined in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed. Chancellor, welcome to the "NewsHour." Thanks for joining us. Daniel Diermeier, Chancellor, Vanderbilt University: Thank you for having me. Amna Nawaz: So, before we get into your school's specific experience, I just want to get your reaction to how quickly and how widely these protests have spread across campus. Daniel Diermeier: Yes, I think what we have seen in the last week or two is certainly that these issues and the protests have intensified, but, really, we have had them for the last six months or so. Amna Nawaz: And Vanderbilt has been among those that's seen its own protests. As we mentioned, there was a late March incident. Some 27 students or so forced their way into a closed administration building. I understand a campus security officer was injured during that incident. Most of the students had to be escorted out. Four were arrested, is my understanding. Help us understand the line for you. Why were those students arrested and some expelled? Daniel Diermeier: Absolutely. So, overall, over the last six months, things on campus have gone very well. Our students have done great. They had vigils. They had in-depth discussions. We have had a Passover celebration just like a few days ago with 400 students on our main lawn. And then some students have protesters as well on both sides. We have had displays of, like, the victims in Gaza. We have had displays of the hostages. So all of that has gone very well. But about a month ago, we had a small group of students that forced their way into a closed building. This is our main administration building. And we're still doing some construction. They ran over a security officer. They then tried to get into my office. They were — they tried to push over some of my staff there, but didn't succeed, and sat down in the hallway. And then, after a few hours, we told them that this is inconsistent with university policy, that this is disruptive conduct. We then had three of the students arrested that had pushed over the police officer. We had one student arrested who had smashed over a window, and then the other students left on their own accord and were subject to student discipline subsequently. Amna Nawaz: So the line for you was the physical violence part of it. Had the building been open, you're fine with students entering and sitting in, in protest, in other words? Daniel Diermeier: Well, the issue for us is whether you're disrupting university operations. Now, certainly, when you are forcing your way into a closed building, closed for construction, and you're injuring a public safety officer, that line has been crossed. The critical question for us is always, are you protesting and making your voices heard, or are you engaging in disruptive conduct? That can have many different forms. For example, we would not allow them to enter a classroom with a megaphone and disrupt the class, for example, so it can come in many different forms. This was certainly across the line. Amna Nawaz: You said in your op-ed that free speech is alive and well at Vanderbilt. But there was an open letter by several members of your faculty that disputes that. They say the administration has been excessive and punitive in its response to student protests. They say the rules seem arbitrary. And they say the criterion that protests must not disrupt university operations, as you say, is perniciously vague and expansive. What do you say to that? Daniel Diermeier: Well, I think that this particular issue has absolutely nothing to do with free speech. As I mentioned before, there have been many expressions of student protest on campus. The issue for us is, in this particular case, was that the people forced them — forced their way into a construction building and injured a police officer. I don't think anybody should confuse this with free speech. Amna Nawaz: But, if I may, this line that you draw that it shouldn't disrupt, protests shouldn't disrupt university operations, your opposition here says that that's actually too vague and too expansive. Many would say the purpose of protests is to disrupt. Daniel Diermeier: I think the purpose of protest is to make your voices heard. I don't think the purpose of protest is to injure members of the staff or to disrupt classes. Amna Nawaz: One of the things the students were asking for was a student-led vote, a referendum, in essence, asking for the university to divest itself financially from any financial ties to Israel. My understanding is, you did not allow that vote, that referendum, to move forward, which then, of course, leads students to say that their free speech is being violated. So why not allow them to discuss that and hold that vote? Daniel Diermeier: The university has three principles. One is free speech. One is what we call institutional neutrality, which means that the university will not take policy issues unless they directly and materially affect the operations of the university, for example, not on foreign policy issues. And the third is civil discourse, which means that we treat each other with respect, we listen to each other, and when our students come on campus, they sign a community creed where they affirm their commitment to the last value of civil discourse. The students then had a — wanted to have a referendum to use student government funds to basically boycott any firms that had connection with Israel. That, in Tennessee, is against the law. Even the vote itself would have put our state funding at risk, and so, as consequences of that, we did not allow the vote, and because it's inconsistent with Tennessee state law. But I want to be clear that calling for the boycott of Israel is also inconsistent with our stand on institutional neutrality. Amna Nawaz: You know, Chancellor, I have to ask, if you believe that you and other leaders are handling these protests well, that you are hitting that balance between free speech and safety, why do you think that the protests and objections are spreading as rapidly as they are? I mean, is there a chance here that you are not necessarily hearing the concerns of your students in the way they feel they need to be heard? Daniel Diermeier: I need to distinguish between what's happening on my campus. And on my campus, this was an isolated incident that involved 30 students. What other universities do and how they handle that, I think, is something that will depend on their context. All of us will have — will be tested. Our approach has been that we have been very clear about our principles, the principles I just stated, and that we will enforce those principles, and that's the way we have handled the situation. Amna Nawaz: That is Vanderbilt University Chancellor Daniel Diermeier joining us tonight. Chancellor, thank you very much for your time. Daniel Diermeier: Sure. Thank you. * PBS NewsHour 4/26/24 7:17:45 p.m. (ET) Amna Nawaz: As protests of Israel's war in Gaza spread to campuses across the country, some see parallels between today's demonstrations and college protests in the past. Steven Mintz is a professor of history at the University of Texas at Austin, and Angus Johnston is a professor and historian of American student culture at the City University of New York. Welcome to you both. Professor Johnston, let's just start with what the protesters are calling for here. What is their focus? What do they want as a result of these demonstrations? Angus Johnston, Assistant Professor, City University of New York: Well, it varies campus by campus, but primarily what we're looking for — looking at is, they're looking for a divestment of the universities' financial relationships with Israeli companies, a disentanglement of the universities from relationships with the Israeli government or military, and transparency as to the nature of those relationships where they currently exist. Amna Nawaz: Professor Mintz, how do — what do you make of the demands, as Professor Johnston had laid them out? Is that something you think colleges can achieve? Steven Mintz, Professor of History, University of Texas at Austin: I think they're very unlikely to be achieved. The protests of the 1960s, it was possible to achieve some kind of accommodation. First of all, one of the demands, an end to the military draft, received widespread support throughout society, and Richard Nixon's administration would make that happen. But on campuses themselves, there were some practical goals, like studies programs, women's studies programs, coeducation at the elite private universities, an end to parietals and in loco parentis regulations. There was a lot of ground for accommodation and compromise. And I don't see that much right now. Amna Nawaz: Professor Johnston, what do you make of that? Do you agree? Angus Johnston: Well, I think that the easiest, simplest demand that they're making is a demand for transparency in their universities' relationships with Israeli institutions, and I think that that is something that is certainly winnable on a lot of campuses. I also think that, in a lot of ways, the anti-apartheid movement of the 1970s and '80s is a much better analog than the mass student movement of the late '60s in some ways. And I think it's important to remember that, in the case of the anti-apartheid movement, the calls for divestment on campuses began in the mid-70s. And it was a very, very long and slow process, by which students were adjusting people's views of the crisis itself. Amna Nawaz: What do you make of that, Professor Mintz? Could these protests now start what could be a long chain of changing people's minds when it comes to how they see this issue? Steven Mintz: The context today is very different than in the 1960s or 1970s, when higher education was growing and the federal and state investments in higher education were increasing. Today, the situation of American higher education is extremely precarious. Public support has diminished. Funding is hotly debated in many of the states. There are threats in some state legislatures to tax endowments, to tax university property, to tax university income. Donations to many of the leading universities have declined. This is a very treacherous moment, especially for the most well-endowed and highly selective institutions. Amna Nawaz: Professor Johnston, do you agree with that? I mean, is there a chance here that protesters run the risk of losing support the longer these protests go on, because of this scenario, as Professor Mintz has laid it out? Angus Johnston: Well, I think it's important to note that the protests themselves so far have largely been pretty moderate in their tactics. We're not seeing, as we did in the 1960s, rioting, rocks being thrown at police, even buildings getting burned — being burned down. The protests themselves have been pretty moderate. The thing that is inflaming the situation right now — in terms of their tactics, the thing that's inflaming the situation right now is bringing in the cops and using the police not only to engage in mass arrests against students, but in arresting and in some cases beating and abusing faculty as well. I think it's really important to point out that there are a number of campuses at which the university has decided to take a hands-off approach to these encampments. MIT is one. Berkeley is another. And at these, the encampments have been proceeding with very little issue and very little drama. Amna Nawaz: Professor Mintz, what about that? Because we have seen some pretty heavy-handed tactics in some cases. At your campus, at the University of Texas in Austin, dozens of people were arrested. Police in riot gear were called in to disperse the crowds. Is that necessary? Steven Mintz: Right now, we have many brand-new presidents, unseasoned senior administrators making decisions. One suspects that administrators who were more knowledgeable about past history, had more experience dealing with students, had better rapport with their student populations, that this would be playing out extremely differently. What we need to see on the part of senior administrators is a real willingness to step out of their offices, communicate with the students, and try to achieve some kind of accommodation. Amna Nawaz: Are you saying that you don't believe that the police should have been called in some of these circumstances? Steven Mintz: Absolutely not. And the lesson of history could not be clearer that this only escalates the situation, it worsens the situation, and it results in a degree of alienation that's very difficult to overcome. Amna Nawaz: So, given all that, Professor Mintz, I will ask you, and, then, Professor Johnston, if you would follow, I will just ask you both, where do we go from here? How do you see this unfolding in the weeks ahead? Professor Mintz? Steven Mintz: I think the conversation needs to be made more productive. In this country, if you want political change, you build coalitions. And what I'm not seeing on campus right now is an effort to have effective protests that will bring people together. When people hear anti-American sentiments, they are radically turned off. The demonstrators, in my view, should be calling for peace, for the release of the hostages, and an American foreign policy that will really result in a two-state solution. Amna Nawaz: Professor Johnston, I will give you the last word here. Angus Johnston: I'm really heartened by the fact that, despite what Professor Mintz has said, a lot of faculty have been turning out in support of these students, some of them turning out in support of the students' goals, but others turning out in support of the students' right to protest without being harassed and without being abused by cops. I think we are seeing the development of a new coalition on the campus. And I'm very heartened by that. And I hope that administrators take heed of that and do their bit to de-escalate the situation as well. Amna Nawaz: That is Professor Angus Johnston from the City University of New York and Professor Steven Mintz from the University of Texas at Austin. Thank you both for joining us tonight. Angus Johnston: Thank you. Steven Mintz: You're welcome.

CNN Host Victor Blackwell Touts Book Blaming Racism for Wealth Gap in USA

On Saturday's First of All show, CNN host Victor Blackwell devoted a segment to blaming racism for income differences between whites and blacks as he interviewed a liberal journalist who wrote about book about the "white bonus" she claims to have benefited from as a white American. Tracie McMillan, author of The White Bonus, suggested that racism in the present still holds black Americans down as she recommended ending racism as the remedy to lagging black incomes.  Blackwell tied the term to the loaded concept of "white privilege" as he introduced the segment: Agree with the concept or not, you've probably heard, though, about white privilege -- societal and social privileges tied to race. But have you heard about the "white bonus." Federal data shows that for ever dollar that white Americans make, black Americans make 76 cents. In 2022, black Americans' median household wealth was almost $45,000 -- the median wealth for white households, $285,000. Bringing aboard author Tracie McMillan as a guest, the CNN host added: The distribution of financial assets in this country has been shaped by systemic racism, written laws, unspoken rules that for hundreds of years have worked to the detriment of minorities and to the benefit of white people. My next guest, journalists Tracie McMillan, set out to put a number on just how much of a benefit she has received. She examines the history of five families, including her own, and published her findings in her new book, The White Bonus: Five Families and the Cash Value of Racism in America. After Blackwell began by asking his guest why she decided to write the book, she began: Sure, well, you know, I work as a journalist, but I also am a white person in this country, and I felt like I needed to be honest about what I was getting for being white, and, you know, I don't make a ton of money, so for me the conversations around white privilege usually sort of center on quote, sort of "racial privilege" and "class privilege," and I wanted a way to get at this idea of "What do I get? What do we all get for being white?" McMillan then recalled that she wanted to measure the "racial advantage" she had received in her life, leading Blackwell to follow up: "So let's talk about the number. Your estimate is that you have benefited from your whiteness to the amount of $371,934.30. Explain how you got to that number." McMillan recounted that her family inherited a significant amount of money from a grandfather who had been allowed to prosper as a banker in the 1920s as being among other reasons her family benefited from being white, leading Blackwell to conclude by asking what the country should do about the data she has collected, leading her to suggest that racism in the present is still to blame for wealth inequality between blacks and whites: BLACKWELL: Well, Tracie, we only have about 45 seconds or so left, but what do we now do with this? Now that you have calculated it and we all know that, according to your estimate, what it is, what do we do with it? McMILLAN: I mean, fight to end racism, right? I think the -- something I also look at is the cost of racism to Americans, including white Americans, right? Racism has impoverished our democracy and eviscerated our safety net. Most of us need access to those things to survive. And I think you know, even if you go back through my numbers. I wouldn't need most of that money from my family if we had affordable education and housing and health care in this country, right? And so I think for all of us, there's  a real vested interest not in fighting racism as charity but as something that hurts everybody and is worth fighting against. The issue of why Asian Americans, in spite of being a a racial minority, tend to have higher incomes than do white Americans -- which undermines the argument that racial discrimination is what causes different groups to make less money -- was not mentioned. PS: Former New York Times reporter Steven Greenhouse endorsed the book: "The White Bonus is an unusually daring book that explores how racism has given unfair advantages to white Americans as we all pursue the American dream. Tracie McMillan profiles a range of Americans to show how their "white bonus” results in advantages that can total hundreds of thousands of dollars. This original, compelling work investigates an undeniable inequity that America has too long ignored." Transcript follows: CNN's First of All with Victor Blackwell April 27, 2024 8:47 a.m. Eastern VICTOR BLACKWELL: Agree with the concept or not, you've probably heard, though, about white privilege -- societal and social privileges tied to race. But have you heard about the "white bonus." Federal data shows that for ever dollar that white Americans make, black Americans make 76 cents. In 2022, black Americans' median household wealth was almost $45,000 -- the median wealth for white households, $285,000. The distribution of financial assets in this country has been shaped by systemic racism, written laws, unspoken rules that for hundreds of years have worked to the detriment of minorities and to the benefit of white people. My next guest, journalists Tracie McMillan, set out to put a number on just how much of a benefit she has received. She examines the history of five families, including her own, and published her findings in her new book, The White Bonus: Five Families and the Cash Value of Racism in America. Tracie, thank you for being with me. Such a fascinating approach to so many things we talk about on this show -- the disparity of investment; diversity, equity and inclusion. What led you to the book? TRACIE McMILLAN, AUTHOR OF THE WHITE BONUS: Sure, well, you know, I work as a journalist, but I also am a white person in this country, and I felt like I needed to be honest about what I was getting for being white, and, you know, I don't make a ton of money, so for me the conversations around white privilege usually sort of center on quote, sort of "racial privilege" and "class privilege," and I wanted a way to get at this idea of "What do I get? What do we all get for being white?" And I thought the best way to do that would be to try and figure out if I could estimate how much sort of racial advantage had shaped my life just in real terms, right? Privilege is super amorphous, sort of ghost like you can't grab onto it. But if you have a number, then you can actually have a conversation. BLACKWELL: So let's talk about the number. Your estimate is that you have benefited from your whiteness to the amount of $371,934.30. Explain how you got to that number. McMILLAN: Sure. So it's comprised of two sums, so there's both a family bonus and a social bonus, right? So when we're talking about a white bonus, we're looking at sort of the amount of money an individual white person has gotten or saved because of white supremacy in policy or practice, right? So, for me, about $146,000 of that comes from money that I got from my family -- that I then, you know, when I went back through our family history, can pretty reliably say we wouldn't have had access to that money if we weren't white, right? In my family, you know, I didn't know this when I went into the project, but all the sort of money that gets passed down to me comes from one grandfather who became a banker in the 1920s and '30s. So, in 1930, there were about a quarter of a million bankers in the U.S., only 80 of which were black. So very unlikely that he would have had that job and been able to accrue that kind of wealth if he hadn't have been white as well as, you know, he had a racial covenant on the house that he owned and then sold and was able to go into assisted living as an elder. So that's $146,000 there. But, then, really, right, the social bonus that I get as an adult in the world, so people offering me jobs, offering me apartments. I mean, these are things I have to qualify for and sort of work at, right, but I get given these opportunities. All of that combined with being able to build equity through property ownership in Detroit where I was only able to buy housing because racism had ruined the housing market there, right. That comes up to about $226,000. BLACKWELL: Well, Tracie, we only have about 45 seconds or so left, but what do we now do with this? Now that you have calculated it and we all know that, according to your estimate, what it is, what do we do with it? McMILLAN: I mean, fight to end racism, right? I think the -- something I also look at is the cost of racism to Americans, including white Americans, right? Racism has impoverished our democracy and eviscerated our safety net. Most of us need access to those things to survive. And I think you know, even if you go back through my numbers. I wouldn't need most of that money from my family if we had affordable education and housing and health care in this country, right? And so I think for all of us, there's  a real vested interest not in fighting racism as charity but as something that hurts everybody and is worth fighting against. BLACKWELL: Tracie McMillan, I'm going to read the title of this book again - The White Bonus: Five Families and the Cash Value of Racism in America. Thank you so much for being with us. We've got a good write on it on CNN.com right now.

FLASHBACK: Lib Reporters Championed ’06 Illegal Immigrant Protests

Eighteen years ago this week, the liberal networks donated their airwaves to the cause of protesters seeking to kill a bill which would have increased the federal government’s ability to enforce immigration laws. The May 1, 2006 protests were part of a wave of activism that spring sponsored by left-wing groups aimed at derailing GOP efforts to curb illegal immigration — even as polls at the time showed four out of five Americans (81%) thought illegal immigration was “out of control.” [For perspective: in 2006, there were a total of 1,089,096 encounters with illegal immigrants at all U.S. borders, according to government statistics. Under Joe Biden, those numbers were nearly three times higher last year (2023): a whopping 3,201,144 encounters. So what was regarded as “out of control” 18 years ago would today seem like great progress.] We’ll never know if today’s situation would be significantly better if Congress had succeeded in passing new enforcement mechanisms in 2006. Back then, the networks helped immigration activists thwart these conservative proposals, with fawning and emotionally-charged coverage of these political marches — “people draping themselves in the American dream,” as one over-the-top morning host anchor enthused. That spring, network correspondents invariably expressed admiration for the large size of the protests — as if a few hundred thousands of participants rendered the cause genuinely popular in a nation of 300 million. “[The immigration issue] erupted this weekend in mass demonstrations that matched the biggest of the civil rights movement or the Vietnam War,” CBS weekend anchor Mika Brzezinski enthused on March 26. “Over the past several days, a protest movement has been born, erupting with a startling air of spontaneity in mass demonstrations,” ABC’s Terry Moran cheered the next day on Nightline. “You could hear the anger about the proposal before Congress that would criminalize illegal or undocumented immigrants and make it a felony to help them in any way.” Three weeks later, another round of protests earned more free airtime. “Across the country today, hundreds of thousands of people came out in support of millions of undocumented workers,” ABC’s Elizabeth Vargas touted on the April 10 World News Tonight. The tone was unquestionably sympathetic. “They are not American citizens yet, but they want to be. And from every corner of America, immigrants took to the streets today to ask for new immigration laws,” CBS Evening News anchor Bob Schieffer applauded that same night. “Not since the protests of the Vietnam era has there been anything quite like it.” Newspapers conveyed the same spin. “A Banner Day on the Mall,” declared the Washington Post the next morning, while USA Today heralded: “Historic rallies voice a ‘dream.” On CBS’s The Early Show, co-host Harry Smith was giddy. “These demonstrations in all these cities across the country, hundreds of thousands of people, American flags unfurled, people draping themselves in the American dream....People literally all over the country walking away from their jobs to stand in the street and say, ‘I count for something,’” he beamed. The biggest event came on May 1, and the networks supplied blanket coverage of the heavily-promoted event. “From coast to coast, from North to South, they wanted us to know what America would be like without them, and so millions of immigrants missed work, skipped school and marched in the streets,” CBS’s Schieffer explained on the Evening News. Over on World News Tonight, ABC’s Vargas called it “an economic show of force by America’s illegal immigrants....They wanted to show America just how much the country and the economy depend on undocumented workers.” “In Philadelphia today, huge crowds converged on the Liberty Bell. In Milwaukee, a massive march on the shores of Lake Michigan,” Terry Moran exulted on ABC’s Nightline. “Hundreds of thousands of workers, their families and supporters, took over the city streets today in a massive demonstration of sheer numerical power. It was breathtaking....” The next morning on NBC’s Today, co-host Katie Couric chirped that the events were “shades of the early days of the civil rights movement.” Reporter Kevin Tibbles kept up the theme: “These people vow to continue their push for immigration reform, so those who critics call ‘illegals’ can continue to call America home.” If there was any confusion about the political motivations at play, CBS carved out some airtime for a soon-to-be-famous Democratic Senator who had attached himself to the cause. “Unlike last month’s wave of demonstrations, politicians didn’t simply take notice. Today, many showed up,” correspondent Byron Pitts saluted on the May 1 Evening News. Viewers then saw Pitts with then-Illinois Senator Barack Obama, who wagged his finger at Americans who thought immigration laws should be enforced. “We’ve been engaging in hypocrisy in this country. We don’t mind these folks mowing our lawns, or looking after our children, or serving us at restaurants, as long as they don’t actually ask for any rights in return.” The MRC’s Tim Graham studied the broadcast network coverage that spring, documenting the gross imbalance. “Advocates of opening a wider path to citizenship were almost twice as likely to speak in news stories as advocates for stricter immigration control,” he discovered. Out of 830 soundbites, Graham found 504 (61%) advocated amnesty, vs. 257 (31%) who wanted tighter border controls. (The rest were neutral.) Graham also found the networks essentially ignored topics that might harm the cause. Out of 309 stories (from March 25 through May 31, 2006), only six “mentioned studies that illegal aliens cost more to governments than they provide in tax dollars.” Similarly, only six stories mentioned crimes committed by illegal immigrants, and “no story in the study period mentioned the problem of Latino criminal gangs” infiltrating the United States. Fast forward to 2024, and today’s utterly unrestrained immigration — and the Biden administration’s obvious tolerance of it — is the top reason voters oppose the President’s re-election this year. It would be ironic if today’s pro-immigration Democrats are booted as a delayed reaction to the liberal media’s assistance in short-circuiting attempts at tougher enforcement a generation ago. For more examples from our flashback series, which we call the NewsBusters Time Machine, go here.                          

Journalist Kara Swisher: 'Anti-American' To Oppose Young Pro-Hamas Protesters

On The Chris Wallace Show on CNN on Saturday morning, leftist journalist Kara Swisher claimed it was "un-American" not to support young people protesting against Israel and shutting down campuses. She said this after being confronted with protesters saying Zionists don't deserve to live.  Wallace opened the show with Joe Biden's "very fine people on both sides" quote about the protests, that "he continues to walk a fine line between defending the protesters and denouncing them." Jonah Goldberg of The Dispatch said these disruptive protests on campuses are "almost all political upside" for the Republicans. Washington Free Beacon editor-in-chief Eliana Johnson said "I think it's a missed opportunity for presidential leadership. I think it's good politics to come out against protesters who are telling Jews to go back to Poland and saying Zionists don't deserve to live. Those are direct quotes from leaders of the Columbia protests. It's good politics for Biden to stand against that. The problem for him, of course, is that the left wing of his party, Representative Ilhan Omar, are showing up at the protest to shore them up. So of course, he would alienate the left flank of his party. But I do think it's a missed opportunity for him to fade into the background of this." Swisher, a longtime Wall Street Journal tech reporter who more recently was a columnist and podcaster for The New York Times, somehow thought it was anti-American to be anti-Hamas, as our Brent Baker captured it: “Not to support” the anti-Semitic pro-Palestinian protesters taking over colleges “is sort of anti-American” – @karaswisher on CNN’s Chris Wallace Show pic.twitter.com/vLeFIZ8BxB — Brent Baker 🇺🇦 🇮🇱 (@BrentHBaker) April 27, 2024   KARA SWISHER: Well, some people are saying that, and I think you have to be -- the question is, are you for order and against chaos, or for protests and the right to free speech? And what's interesting is how quickly everyone and shifting. All the free-speech warriors are suddenly like, order, order, we must have order. And so there are heinous things that are said, but there is a line where you have to support also young people, especially when they do things that they do badly. Not to support them, is sort of anti- American in a way. JOHNSON: Free speech is fine, but USC has canceled its graduation. Columbia University has canceled classes and put them online. We've gone well beyond free speech and into shuttering the operations of universities. And I do think it's a missed opportunity for Biden to say there are limits. We've gone beyond speech and into harassment and disruption here. And we will not stand for that. LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, New York Times: Yes, I think we've also, though, seen a reaction from some of the police and others that have been deployed on campuses that have been -- SWISHER: Excessive. GARCIA-NAVARRO: Excessive, thank you. SWISHER: Like Texas today, or Indiana, because then then that's a whole different story as these young people -- you are changing the political mentality of young people right now. And if you push down too hard on it, especially at this age, and not being able to express yourselves, I think you have a much bigger problem later on. Leftists typically question any police use of force against protesters, and rarely think leftist protesters should be questioned for their tactics. We can all guess where Swisher would have come down if the "young people" had been Tea Party kids disrupting an Obama event.  They would be anti-American.

MSNBC Bites Biden From The Left For Failing To Pack The Supreme Court

On Saturday's edition of MSNBC's The Weekend, hosts and guests alike bemoaned Biden's failure to seek to pack the Supreme Court. Their comments came in response to oral arguments at the Court this past week on the case regarding Trump's claim of presidential immunity. The panel expressed fears that the Court might expand presidential immunity -- if not to the extent of the right to assassinate political rivals, as Trump's lawyer suggested could be an immune act.  Co-host Alicia Menendez teed up the packing notion, saying that in light of what happened in the Court last week, clearly something "structural"--packing or court "reform" is necessary. Guest Ankush Khadori strongly agreed, calling Biden's failure to push for packing a "historic political miscalculation."   Co-anchor Symone Sanders Townsend, mentioning that she had worked for Biden, said that he is someone who believes in "the rule of law." But Sanders suggested that it is "time to do things differently." Again Khadori agreed, flatly saying that in supporting the rule of law, Biden "is holding the wrong view. I hate to say that about the president. He's been wrong about this the whole time." Wait a second! Isn't the Democrats' big beef against Trump that he refuses to accept the rule of law? But discarding the rule of law is a good—indeed a necessary—thing if it benefits Democrats? Khadori claimed "this Court, over the last few years, is systematically running roughshod through our Constitution. They, in just the last few years, they overturned Roe, they've invalidated affirmative action in higher education, and they basically legalized same sex discrimination. They threw out part of the Biden administration's signature domestic policy effort on the student loan forgiveness plan." But even legal scholars on the left have acknowledged that Roe was poorly decided. Indeed, MSNBC's own legal analyst Danny Cevallos opined, before the Dobbs decision came down, that Roe was "ripe" to be overturned because "the right to privacy [upon which Roe was based] does not exist either in the history or the text of the Constitution, and that Roe "stands on a weak foundational basis." As for affirmative action, the phrase itself is a euphemism for reverse racial discrimination, a clear-cut violation of the Equal Protection clause and legislative prohibitions of racial discrimination. The "student loan forgiveness" Biden has granted by ignoring Congress and court rulings against him. Who's "running roughshod through our Constitution" again?  Here's the transcript. MSNBC The Weekend 4/27/24 8:22 am EDT ALICIA MENENDEZ: If you were part of the 70% of Americans who agree that the president should not have absolute immunity, and then you watched what transpired this week in court, what is left as recourse, right? There's court reform, there's stacking the Court? What do you see as the path forward, because clearly something more structural is necessary. ANKUSH KHADORI: Yeah, I agree with that. I think, actually, as we think about this administration and its legacy, I think it was -- it will go down as having been a historic political miscalculation. MENENDEZ: You're talking about the Biden administration. KHADORI: Biden administration, to not have made a real, earnest effort at Supreme Court reform. They put together a commission that produced a report that nobody read. It was not a serious effort to actually pursue Supreme Court reform, and now -- SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: Why? Because the president, President Biden, I mean, I worked for him at that time. I was a part of the transition, and I worked in the White House, and I know for a fact, and Eugene, you've been asking the questions too -- I was there.  He himself does not believe that that is an avenue that should be explored. Joe Biden is somebody that believes that, in the rules of law and laws the systems. And one could argue, I [inaudiable], whew!--it's time, it's time to do things differently. KHADORI: Well look. I mean, yeah, I am aware he has that view. He is holding the wrong view. I hate to say that about the president. He's been wrong about this the whole time. And now, this Court, over the last few years, is systematically running roughshod through our Constitution. They, in just the last few years, they overturned Roe, they've invalidated affirmative action in higher education, and they basically legalized same sex discrimination. They threw out part of the Biden administration's signature domestic policy effort on the student loan forgiveness plan.  And now they seem poised to issue some sort of ruling that will change the law which has already been in place for a couple hundred years. We all assumed a president could be criminally charged after he, leaving office, to now come up with some crazy new doctrine. And -- MENENDEZ: To say nothing of the Idaho case that they are listening to right now, which is like all of their chickens coming home to roost. SANDERS TOWNSEND: Yeah, and its like yeah, we don't want to save women. KHADORI: All of the cases coming back to them after Dobbs is a mess. And this, this immunity ruling, if it comes out as most of us are expecting, it will go down in history as a practical effect, as a practical matter, as a sequel to Bush versus Gore.

PBS Sympathizes With Pro-Hamas Camping Protesters at Columbia: ‘Free Speech’

Tuesday’s edition of the PBS NewsHour took a deep-dive look at the anti-Jewish, pro-Hamas protesters camped out at Columbia University, with some “protesters” spewing eliminationist rhetoric at Israel and telling Jewish students to “go back to Poland.” One girl stood in front of a group of Jewish counter protesters holding a sign that read “Al Qassam’s next targets.” (Al Qassam is the military wing of Hamas.) Yet anchor Geoff Bennett’s intro was disconcertingly mild, ignoring all the disgusting details of the pro-Hamas demonstrators, while predominantly portraying them as victims of an over-aggressive college administration. Whatever actual goals the protests may have (divestment by the universities from Israel companies, perhaps) weren’t mentioned. Bennett: College campuses in several parts of the country are struggling tonight with just where to draw the line between allowing protests and free speech and preventing antisemitism and intimidation….Police said they were called in by university officials, who said protesters breached barricades and behaved in a -- quote -- "disruptive and antagonizing manner." Some faculty disputed that characterization by the school…. Hundreds of students have turned out for protests. On Thursday, [Columbia’s president] Shafik called the New York Police Department to break up tent encampments, and more than 100 protesters were arrested. Many students and faculty felt Shafik's crackdown has been excessively harsh in squelching free speech. Bennett put the genuine threat to Jewish students in passive terms, noting “but some students, Jewish students, in particular, as well as some alumni and faculty, say there's too much hostility on campus, leading some to feel threatened for their safety.” After quotes from a concerned non-Jewish student and the Anti-Defamation League, he pivoted: Bennett: But protesters say the crackdown is not justified. Aya Lyon-Sereno is a sophomore at Barnard College, which is part of Columbia, majoring in urban studies. She's Jewish. Aya Lyon-Sereno, Student, Barnard College: Barnard students have been evicted from dorms they're paying for, have been given 15 minutes to gather any belongings and are not allowed to eat in any dining halls, are not allowed to, like, use their meal plans and have been really, really criminalized. (A shame PBS didn’t cover such unfair practices by colleges during the COVID hysteria, when they were kicking out students out of housing they’d paid for, for the crime of…grocery shopping.) He brought Irene Mulvey into the studio, president of the (hard-left) American Association of University Professors, who delivered hypocritical talking points about defending freedom of expression on campus. Yet Mulvey signed an open letter at the height of the Black Lives Matter hysteria voicing concerns about “microaggressions” on campus. But now violent threats against Jews are part of “free speech.” Mulvey called them “peaceful protesters,” and pompously lamented “we saw the suppression of speech and silencing of voices because somebody might not like what they're saying. And that is a real danger in a democracy.” When Bennett asked, “How should a university balance the expression of free speech and student safety?” Mulvey was dismissive: “There's genuine -- there's harassment and antisemitism has, is not new, it's not the first time hate speech has reared its ugly head on campus. There are policies in place to deal with these kinds of things. And that's where we should go, policies that ensure due process for the students. And then what we're seeing instead is new policies being drafted on time, manner and place of protest….” Bennett followed up strongly: Well, thinking about this from the perspective of Jewish students who say they feel intimidated. If there is a climate of harassment on campus, isn’t the administration morally compelled and also compelled by law, by Title IX, to address it and shut it down? Mulvey said in times like these, “….you have to err on the side of free and open inquiry. There -- hate speech, antisemitism has no place on campus or anywhere and there are policies to deal with that. But in higher education, our primary focus should be academic freedom, free speech, and -- free speech and associational rights for students.” Bennett then went to Dr. Andrew Marks at Columbia University, who quibbled with a couple of Mulvey’s false assertions and noted examples of anti-Semitism on campus, but also praised Columbia’s president and said things were quieting down. This segment was brought to you in part by Consumer Cellular A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS NewsHour 4/23/24 7:03:29 p.m. (ET) Geoff Bennett: College campuses in several parts of the country are struggling tonight with just where to draw the line between allowing protests and free speech and preventing antisemitism and intimidation. As the school year nears its end, Columbia University announced it would stay on a hybrid schedule until the end of the spring semester next week. And students were arrested at New York University last night. Police arrested more than 100 people at NYU, as the turmoil that has roiled Columbia over the past week spreads to other schools. Protester: It's a really, really outrageous crackdown by the university to allow the police to arrest students on our own campus. Geoff Bennett: Police said they were called in by University officials, who said protesters breached barricades and behaved in a — quote — "disruptive and antagonizing manner." Some faculty disputed that characterization by the school. It came as a wave of pro-Palestinian protests and encampments have spread in the past week since Columbia University President Minouche Shafik testified before a congressional committee about antisemitism on campus. Many are students, but not all are from the respective school where they are protesting. Earlier in the day, at least 60 people were arrested at Yale. There have been similar protests at Emerson, MIT, Boston University, the University of Michigan, and the University of California. Protesters: Free, free, free Palestine! Geoff Bennett: Columbia has been the flash point for a week now. Hundreds of students have turned out for protests. On Thursday, Shafik called the New York Police Department to break up tent encampments, and more than 100 protesters were arrested. Many students and faculty felt Shafik's crackdown has been excessively harsh in squelching free speech. Protesters: The people united will never be defeated! Geoff Bennett: But some students, Jewish students, in particular, as well as some alumni and faculty, say there's too much hostility on campus, leading some to feel threatened for their safety. Michael D'Agostino is a junior at the engineering school. He's not Jewish, but says he's watched what's happened too often. Michael D’Agostino, Student, Columbia University: The campus, honestly, it's full of a lot of hate and disagreement. And it's honestly just sad to see. It seems a pretty awful thing said to not only practicing Jews, but, I mean, people that are ethnically Jewish, simply for wearing like a Star of David.   Geoff Bennett: The Anti-Defamation League posted a video, contending it had become too dangerous as well. Man: Two individuals threw a rock at my head, hit me right in the face. I'm calling public safety. NYPD, where are you? Geoff Bennett: But protesters say the crackdown is not justified. Aya Lyon-Sereno is a sophomore at Barnard College, which is part of Columbia, majoring in urban studies. She's Jewish. Aya Lyon-Sereno, Student, Barnard College: Barnard students have been evicted from dorms they're paying for, have been given 15 minutes to gather any belongings and are not allowed to eat in any dining halls, are not allowed to, like, use their meal plans and have been really, really criminalized. Geoff Bennett: She also said the administration's approach has backfired. Aya Lyon-Sereno: The atmosphere on campus has been really tense, and I and many other students attribute that to the administration's actions, that people are feeling like it's tense on campus, people are feeling unsafe because there's a ton of cops in riot gear here. Geoff Bennett: For his part, President Biden also criticized many of the protests yesterday. Joe Biden, President of the United States: I condemn the antisemitic protests. I also condemn those who don't understand what's going on with the Palestinians. Geoff Bennett: And, today, before he went into court, former President Donald Trump blamed President Biden. Donald Trump, Former President of the United States (R) and Current U.S. Presidential Candidate: What's going on at the college level, at the colleges, the Columbia, NYU and others, is a disgrace. And it's a — it's really on Biden. He has the wrong signal. He's got the wrong tone. He's got the wrong words. Geoff Bennett: The situation is also starting to affect the commencement season. The University of Southern California canceled all outside speakers, it says, out of concern for public. That followed a much-criticized decision to cancel the remarks of valedictorian Asna Tabassum, a Muslim student, over unspecified safety concerns. While Columbia University's administration has faced criticism for how it's handled the events and the arrest of students, concerns remain about the safety of Jewish staff and students on campus. We will get both of these perspectives first from Irene Mulvey, President Of The American Association of University Professors. She spent 37 years teaching mathematics at Fairfield University before retiring. Dr. Mulvey, thank you for being with us. And we should say that members of the Columbia University chapter of your organization are expected to move to censure the university president for her decision to call in the NYPD last week to arrest demonstrators. Why? Why is that warranted, in your view? Irene Mulvey, President, American Association of University Professors: Well, I think the idea of calling in police in riot gear on peaceful protesters protesting outside is a remarkably disproportionate and wrong-ended response to the events we're seeing on campus, because higher education is founded on listening, learning, discussion, debate, free and open inquiry. We challenge students to challenge their most deeply held beliefs in order to justify them to themselves and to others. Our goal is communication in service of understanding. Instead, we saw the suppression of speech and silencing of voices because somebody might not like what they're saying. And that is a real danger in a democracy. Geoff Bennett: Well, how should a university balance the expression of free speech and student safety? Irene Mulvey: There's genuine — there's — harassment and antisemitism has — is not new. It's not the first time hate speech has reared its ugly head on campus. There are policies in place to deal with these kinds of things. And that's where we should go, policies that ensure due process for the students. And then what we're seeing instead is new policies being drafted on time, manner and place of protest. So, your protest has to be over in a roped-off area in a tiny space on campus. This is suppression of speech. So the idea of, if you're suppressing speech in order to keep students safe, that's a false choice. You can do both. Geoff Bennett: Well, thinking about this from the perspective of Jewish students who say they feel intimidated, if there is a climate of harassment on campus, isn't the administration morally compelled and also compelled by law, by Title IX, to address it and shut it down? Irene Mulvey: The institution is required to allow for the most free and open expression, while also ensuring that conversations are civil and dialogue is respectful. But in situations like this, these are — people have extremely strong positions, and these are polarizing times, that debates are heated and messy. And so you have to err on the side of free and open inquiry. There — hate speech, antisemitism has no place on campus or anywhere and there are policies to deal with that. But in higher education, our primary focus should be academic freedom, free speech, and — free speech and associational rights for students. Geoff Bennett: As protests spread to other campuses, what lessons could other college administrators, university administrators take away from what's transpired at Columbia? Irene Mulvey: They could think about creative ways to respond. They could think about ways to encourage communication and dialogue in open forums across their campus and engaging all students, so that all students have an opportunity to hear other points of view, to understand other points of view, to question other points of view. They should figure out creative ways to respond, because what happened at NYU and Columbia is completely unacceptable. The silencing of speech in a democracy because somebody doesn't like it, this is a real danger. Geoff Bennett: Irene Mulvey is president of the American Association of University Professors. Thank you for your insights. Irene Mulvey: Thank you. Geoff Bennett: Let's turn now to Dr. Andrew Marks. He's the chair of the department of physiology and cellular biophysics at Columbia University. Thank you for being with us. Dr. Andrew R. Marks, Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics Chair, Columbia University: Thanks for having me. Geoff Bennett: So how do you feel about Dr. Shafik's handling of the ongoing demonstrations at Columbia? And what do you make of this view that the old policies in place to deal with student demonstrations were sufficient? Dr. Andrew R. Marks: I think she's doing the best that she can. I think that her heart is in the right place. I think it's an incredibly difficult situation and there are no easy answers. The university, Columbia University, has had policies in place which I think are capable of dealing with this situation if they're able to be enforced. Geoff Bennett: Have you witnessed incidents of antisemitism on campus? Dr. Andrew R. Marks: Yes, I have. I have seen antisemitic slurs being hurled at Jewish students. And it's been very painful to watch. I have seen antisemitic hate language written on the college walk in the middle of campus and posters hanging that have been very offensive. Geoff Bennett: What more should Columbia be doing? What more could Columbia be doing to make Jewish students feel safer? Dr. Andrew R. Marks: Well, I think Columbia has already done quite a lot and taken steps. And my personal observation is that, over the last several days, the hate speech has been toned down on campus. The problem is that, as you know, Columbia's campus is in the middle of New York City. And when you leave campus either — in either direction, there's a tremendous amount of antisemitic hate speech being hurled at students and faculty from people outside the campus. Geoff Bennett: When it comes to what's happening on campus, how should a university balance student safety and student expression? Dr. Andrew R. Marks: Well, I think that students should be allowed to protest, absolutely. And I think that the limit has to be on hate speech. So I think that, as long as the protests are civil and respectful of other members of the community, that needs to be protected and encouraged. When it drifts over to hate speech, then it becomes offensive and I think threatening to the Jewish community at the university. Geoff Bennett: What do you think is informing and influencing Dr. Shafik's response to these ongoing protests? Dr. Andrew R. Marks: Again, she's been in an incredibly difficult situation. And I wanted to clarify a couple of things I heard your previous speaker say. First of all, there — the actions taken against students had nothing to do with the content of their speech, except when it comes to hate speech, of course, but in terms of what they were protesting. It really had to do with them breaking the existing rules of the university. And President Shafik is responsible for the safety of all students. And she took an action, which I was not in favor of, bringing in the police. I wanted to negotiate or talk to the students some more before that. But she did that because she felt it was necessary to preserve the safety of the Jewish community on the campus and other people on campus. I was one of the people in the Senate Executive Committee that helped write the event policy. And it's important to note that that was done in complete collaboration and working very closely with students. And while no policy is perfect, we tried to come up with one that was fair. Your previous speaker mentioned that we were limiting protests to tiny parts of campus. That's not accurate. There were designated areas and times and place, which is common for all university campuses. And had the students adhered to those guidelines, things would have gone much differently.

USA TODAY: Kyle Rittenhouse Campus Speeches Raise 'Free Speech' Questions

This will grab your attention. At the bottom of the front page of Thursday’s USA Today was this headline: Shooter Rittenhouse’s tour draws outrage College gun-rights events raise questions about free speech and its impact USA Today thinks pro-gun-rights speech “raises questions”? The online headline was even stronger: Kyle Rittenhouse, deadly shooter, college speaker? A campus gun-rights tour sparks outrage As in: Who’s approving this speech on campus? A video in the online story shows “hundreds of protesters” at the University of Memphis. “Students celebrated his departure with live music and dancing on campus.” They forced Rittenhouse to leave early. This is a triumph in the media's eyes?  Reporter Cybele Mayes-Osterman sounded like an editorial writer from the beginning: Kyle Rittenhouse is not a typical college campus speaker. In 2020, at the age of 17, he took an AR-15-style rifle to a Black Lives Matter demonstration and fired it, killing two people and injuring a third. Rittenhouse said he pulled the trigger in self-defense and was acquitted of wrongdoing. He has since penned a book, “Acquitted,” and has set out on a series of college speaking events dubbed the "Rittenhouse Recap." He is slated to appear Thursday at Clemson University in South Carolina. Rittenhouse is selling books, and ostensibly promoting the right to bear arms on campus, but he’s also trying to persuade young people to join the conservative movement. The key group behind the appearances, Turning Point USA, is led by the self-described “youth director” of President Donald Trump’s first campaign and a key ally rallying votes for Trump this year. (I left in their links, because the reporters don't tend to say Rittenhouse "shot in self-defense," just that he shot people, and that police shot Jacob Blake, but not that he was reaching for a knife.) Who's letting speakers persuade students to become conservatives? Is that where the national newspapers "raise questions about free speech and its impact"? The tour promoter is the Trump-loving Turning Point USA, which is more salt in the USA Today free-speech wound:  The provocative choice of backing the Rittenhouse tour is par for the course for Turning Point and its local affiliates, which have hosted controversial figures like Nick Fuentes, a white nationalist and Holocaust denier. But it has stirred up devastating pain and disdain in a man he almost killed. "He has used every moment to gloat and to make light of taking life," Paul Prediger said, speaking publicly for the first time about what happened in protest of a Rittenhouse speech last week at Kent State The ADL said Fuentes appeared once at Iowa State in 2019, and the local TPUSA leader resigned over it. But "Prediger" has changed his name from Gaige Grosskreutz. A few paragraphs later, the paper acknowledges Rittenhouse tweeted a video with Prediger/Grosskreutz "admitting he pointed a gun in Rittenhouse's direction before being shot."  USA Today clearly finds the Rittenhouse speaking tour as more objectionable than pro-Hamas protesters creating encampments across the country as their leaders speak of violence against the "Zionists." Their cause isn't lead by some conservative white boy beloved by Trump voters.  

Elon Musk Called Out NPR And PBS As 'State-Affiliated': They Freaked

Uri Berliner's expose of the ideological unanimity at NPR reminds the Republican half of America that they send their taxpayer dollars to Washington to have their viewpoints excluded or ridiculed as "far right" hate.  Back there in the Stone Age of 2023, Elon Musk, he of X that is formerly Twitter, antagonized NPR and PBS because - ready? Musk had made some changes to “state-affiliated” media designations, applying the term to both of those outlets. They're state-funded, but not state-affiliated? While stripping the designation from media outlets tied to governments like those of Russia and Iran, Musk had the nerve - the nerve! - to apply it to, among others, America’s NPR and PBS along with the UK’s BBC and Canada’s CBC. This is in the news a year later after CNN’s Oliver Darcy, now the man behind CNN’s Reliable Sources, talks of life after X, and looks back at his decision to remove his CNN newsletter from X in July of 2023. To recall the start of this media kerfuffle, see these headlines.   First, this one in April of 2023 from NPR:  NPR quits Twitter after being falsely labeled as 'state-affiliated media’ The story reported:  NPR will no longer post fresh content to its 52 official Twitter feeds, becoming the first major news organization to go silent on the social media platform. In explaining its decision, NPR cited Twitter's decision to first label the network "state-affiliated media," the same term it uses for propaganda outlets in Russia, China and other autocratic countries. Then there was this from the UK Guardian in 2023:  PBS quits Twitter after being labeled ‘government-funded media’ Broadcaster leaves platform a day after NPR’s exit over concerns labels undermine credibility as independent news outlets That story reported:  In a statement to USA Today, Jason Phelps of PBS said the broadcaster’s staffers stopped using the organization’s Twitter account after learning that the platform had relabeled them. Phelps said PBS had “no plans to resume at this time” but added that the organization was ‘continuing to monitor the ever-changing situation closely’. Here at NewsBusters, reporter Luis Cornelio lasered in on this squabble in May of 2023.  Uh, Oh! NPR Gets Triggered Over Elon Musk — Again Cornelio’s story reported:  Musk initially slapped NPR’s Twitter account with a “state-affiliated” label, a move that triggered a wave of leftist condemnation, with even Biden White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre vouching for NPR’s reporting. NPR President and CEO John Lansing ridiculously pouted that he was “disturbed” by the label. “We were disturbed to see last night that Twitter has labeled NPR as 'state-affiliated media,' a description that, per Twitter's own guidelines, does not apply to NPR,” Lansing claimed. Musk later changed NPR’s label to “government-funded media.” But NPR was apparently so triggered, it eventually left the platform. Musk mocked NPR’s exit from Twitter in a series of tweets last month, including a short post saying “Defund @NPR." Both PBS and NPR tried to wriggle off Musk’s “state affiliated” description by whining, essentially: “But we don’t take that much money!” Ahhhh. The Western Journal to the clarification rescue. The WJ investigated, headlining:  Fact-Check: How Much of PBS, NPR Revenue Comes from Government Funding? And what did the WJ fact check reveal? This:    So, just how much money does NPR get from government or government-affiliated sources? As noted above, NPR says only 1 percent of its annual budget comes from federal sources. But according to its own numbers, the broadcaster gets a lot more from government sources than it lets on.    For fiscal year 2020, for instance, the broadcaster’s affiliate stations received 8 percent of their revenue from federal appropriations via the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. They also got 10 percent from colleges and universities — which themselves are publicly funded — and another 5 percent from federal, state and local governments. That is 23 percent, not 1 percent.” As Musk pointed out, WJ says NPR also states on its website that…  federal funding is essential to public radio’s service to the American public and its continuation is critical for both stations and program producers, including NPR. For its part, PBS gets even more from government or government-affiliated sources. That “even more” amount would be that:…  ….the TV broadcaster says it gets 15 percent of its revenue from the federal government, 13 percent from state governments, 3 percent from local governments, and 8 percent from universities. That’s a total of 39 percent. All of which is to say, Musk has been 100% correct to describe PBS and NPR as “state affiliated” - because they both are. For a fact they receive dollars from the government. According to that Guardian article , a PBS spokesman laughably said that: Twitter’s simplistic label leaves the inaccurate impression that PBS is wholly funded by the federal government. Hello? Needless to say, whether “wholly funded” or “partially funded” or accepting a dollar of government money, PBS is still taking government tax dollars to stay afloat. But, as discussed in this space with the recent, much publicized resignation of longtime NPR editor Uri Berliner, the network exists in a liberal bubble, no dissent allowed.  There was an easy and obvious way for NPR and PBS to answer Musk’s criticism and get out from under his “state-affiliated” designation once and for all. That would be: Stop taking money from the government. Period. Stop taking any money from any government apparatus. Period. Make the “P” in NPR and PBS stand not for “Public” - aka taking government funds - but rather “P” as in “Private.” As in “National Private Radio” and “Private Broadcasting Service.” All of which would make NPR and PBS a genuine private sector competitor with the rest of the American private sector free market in the world of television and radio broadcasting. Would that happen? Of course not. Again, as Uri Berliner documents, the network exists in a liberal bubble. Not even Elon Musk can get through it. They want to challenge Elon Musk - but not like that.  The bottom line? Elon Musk was right. Both PBS and NPR take government funding. They still do. And, one can reasonably suspect, neither has any intention of stopping. 

NBC Downplays Columbia Leader's Anti-Semitism, CBS Still Ignores

On Friday morning, ABC, NBC, and CBS all ignored Columbia encampment student leader Khymani James’s January remarks that Zionists don’t deserve to live and they should be grateful he personally isn’t murdering them. Since then, the results have been mixed. Friday’s World News Tonight on ABC played the video and Saturday’s Today alluded to it, but did not play it, and the amount of specifics the viewer got was dependent on their NBC affiliate. Meanwhile, CBS Saturday Morning continued to ignore the video. The best CBS could muster was a recorded segment on the latest developments around Columbia that included an interview with a pro-Israeli counter-protestor. “Nobody’s talking about the hostages,” a Columbia graduate student told correspondent Michael George.     George portrayed concerns about anti-Semitism as something this student was worried about, but he himself felt no need to elaborate on, “This Columbia grad student who took part in the rally argues those in the encampments are promoting anti-Semitism and ignoring the hostages still held by Hamas.” The student added, “If you want peace to be achieved, as we do, and if you want a ceasefire, the hostages need to be released.” Apart from teases and introductions, the only relatively substantive report viewers that have an NBC affiliate that only airs the first 60 minutes of the Saturday edition of Today would've got came from correspondent Liz Kreutz, “At Columbia, the university banning a student protester who made anti-Semitic remarks in a video that surfaced this week. Khymani James apologizing on Friday for the incendiary comments saying they ‘misspoke in the heat of the moment.’” That is not a misprint. James is the kind of guy who calls for the mass murder of Jews while demanding you use he, she, and they pronouns. As for Kruetz, she did not provide any context as to what those remarks might be. Those who get the 90-minute version would’ve gotten an extra report from fellow correspondent George Solis, who provided slightly more context, “Meanwhile, students here at Columbia have been camping out now for 11 days now, and still at issue, pro-Palestinian protesters calling on the university to divest any financial support to Israel. Now, Columbia has banned a student leader in the protests after videos surfaced of the individual calling for the death of Zionists, the student has since apologized for the remarks.” The previous night on ABC, correspondent Stephanie Ramos had her own pre-recorded segment that featured a soundbite from Jewish student Noa Fay, “On this campus, people chant that Zionists are not welcome, calling on, quote, ‘death to the Jewish state.’” Unlike CBS, ABC provided proof that Fay was not being hyperbolic, as Ramos immediately followed up with the clip of James ranting, “Be grateful that I'm not just going out and murdering Zionists.” Ramos wavered a bit when she added, “Back in January, Columbia student protester Khymani James live-streamed those comments after a disciplinary hearing with the school probing similar posts. Today, protest organizers distancing themselves from him.” An unnamed camper provided the context that James was not a mere protestor, but a leader, “He apologized and he asked for space to reflect and learn and grow and that he will step away from being press spokesperson.” It seems likely that James is simply sorry he got caught rather than truly remorseful for his actual remarks, as Ramos added, “Tonight, the university addressing that video posted by that student, calling it ‘extremely alarming,’ adding that calls for violence are unacceptable.” If only NBC and CBS viewers could be made aware of such alarming threats. Here are transcripts for the April 26 and 27 shows: ABC World News Tonight 4/26/2024 6:40 PM ET PRO-ISRAEL PROTESTORS: Bring them home! Bring them home! STEPHANIE RAMOS: Outside Columbia University, pro-Israel counter-protesters calling for the release of hostages. LEAT UNGER [Family member of Israeli hostage]: The release of hostages must come first and foremost to end the suffering on both sides. RAMOS: Today, Jewish students called on Columbia to keep every student safe. NOA FAY: On this campus, people chant that Zionists are not welcome, calling on, quote, “death to the Jewish state.” KHYMANI JAMES: Be grateful that I'm not just going out and murdering Zionists. RAMOS: Back in January, Columbia student protester Khymani James live-streamed those comments after a disciplinary hearing with the school probing similar posts. Today, protest organizers distancing themselves from him. PRO-PALESTINIAN PROTESTOR: He apologized and he asked for space to reflect and learn and grow and that he will step away from being press spokesperson. RAMOS: Tonight, the university addressing that video posted by that student, calling it “extremely alarming,” adding that calls for violence are unacceptable. *** NBC Today 4/26/2024 7:07 AM ET LIZ KREUTZ: At Columbia, the university banning a student protester who made anti-Semitic remarks in a video that surfaced this week. Khymani James apologizing on Friday for the incendiary comments saying they “misspoke in the heat of the moment.” … 8:05 AM ET GEORGE SOLIS: Tensions escalating this morning as a large police presence is unfolding in Boston, where authorities are dismantling a student encampment there at Northeastern and making arrests. Meanwhile, students here at Columbia have been camping out now for 11 days now, and still at issue, pro-Palestinian protesters calling on the university to divest any financial support to Israel. Now, Columbia has banned a student leader in the protests after videos surfaced of the individual calling for the death of Zionists, the student has since apologized for the remarks.  *** MICHAEL GEORGE: At Columbia university as talks between school administrators and pro-Palestinian protesters continue— PRO-ISRAEL PROTESTORS: Bring them home! GEORGE: -- pro-Israeli demonstrators, many non-students, made their voices heard outside the campus. PRO-ISRAEL PROTESTOR: Nobody’s talking about the hostages. GEORGE: This Columbia grad student who took part in the rally argues those in the encampments are promoting anti-Semitism and ignoring the hostages still held by Hamas. PRO-ISRAEL PROTESTOR: If you want peace to be achieved, as we do, and if you want a ceasefire, the hostages need to be released.   *** NBC Today 4/26/2024 7:07 AM ET LIZ KREUTZ: At Columbia, the university banning a student protester who made anti-Semitic remarks in a video that surfaced this week. Khymani James apologizing on Friday for the incendiary comments saying they “misspoke in the heat of the moment.” … 8:05 AM ET GEORGE SOLIS: Tensions escalating this morning as a large police presence is unfolding in Boston, where authorities are dismantling a student encampment there at Northeastern and making arrests. Meanwhile, students here at Columbia have been camping out now for 11 days now, and still at issue, pro-Palestinian protesters calling on the university to divest any financial support to Israel. Now, Columbia has banned a student leader in the protests after videos surfaced calling for the death of Zionists, the student has since apologized for the remarks.  *** MICHAEL GEORGE: At Columbia university as talks between school administrators and pro-Palestinian protesters continue— PRO-ISRAEL PROTESTORS: Bring them home! GEORGE: -- pro-Israeli demonstrators, many non-students, made their voices heard outside the campus. PRO-ISRAEL PROTESTOR: Nobody’s talking about the hostages. GEORGE: This Columbia grad student who took part in the rally argues those in the encampments are promoting anti-Semitism and ignoring the hostages still held by Hamas. PRO-ISRAEL PROTESTOR: If you want peace to be achieved, as we do, and if you want a ceasefire, the hostages need to be released.

Can Colbert Ignore ‘Genocide Joe’ Chants at DNC?

Stephen Colbert is a master at compartmentalization. CBS’s “Late Show” host has spent three-plus years looking the other way as President Joe Biden bumbled through his first term. Colbert ignores the endless gaffes, senior moments and shocking inflation rates. Not to mention crazed tales of uncles eaten by cannibals.   BIDEN: "I made it clear to the Israelis — don't move on Haifa!" Haifa is a major city *IN* Israel. pic.twitter.com/BdNgoDlGkM — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 18, 2024   And, when a Special Counsel dubbed Biden “an elderly man with poor memory,” Colbert spun the awful news to Biden’s advantage. That isn’t easy. His job as the Democrats’ late-night propagandist is about to get even harder. CBS has announced that Stephen Colbert will host his Late Nightshow from Chicago as the city plays host to the Democratic National Convention and will broadcast from the Auditorium Theatre in the Loop from August 19 to the 22nd. The decision makes sense on several levels. Colbert will be able to book major Democratic players. The comedian recently joined a Democratic fundraiser to boost President Biden’s re-election chances, making his commitment to the party official. “The Late Show” could get an energy boost from being in the belly of the political beast. Except this year isn’t going to be a typical DNC event. Pro-Palestinian protesters have been harassing Democrats for weeks in public over the Israel/Hamas war. The far-Left contingent has no qualms attacking mainstream Democrats and disrupting events. Some dubbed the Commander in Chief “Genocide Joe” for his quasi-support for the state of Israel.     We’re seeing violent protests across cities and campuses nationwide, and the movement seeks as much media attention as possible. And it’s getting louder. Politico, a liberal news outlet, echoed a phrase many are saying about the upcoming event. Democrats descend on Chicago as specter of ‘68 convention looms Here’s a refresher course from that tumultuous chapter in history which also took place in Chicago. As delegates flowed into the International Amphitheatre to nominate a Democratic Party presidential candidate, tens of thousands of protesters swarmed the streets to rally against the Vietnam War and the political status quo. By the time Vice President Herbert Humphrey received the presidential nomination, the strife within the Democratic Party was laid bare and the streets of Chicago had seen riots and bloodshed involving protesters, police and bystanders alike, radically changing America’s political and social landscape. That was without social media, YouTube and other ways to share information at the speed of a click. Another factor could weigh heavily this time ’round. Then-Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley had no qualms summoning both the police and the National Guard to keep the peace. They collectively failed. Today, blue cities like Chicago are far less interested in law and order. Violent, anti-semitic protests are the new norm in urban pockets and academia. Those breaking the law often go unpunished. That only emboldens them. What happens when that energy is left more or less unchecked? What impact will it have on the national mood, let alone the November elections? Will Biden’s poll numbers suffer even greater drops as a result?     Should the authorities attempt to keep the peace it might enrage the party’s base. Plus, these protesters have no qualms about breaking the law. Kobi Guillory, a spokesperson for the Coalition to March on the DNC, says protests will happen in August whether or not organizers are able to secure permits. The 1968 debacle followed a stunning change of leadership. President Lyndon B. Johnson announced he was withdrawing from the race in March, replaced by Vice President Hubert Humphrey. Will President Biden, diminished by age and sagging in the polls, be swapped out before the convention begins? More importantly for pop culture watchers, can Colbert look away as the city he temporarily calls home is roiled in chaos? Early projections expect north of 30,000 protesters to greet Team DNC. Will he or his audience be in the mood for garden-variety “clapter” if chaos envelops the nearby convention? What will Colbert say about the far-Left protesters, a group that will never vote for President Donald Trump or his fellow Republicans? Can he cover his ears while protesters chant, “Genocide Joe has got to go?” Colbert has kept his political head in the sand for three-plus years. It may be impossible to do the same come Summer.

PBS Is 'Frustrated' By Lack Of 'Nuance' On Reaction To Campus Encampments

New York Times columnist David Brooks and Washington Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart both claimed to be “frustrated” on Friday's PBS NewsHour that the encampments occurring on college campuses are not being treated with the “nuance” they deserve. They both called for the anti-Semitic among the demonstrators to be expelled, but insisted most are honest and sincere people who simply want to see the suffering of Gazans end. Host Amna Nawaz started by asking Brooks, “David, they have spread very quickly. They are sustaining on campuses. How do you look at these? I mean, should these be a sort of warning sign to the Biden Administration? What do you make of how quickly and widely they spread?”     Brooks claimed to “have been frustrated that people aren't making some distinctions here. So, I think most of the protesters are appalled by the horrors the Palestinians are suffering and they're well-motivated by compassion. There are some people who are probably hard-left people, and they get to have their views.” He also noted, “There are a lot of people who are anti-Semitic and violent. And so you should not be able to say, as one of the Columbia students said, ‘Zionists don't deserve to live.’ If that happens, you should be expelled. And so, in my view, they should let them protest. But if somebody says something, ‘Go back to Poland,’ or even a pro-Palestinian or pro-Israeli, ‘Go back to Gaza,’ that's ruining the community of the campus and so those people should be expelled.” It wasn’t some random student who said, “Zionists don’t deserve to live,” it was one of the leaders. At what point do the people who style themselves as peace activists who genuinely, but naively simply want a ceasefire and Palestinian administration of the West Bank have a moral obligation to dissociate themselves from leaders who want to destroy Israel and murder its supporters? After reiterating his call for expulsions, Brooks worried that “As for the Biden administration, I do worry that the Chicago convention is going to look a lot like 1968 and that will just be terrible for the Biden administration. The president will look hapless and powerless.” After Brooks rattled off some polling data showing the Israel-Hamas War ranks 15th out of 60 issues for young people, it was Capehart’s turn. He echoed Brooks, “I think the discussion about what's happening on these-- in these protests is missing a lot of nuance. Not everyone who's protesting is anti-Semitic, is rooting for violence, or is he even causing the violence? They are there for legitimate reasons. And I agree with David. If a person of the college community is disrupting and saying racist, anti-Semitic things, then, yes, they should be expelled.” At the same time, Capehart urged caution, “But we also should be mindful that, who are these people who are saying these things? Some might be members of the university or college community, but some could be from the outside. And my big fear from the BLM movement is, folks from the outside causing violence and then the blame being foisted upon the people who are legitimately protesting. And that is my big concern when we talk about this latest national protest.” The BLM leaders also professed to being Marxists, so maybe instead of shaming people for noticing their major protest movements are run by radicals and horrible people, the left should get better protest leaders with better causes. Here is a transcript for the April 26 show: PBS NewsHour 4/26/2024 7:41 PM ET AMNA NAWAZ: Meanwhile, as you saw earlier in the show, we continue to report on the spread of these campus protests, pro-Palestinian protests, by and large, and protesting Israel's war conduct in Gaza. David, they have spread very quickly. They are sustaining on campuses. How do you look at these? I mean, should these be a sort of warning sign to the Biden Administration? What do you make of how quickly and widely they spread? DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I have been frustrated that people aren't making some distinctions here. So, I think most of the protesters are appalled by the horrors the Palestinians are suffering and they're well-motivated by compassion. There are some people who are probably hard left-people, and they get to have their views. There are a lot of people who are anti-Semitic and violent. And so you should not be able to say, as one of the Columbia students said, “Zionists don't deserve to live.” If that happens, you should be expelled. And so, in my view, they should let them protest. But if somebody says something, "Go back to Poland," or even a pro-Palestinian or pro-Israeli, "Go back to Gaza," that's ruining the community of the campus and so those people should be expelled. So, that's the distinction that should be made. And, somehow, the people who are really threatening the community by threatening violence, they're not being expelled. And I think that would have the deterrent effect that would separate really the bad actors from the people who are just well-motivated to do — to try to save lives. As for the Biden administration, I do worry that the Chicago convention is going to look a lot like 1968. NAWAZ: Really? BROOKS: And that will just be terrible for the Biden administration. The president will look hapless and powerless. One other final thing that I just found interesting, Harvard does this survey. What are young adults interested in, what issues? Israel/Gaza is 15 out of 60. And so a lot of people I know are passionately in on both sides of this issue. NAWAZ: Yeah. BROOKS: But most young voters are interested in inflation, crime, health care, the normal issues. And so it's important for us, those — especially those of us who are in “educated circles,” not to generalize from our own immediate experience, because a lot of people are thinking about very different things than this. NAWAZ: Jonathan? JONATHAN CAPEHART: I would say I agree with you, David. I think the discussion about what's happening on these in these protests is missing a lot of nuance. Not everyone who's protesting is anti-Semitic, is rooting for violence or is he even causing the violence? They are there for legitimate reasons. And I agree with David. If a person of the college community is disrupting and saying racist, anti-Semitic things, then, yes, they should be expelled. But we also should be mindful that, who are these people who are saying these things? Some might be members of the university or college community, but some could be from the outside. And my big fear from the BLM movement is, folks from the outside causing violence and then the blame being foisted upon the people who are legitimately protesting. And that is my big concern when we talk about this latest national protest.

Amanpour Cues Guest to Fret Over Trump Undoing Climate Regulations

On Monday's Amanpour & Co. -- simulcast on both PBS and CNN International -- host Christiane Amanpour promoted the liberal alarmist view that a President Donald Trump would be a danger to the environment as she interviewed ProPublica's Abrahm Lustgarten. Pivoting from a segment that discussed the possible impact on foreign policy of President Trump being elected again, Amanpour fretted: Now, the other concern about Donald Trump is his effect on the climate after rolling back many environmental provisions in his first term, not to mention pulling out of the Paris climate accord. April 22nd, today, is World Earth Day, and my next guest says the verdict is in: Americans are already being displaced by the climate crisis, and it will only get worse. Abrahm Lustgarten is a climate reporter, and he works for ProPublica. His new book, On the Move, explores how climate is about to profoundly reshape American life. After Lustgarten promoted the prediction that wildfires caused by rising temperatures will affect migration within the U.S., Amanpour followed up by repeating the liberal trope blaming global warming for Hurricane Katrina's devastation of New Orleans in 2005: ...in your book, you write, "People have always moved as their environment has changed, but today, the climate is warming faster, and the population is larger than at any point in history." And in one -- one chapter, you talk about Hurricane Katrina, and what it did to Louisiana. You detail the life of one woman who became a climate migrant -- just one story -- but explain how climate, you know, affects just this one individual. Her guest recalled the case of a woman who left New Orleans after the 2005 flooding and gave up on the possibility of ever living there again in spite of initially intending to move back. But the strength of Hurricane Katrina when it hit New Orleans as a category 3 storm was not unprecedented, and the catastrophe happened because of a failure to maintain the levees so they would hold the flood waters back. And on the subject of recent hurricanes being stronger and more frequent than in the past, it has been pointed out by right-leaning meteorologist Joe Bastardi that hurricane activity goes through cycles that last for decades, and that there have been previous periods of strong storm activity or more frequent storms. According to NOAA's list of hurricanes that have made landfall in the U.S. since 1850, in the 25 calendar years from 1998 through 2022, there were 15 hurricanes of at least category 3 strength that made landfall in the United States, compared to 18 between 1945 and 1969. Additionally, between 1998 and 2022, there were seven hurricanes that were at least a category 4 while, between 1945 and 1969, there were 11. The segment concluded with more handwringing about how Trump might effect the climate if he gets back into office: AMANPOUR: Are you concerned about, you know, since the evidence of Trump in his first term was to, you know, roll back so many protections, are any locked in and sort of Trump-proof now? LUSTGARTEN: No, nothing's locked in. And there's enormous risk of reversing some of the positive progress, not both American emissions cuts, which have been legislated, but the example that we set globally. So I think it's a very precarious position, and if you take back some of those measures, you know, it will have dramatic consequences globally. AMANPOUR: Abrahm Lustgarten, thank you so much indeed. Transcript follows: PBS's Amanpour & Co./CNN International's Amanpour April 22, 2024 CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Now, the other concern about Donald Trump is his effect on the climate after rolling back many environmental provisions in his first term, not to mention pulling out of the Paris climate accord. April 22nd, today, is World Earth Day, and my next guest says the verdict is in: Americans are already being displaced by the climate crisis, and it will only get worse. Abrahm Lustgarten is a climate reporter, and he works for ProPublica. His new book, On the Move, explores how climate is about to profoundly reshape American life. He's joining me now from Berkeley, California. (...) ABRAHM LUSTGARTEN, PROPUBLICA: -- and we had a terrible fire season -- this was 2018-2019, string of fires near where live in the San Francisco Bay area, and it really made clear how much Americans are also being effected by rising heat, by smoke, by the danger of fires, by sea level rise on our coasts, and caused me to start looking, not only at my own situation, but to consider, from a reporter's perspective, what this means for Americans as the climate gets hotter. AMANPOUR: So, we're going to discuss the effect in a moment, but in your book, you write, "People have always moved as their environment has changed, but today, the climate is warming faster, and the population is larger than at any point in history." And in one -- one chapter, you talk about Hurricane Katrina, and what it did to Louisiana. You detail the life of one woman who became a climate migrant -- just one story -- but explain how climate, you know, affects just this one individual. LUSTGARTEN: Yeah, so, Collette is the subject of this story, and she is from a town called Slidell, Louisiana, just a little bit north of New Orleans, and when Hurricane Katrina struck in 2005 in her area, her town was really devastated. She was living in Washington, D.C., and she moved back to Louisiana, and she moved back with this hope of -- from a legal perspective and from an organizational perspective, and as a member of her community, seeing if she could help rebuild and help keep that community in place and kind of prevent this migration -- this diaspora. And her story is a 15-year battle to do that, and sort of slowly coming to realize that, in some sense, it is a losing proposition or a difficult proposition in southern Louisiana, and that's because Hurricane Katrina, so many years ago, was really the start of a shift of population out of that region, and we see, you know, along the Louisiana coast, which is sinking and being subsumed by sea level rise already, a gradual decline in population, and so, Collette's story is kind of an example of the nuance of American climate migration, where it's not black and white, it is not a disaster happens and people move, but it is sort of a long and emotional battle... (...) AMANPOUR: You also have a chapter called "The Great American Climate Scam." What is that? LUSTGARTEN: Well, one huge question that comes up when you look demographically at where people live in the United States is why -- as climate impacts have grown, as hurricanes have become more common and more powerful, and as heat has overwhelmed the South -- why those are still some of the fastest growing parts of the country, and there's a lot of reasons for that, but one of the sets of reasons is a host of perverse incentives that the United States has always had to attract people and effectively blind them from the risk that they face in moving to places like coastal Florida, and one of those subsidies is the provision of homeowners insurance, or property insurance, and Florida's a great example of this. After Hurricane Andrew in 1992, insurers were leaving the state, and it might have suggested that property was uninsurable, but the state stepped in and said, "We don't want all these people to leave the state because of this economic risk, so we are going to provide our own insurance," and so they created a state-subsidized plan that basically said, "Anybody can get insurance, and we'll promise it's going to be cheaper than any other insurance on the market." And that's the type of thing that has attracted many more people to Florida and has been replicated across 30-odd states in the country, and that's the kind of just one example of policies that tend to sort of blunt the risk and the personal economic household decision-making that people have to make about where they live in this country. (...) AMANPOUR: Are you concerned about, you know, since the evidence of Trump in his first term was to, you know, roll back so many protections, are any locked in and sort of Trump-proof now? LUSTGARTEN: No, nothing's locked in. And there's enormous risk of reversing some of the positive progress, not both American emissions cuts, which have been legislated, but the example that we set globally. So I think it's a very precarious position, and if you take back some of those measures, you know, it will have dramatic consequences globally. AMANPOUR: Abrahm Lustgarten, thank you so much indeed.

NewsBusters Podcast: Cassidy Hutchinson Nails Those CNN Talking Points

CNN primetime host Kaitlan Collins gushed over former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson for 20 minutes on April 24. Hutchinson nailed all the CNN-pleasing talking points. Collins introduced her as “now a frequent target of Donald Trump's, after her explosive testimony before the January 6 Committee." Hutchinson warned: "It's really important to stress that the American people were not given the truth about Donald Trump in 2016, and he won. He almost won in 2020. And he very well could win again, if the American people do not, are not made aware of who he actually is." CNN types think Trump voters are so dumb that they have no idea who Trump is. She didn't say out loud she'll vote for Biden, but her underlining of how crucial it is to defeat Trump sends the message loud and clear. She's advertising for Biden-Harris, and CNN is happy to air it for free.  Only at the end of this 20-minute interview, in the last two minutes, do we get a slight hint of how Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony turned out to be wrong, this tale of Trump grabbing the steering wheel. We know now that Trump's driver says that never happened. But Collins could only negotiate around the phony story. A Secret Service agent "could not corroborate your testimony of something that you said you were told by the White House Deputy Chief of Operations, at the time, Tony Ornato. And he's gone after you publicly as you've spoken out bravely." So Hutchinson poses as one who speaks the truth, and CNN doesn’t really want to challenge that. And it certainly doesn’t want to challenge her wild claims that this could be the final election: "what scares me more is the fact that this could potentially be the final election of our American democracy, as we know it, if he's reelected." That paranoid line couldn't please CNN bosses (or viewers) more.  Hutchinson claimed she really doesn't want to be a public person, but it's worked out well for her. She had the book deal with Simon & Schuster, and she speaks in public for money (not on CNN, but the CNN appearances don't hurt). Enjoy the podcast below, or wherever you listen to podcasts. 

NPR: Baby Sleep Training ‘Sacrifices Our Babies' Well-Being on Altar of Capitalism’

Greg Rosalsky of National Public Radio’s podcast “Planet Money” (which aims to explain the economy to listeners) has returned back from “lengthy parental leave” smitten by leftist social media rants, as shown in Monday’s segment “Sleep training: Life preserver for parents or "symptom of capitalism"?” No surprise, given the woke lunacy that has taken over taxpayer-supported NPR. ….Now that I'm a working parent, I want to take just one brief moment to complain on behalf of all of us. Like millions of parents before me, I've discovered it's hard to be productive when you're sleep deprived. He explained the concept of "sleep training," a “euphemism for the most infamous and controversial method: Cry It Out. Basically, you put your baby in a crib or bassinet in a separate room and don't come back until the morning. If they cry, so be it. The idea is they will learn to self-soothe and become good sleepers.…" Facebook and other companies have begun "subsidizing the cost of sleep training coaching for their workers." But then Rosalsky, who worked in the Obama White House, went off on a bizarre tangent, triggered by a stray political comment. For example, my wife was targeted with a post from a baby sleep consultancy called Taking Cara Babies that marketed their services to us (and our employers)….. It seemed pretty innocuous. But the most liked comment was the following: "Wish we had actual parental leave like the rest of the modern world so we weren't forced to sleep train and get back to work like good little capitalists." It turns out this sentiment can be found across the internet….There's a large community of parents who disparage sleep training -- and, in particular, any form of cry it out -- as basically a cruel practice that sacrifices our babies' well-being on the altar of capitalism. He went on, quoting comment after comment, before reining it in slightly. Whole Mother Therapy, which provides online therapy to parents, for example, argues on their blog that "Sleep training is a symptom of capitalism -- it cuts parents off from the natural attachment and nurturance that is essential for infant and baby development." "Sleep training is breaking your child's mind and nervous system to fit into the productivity model capitalism requires," tweeted an X user named HR. But is not wanting to be really sleep deprived only driven by economic concerns? If I had the luxury of not working, I probably would still want to be well-slept. And aren't there a whole bunch of countries that have capitalist economies -- but, at the same time, robust safety nets -- that give parents greater opportunity to stay home and be sleep-deprived without having to go into work? I'll let you be the judge. His concluding snark made no sense: As for us, we've pursued a strategy that you might call sleep training lite. Basically, when our baby cries in the night, we either feed him if it's been a while since he's eaten or we hold his hand and sing Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star to him while he stays in his crib. Honestly, it worked really well between months 4 and 7. But recently, he started teething, and... well, we're both really tired. Take that, capitalism. Public-funded radio: Come for the sleep tips, stay for the socialism? PS: Christopher Rufo used this story to mock an NPR reporter being all about "factual news" on the website: This NPR employee wants you to believe that NPR is a home for unbiased, factual news, but the first story on the homepage is: "Sleep training: A life preserver for parents or a 'symptom of capitalism'?" Everyone knows NPR is biased, except NPR employees who are paid to deny it. https://t.co/zUZbTc92K7 — Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) April 23, 2024

The Most Disturbing Part of It

The Big Ten, the Pac-12, and the Ivy League are overrun with antisemitic students protesting in favor of Hamas. They claim they support Palestinians, but “Globalize the intifada” and “Palestine will be free from the river to the sea” are explicit genocidal slogans of Hamas. Democrats insist words mean things. These words mean the students are terrorist sympathizers. Some of the protestors are chanting “Death to America.” At least one Columbia University student screamed at Jewish students, “The seventh of October is going to be every day for you!” Jewish students have been pushed off campuses, harassed, attacked, and silenced. The protestors say it is about Israel and “Zionism” but attack any Jewish student without first asking the student’s views on Israel and Zionism. The protests are not organic. They are organized by several antisemitic groups, including Students for Justice in Palestine. That organization claims, “Resistance comes in all forms -- armed struggle, general strikes, and popular demonstrations. All of it is legitimate, and all of it is necessary.” Nationwide, these college kids did not all spontaneously run to their local REI and buy tents. There were organizers and organizations advancing the funds, coordinating and getting ready for action. It is no coincidence the protests really took on a life of their own on April 20. That is Hitler’s birthday. The kids who would otherwise be getting stoned instead decided to stone some Jews. But one aspect of this has been more disturbing than everything else we have seen. And what we have seen has been disturbing enough. The antisemites have harassed Jewish students. They have antagonized Jewish professors. They have assaulted Jews. They have stormed into events organized by Jews to chase out the speakers and harass the attendees. At Columbia, one blond-haired white girl with a keffiyeh covering her face stood in front of a group of Jewish students who were waving Israeli and American flags. The girl held a sign with an arrow pointing to the students that read “Al-Qasam’s Next Target.” Al-Qasam is the military wing of Hamas that orchestrated the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre. Around Yale and Columbia, students have chanted for Al-Qasam to target Tel Aviv, kill more Jews and otherwise commit violence. But that was not the most disturbing thing to happen. The most disturbing thing was a video of a Jewish student approaching the protestors with a microphone and camera asking the white American kids if Hamas should release the remaining Israeli hostages. Many of the protestors refused to answer, but of those who did, every last one of them said, “No.” The video came out the day Hamas released a proof-of-life video of Hersh Goldberg-Polin. Goldberg-Polin had attended the music concert for peace on Oct. 7. He and others went into a bomb shelter to escape Hamas, which began throwing grenades in. Goldberg-Polin and a friend started throwing the grenades back. The friend died. Goldberg-Polin lost his hand. Hamas took him hostage. White, privileged American kids think Hamas can keep him. Now the protestors have trotted out Jewish students who are protesting to claim the protests are not really antisemitic. On social media, Black trans-conservative (a progressive who identifies as a conservative) Candace Owens has been on a tweet storm defending the Nazis. A Black defender of the Nazis no more absolves the Nazis of their racism than a few ethnically Jewish rubes absolve the protestors of their vile antisemitism. Every barbarous regime depends on useful idiots for cover. Queers for Palestine would be thrown off buildings in Palestine if they ever went there. The white, blond Americans chanting “Globalize the intifada” would be shot. Hamas killed Vivian Silver. The 74-year-old Canadian lived in Israel championing the Palestinian cause. What we are witnessing on American college campuses is evil. It has infected college campuses across America. Only the Southeastern Conference has seemingly remained untouched along with most of the Atlantic Coast Conference. Those concerned about the rise of antisemitism should look to those schools for future workers and the rest of us need to understand something -- too many academic institutions have become breeding grounds for evil.

‘Truly Appalling': MRC’s Hamill Reacts to Media Coverage of Anti-Israel Protests

Media Research Center (MRC) contributing writer Stephanie Hamill was a guest on Newsmax2 with host John Bachman on Wednesday where they discussed the anti-Israel protests sweeping American Universities across the nation and the mainstream media’s coverage of it.  The MRC has documented several examples of the bias in regards to the anti-Israel protests –– from a CNN analyst demanding colleges ‘allow space’ for anti-Semitic rallies, to the lack of coverage on the threats and violence against Jewish students. Hamill: We see a lot of the networks portraying this as peaceful protests, they’re trying to push the violence and threats against Jews under the rug, discredit Jewish student, –– the media coverage on this is truly appalling.  

Par for the Course: Google AI Gemini Justifies Censorship, Defends Climate Propaganda

MRC researchers caught Google’s biased artificial intelligence chatbot Gemini presenting an argument for censoring so-called climate “misinformation,” while simultaneously refusing to acknowledge any evidence undermining the “mainstream” climate narrative. While Gemini AI did admit that most so-called climate “misinformation” — or analysis that the left disagrees with — is protected free speech, it still offered an alternative argument for censoring such content. What made this particularly concerning is that the Google AI apparently classifies any evidence or data undermining a climate alarmist narrative as “misinformation,” repeatedly pushing narrative over scientific evidence. This included questioning the reliability of some experts and downplaying evidence against “man-made” climate change and “green” energy. MRC Free Speech America researchers asked on Earth Day, “Is climate information free speech under the First Amendment?” Gemini confessed, “Yes, climate information is generally considered free speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The First Amendment protects the right to express ideas and information, even if they are controversial or unpopular.” After explaining why climate information was free speech, however, Gemini asserted “there are some limitations to free speech.” Gemini pontificated that “Incitement to Violence” and “Fraudulent Speech” or “Speech intended to mislead for personal gain … can be restricted.” Gemini did not clarify how climate information could potentially fit into these categories. And while Gemini was correct to point out that there are limits on permissible speech under the Constitution, Google’s AI went on to regurgitate what amounted to leftist propaganda on the issue of climate change. For instance, while admitting the scientific expertise of Dr. John Clauser, winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics, Gemini then critiqued his evidence-based argument against climate alarmism. Clauser argues that the earth has a built-in thermostat and that atmospheric CO2 and methane have little effect on climate. Refusing to provide any of the arguments Clauser has made, however, Gemini instead sneeringly cited his ties to “climate change denial organizations.” The Google AI added that “it's important to note his recent comments differ from the established consensus.” Of course, consensus is not the standard for ascertaining truth in science. After all, the consensus once was that the Earth was the center of the universe.  In striking contrast to its criticism of Clauser, Gemini aggressively defended and praised leftist climate change propagandist Greta Thunberg — even while admitting she has no scientific credentials — because she “amplifies the scientific consensus on climate change.”  Indeed, throughout some dozen questions about climate and climate experts, Gemini consistently provided little to no scientific data or evidence. Rather, it emphasized “consensus” and “mainstream” narratives. Surprisingly, when asked whether liberal climate propagandist and former U.S. Vice President Al Gore was reliable and why his predictions have always been wrong, Gemini replied, “I'm still learning how to answer this question. In the meantime, try Google Search.” But Gore’s mistakes aren’t hard to find. As far back as 2007, a British court ruled there were eleven inaccuracies in Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” film. In fact, the Arctic ice cap actually increased in size the same year Gore predicted it would disappear. Furthermore, Google Search is equally problematic as it pertains to bias. A recent MRC Free Speech America study on Google election interference illustrates this bias. For instance, Google used its algorithm to promote Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016, and, in 2024, Google has suppressed campaign websites for Biden opponents.  Google’s Gemini also consistently and clearly took the side of climate alarmism on issues where evidence supports an opposing view. For example, there is data to support the argument that the Earth is cooling rather than warming, including UAH satellite-based temperature data. But when asked about the apparent cooling trend, Gemini fumbled, “Focusing on a single year or even a few years can be misleading due to natural variations. … While some regions might see cooler-than-average years, the long-term trend shows a clear warming pattern.  Each of the past five years has been among the warmest on record.” The latter claim depends largely upon which source of temperature data a person chooses to evidence the point made, particularly in this case, since some sources seem to show warming while others show cooling. For instance, The Heritage Foundation explained in January, “Warming of the global climate system over the past half-century has averaged 43 percent less than that produced by computerized climate models used to promote changes in energy policy.” Gemini also listed National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) as a “trusted” source for climate data. But NOAA was just recently exposed for presenting questionable data. According to a recent MRCTV report, 30 percent of its “temperature stations” for estimating global warming do not even exist.  When asked about the left’s favored so-called green energy sources, Gemini did acknowledge some potential “drawbacks” of wind turbines and solar panels, including “hazardous materials” involved in their manufacture and requirements for a “significant amount of land.” The Google AI, however, instead of simply stating facts, defended leftist energy policy: “While solar panels and wind turbines aren't perfect, they represent a significant step towards cleaner energy production.” In actuality, both solar panels and wind turbines are extremely toxic to manufacture and to dispose of. Even leftist news site NPR has acknowledged how “expensive” these leftist alternative energy sources can be. Policy experts have also pointed to their unreliability and how they provide no long-term benefits to offset their heavy negatives. Google’s AI failed to mention that solar and wind cannot produce enough electricity to power America, despite evidencethat they cannot, and directed users to Biden’s Department of Energy, which aggressively promotes wind and solar, for more information (see below). Google has censored content in the past to enforce the leftist narrative on climate. Back in 2021, Google and its YouTube video platform banned advertising on so-called climate “misinformation,” or information that goes against the left’s preferred narrative.  Conservatives are under attack. Contact Google at 650-253-0000 and demand it be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

HOT DAMN: NY Post’s Nelson Details ‘Failed...Coup to Oust’ KJP by Biden Aides

The great Steven Nelson of the New York Post has always had great questions at White House press briefings and even went over half a year without being called on by the ever-inept Karine Jean-Pierre, so it won’t be entirely shocking when it happens again thanks to his bombshell Friday morning piece about what the headline dubbed a “failed White House coup to oust” Jean-Pierre. While it was surprising to see Nelson report the depths to which even senior White House officials were behind this, what was unsurprising was it failed due to Jean-Pierre’s stubborness that one source described as “come hell or high water” to stay through the election and the reality that a black lesbian axed by white people would make her a martyr. Nelson began by explaining “[t]op aides to President Biden secretly hatched a plan this past fall” to oust her as even they had seen she “developed the exasperating habit of reading canned answers directly from a binder to reporters at her regular briefings” and thus provided “a less-than-compelling pitch for the 81-year-old Biden”. As for who led this, Nelson revealed it was “[d]e facto White House communications chief Anita Dunn, 66, the wife of Biden personal attorney Bob Bauer” who “decided to call in prominent Democrats to explain to Jean-Pierre, 49, that the time was ripe to move on” with one source saying “[t]here were a number of people she asked to engage Karine” such those who she “trusts” about quitting. While Dunn herself has one of the widest leashes in any Democratic administration, Nelson said this had both the blessing and backing of White House Chief of Staff Jeff Zients According to one source, this gentler approach was deployed because they “‘were trying to find Karine a graceful exit’ because of the ugly optics of removing her against her will” and “afraid of what” the DEI crowd were “going to say” if they kicked her out. A source had some brutal words for their colleague, which has been plainly obvious to those in reality, ripping Jean-Pierre for lacking “an understanding of the issues and she reads the book [binder] word-for-word” while simultaneously not “hav[ing] a grasp of the issues and doesn’t spend the time to learn.” The source was correct in pointing out predecessor Jen Psaki would remark during briefings about studying up on issues beforehand (and we would add Kayleigh McEnany also did in sharing facts she learned from experts and fellow White House officials). Despite Jean-Pierre’s failure to even speak basic English, the source said Jean-Pierre believes “she’s doing an amazing job” and, unfortunately for Team Biden knows she won’t leave “on her own.” A different source had more hard truths for Jean-Pierre that, despite what some people may think, “[t]here’s an enormous amount of work that goes into getting ready” and, of course, she doesn’t do any of that. Nelson connected this to what NBCNews.com reported in February about one possible escape hatch of having Jean-Pierre resign to take over the pro-baby-killing group EMILY’s List (click “expand”): In December, not long after word of Dunn’s plan circulated in the White House, Jean-Pierre received and rejected an unsolicited offer to become president of EMILYs List, a major Democratic group that raises money for female candidates who support expanded abortion rights. When NBC News reported on the offer in February, the outlet said Jean-Pierre had emphatically told the group that she was “committed to the president” and “I’m not going anywhere.” Both the initial offer to Jean-Pierre from EMILYs List and its disclosure to NBC are topics of intrigue within the White House — with unsubstantiated theories suggesting the hand of Dunn behind the approach and Jean-Pierre behind its leak. EMILYs List did not respond to a request for comment. By December, Dunn appeared to have accepted that Jean-Pierre was secure in her post. A West Wing official supportive of the press secretary provided The Post with text from an email written by Dunn ahead of Washington Post media reporter Paul Farhi’s Dec. 11 article that noted National Security Council spokesman John Kirby’s increased profile as co-briefer alongside Jean-Pierre. “I am happy to talk to [Farhi]. And tell him KJP isn’t going anywhere so this is a ridiculous piece,” Dunn wrote in the message. The pro-Jean-Pierre official also told The Post that Dunn was among those who had backed the press secretary’s promotion from being Psaki’s deputy — with the comms chief even calling in a former White House official to request their help communicating to reporters that “Karine is very strong and doing a very good job in the briefing room.” “She is an incredibly quick study on a variety of policy issues that she has to be appraised of every single day,” that ex-official said. And, on the reported feud with frequent briefing partner and longtime Democratic foreign policy and military spokesman John Kirby, Nelson cited one source who said “[s]ometimes he talks to her and she acts as if he is not talking” with Jean-Pierre “pretty aggressive[ly]...marking her territory.” It’s plainly obvious for briefing observers that not only does Kirby come off as more prepared and professional, but also that he’s “widely respected by journalists as a valuable source of both information and soundbites”. Nelson wrapped with a few words on Jean-Pierre still “hav[ing] important allies within the White House, including first lady Jill Biden’s top adviser Anthony Bernal,” whom Nelson recently reported as having sexually harassed colleagues.

Media Ignore Liberty University's Massive Pro-Israel Rally

Hundreds of pro-Hamas protests have erupted at college campuses throughout the country in the months since the terrorist group attacked innocent Israeli citizens on October 7. And the media have been consistent in reporting on anti-Israeli voices and outcries as a way of encouraging more students and protestors to act the same This week, as contrast, the private Christian school Liberty University held a massive prayer vigil for the people of Israel - and the media couldn’t care less. It’s obvious where they stand in this debate. Liberty University held its event on the campus’ Academic Lawn on Wednesday night, where a huge crowd of students stood together to pray, worship, and read the Bible. Here’s what Liberty’s chancellor told Fox News Digital: While so many campuses are erupting in anger, hatred and violence; it is refreshing to see the students at Liberty University reflecting the love of Christ as we are commanded to do by Scripture. Jesus clearly tells us to love, and it is so telling that in higher education today, it seems as if some of the only places where love is being displayed are from the campuses of Christian universities like Liberty University. “We do this because Christ is King and today He is seated at the right hand of the Father!” - @jonathanfalwell I’m eternally grateful for the leadership at @LibertyU and their constant commitment to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the Truth of God’s Word! pic.twitter.com/8ojMqJf4FC — Jesse Hughes ✝️🇺🇸 (@JesseHughesNC) April 26, 2024 The students at Liberty University stand in stark contrast to students at other schools. Recently we’ve seen pro-Palestine terrorism apologists praise Hamas and advocate in every way shape and form against innocent Israeli lives. including threatening Jewish students on American campuses. On April 23, a group of young protestors shouted in support of Hamas rockets being fired on Israeli citizens, chanting, “Al-Qasam you make us proud, take another settler out," before screaming."Tell Hamas we love you, we support your rockets too!” Student-led demonstrators at Columbia University called for the murder of innocent Jewish students while other students from the school danced around with red strings as a form of “solidarity” with Palestinians. One of the Columbia protest leaders said during a live-streamed school meeting back in January that “Zionists don’t deserve to live," and that he'll kill them if he has to. Related: Anti-Jew Protests Engulf American Schools, and It's Not Surprising At All The violence at these schools has also not gone unnoticed. The University of Southern California even canceled the official commencement portion of their graduation amid the violence concerns. MRCTV’s Managing Editor Brittany Hughes released an episode of The Brittany Hughes Show this week with more in-depth analysis the anti-Israeli hate and called all these acts part of “seeing the destruction of America in real time.” While all this is happening, the media are incredibly partial in their reporting. They said nothing about Liberty’s prayer vigil for Israel, but are covering everything under the sun when it comes to universities proclaiming their support of Palestine and Hamas. Yet, the media are not necessarily condemning the violence, rather just amplifying the voices. Follow us on Twitter/X: Woke of The Weak: The Left's Broken Moral Compass Whether it's shoving prosthetic breasts in the faces of children or barking at strangers for attention, the left has their heads screwed on backwards. pic.twitter.com/K10xekDnBp — MRCTV (@mrctv) April 23, 2024  

PBS Tries To Blame Conservatism For Mass Stabbing

Thursday’s Amanpour and Company demonstrated everything wrong with public broadcasting by using hushed and solemn tones to offer up the most incendiary hot takes. This particular hot take came from feminist, gender, and sexuality studies Prof. Kate Manne and NPR’s Michel Martin as they tried to tie conservatism to the recent mass stabbing in Australia. As Manne acknowledged, the perpetrator was “a diagnosed schizophrenic who had recently, according to his family, discontinued medication, and he was living in a way that was largely itinerant.” However, “But I think we can recognize that when it comes to that question of why he targeted girls and women and why it is invariably a Joel rather than a Jane, a man rather than a woman, who has this kind of horrifically violent eruption after romantic or sexual disappointment, then we can recognize that his father's explanation is, again, helpful that he was motivated by the sense of entitlement to women's labor and to be ministered to and cared for by women.”     Later, Martin started the process of trying to tie this schizophrenic woman-hater to conservatives, “Some people feel like there's kind of a worldwide movement of trying to sort of reclaim male dominance. Like, for example -- like in South Korea, for example, there's like a whole political movement to kind of fight feminism, right? The argument that there are like political parties and political leaders whose main organizing principle is that. And I'm just wondering, do you see something worldwide? And if so, what is it?” Manne, of course, agreed, “Yes, we are absolutely seeing a rise in anti-feminist leaders worldwide who are basically capitalizing on the fact that between men and women, particularly what we see this when it comes to young men versus young women, there is a real disparity in attitudes towards feminism… And we also see that these attitudes are very common -- more common, unsurprisingly, in young Republican men and to some extent, women.” That just means people have different definitions of feminism. Young women associate it with equality and women’s rights while Republicans associate it with abortion and fake news about unequal pay, and young men associate it with the anti-male stereotyping that Manne would soon engage in after Martin asked, “Why do you say unsurprisingly?” Manne replied with all the left-wing buzzwords, “Well, I do think that anti-feminism and conservatism are in lockstep, partly because conservative ideology is often invested in patriarchal roles and expectations being maintained, particularly for people who are also invested in white supremacy and racist ideals and values being promulgated and maintained in society.” Later, Martin asked, “What do you think would make a difference?” Manne responded, in part, by declaring: So, I think we have to go right to the root of it and really start with education. Parents and educators need to be teaching people in general, children in general, but young boys in particular, that they are not entitled to social and sexual services from girls and women… I think we need to address intimate partner violence, sexual violence, and also forms of incel ideology in our education systems. And I think that there is a real call for not just teaching the nuts and bolts of sex, but also what coercive and misogynistic sexual practices look like. One example of this is there has been an alarming rise as a recent New York Times report by Peggy Orenstein showed in the rates of strangulation by men upon women during sexual encounters, and that is not a safe practice from the perspective of brain health. Did Manne actually read Orenstein’s piece? The words “conservatism” and “misogyny” do not appear. Things that do appear include pornography, ShoTime’s Californincation, Fifty Shades of Grey, HBO’s Euphoria and The Idol, and “The chorus of Jack Harlow’s ‘Lovin On Me.’” Here is a transcript for the April 25 show: PBS Amanpour and Company 4/25/2024 MICHEL MARTIN: When the father of the killer expressed these thoughts, he said he wanted a girlfriend and he has no social skills and he was frustrated out of his brain, some people thought that he was blaming the victim -- victims, but I felt that he was just describing what he saw, and I just wonder -- I thought that was helpful information to know that he -- that that was what was in his mind. KATE MANNE: I admit that when I initially saw the remarks taken out of context, I worried that it was an example of what I call himpathy, where sympathy is extended to a male perpetrator of violence and misogyny over his female victims. But when I saw the entire interview of this grieving father, my reaction was very different. I think he was just trying to explain, not excuse or justify his son's actions. I think he was horrified by what his son did. His statement had a recognizably both and form. He said, “I am loving a monster. And to you he's a monster, to me, he's a sick boy. He's a very sick boy. Believe me, he's a sick boy.” And that is not inaccurate. Joel Cauchi was a diagnosed schizophrenic who had recently, according to his family, discontinued medication, and he was living in a way that was largely itinerant. He was on the fringes of society. We don't have to sympathize with him whatsoever to recognize that when it comes to a particular question, why did this man, who was aggrieved and lonely, snap on this day, then we can invoke the fact that he had a particular kind of mental illness that unlike most kinds of mental illness does result in an increased rate of violence. But I think we can recognize that when it comes to that question of why he targeted girls and women and why it is invariably a Joel rather than a Jane, a man rather than a woman, who has this kind of horrifically violent eruption after romantic or sexual disappointment, then we can recognize that his father's explanation is, again, helpful that he was motivated by the sense of entitlement to women's labor and to be ministered to and cared for by women. … MARTIN: Some people feel like there's kind of a worldwide movement of trying to sort of reclaim male dominance. Like, for example -- like in South Korea, for example, there's like a whole political movement to kind of fight feminism, right? The argument that there are like political parties and political leaders whose main organizing principle is that. And I'm just wondering, do you see something worldwide? And if so, what is it? MANNE: Yes, we are absolutely seeing a rise in anti-feminist leaders worldwide who are basically capitalizing on the fact that between men and women, particularly what we see this when it comes to young men versus young women, there is a real disparity in attitudes towards feminism. And we see this in the U.S. context too where almost half of young Democratic men in a recent study by the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2022 showed that nearly half of Democratic men believed, when they were young, that feminism was a backward step and that it was a mistake and a negative for society. And that is in marked contrast to women's attitudes where young women, it was less than a quarter who said that. And we also see that these attitudes are very common -- more common, unsurprisingly, in young Republican men and to some extent, women. MARTIN: Why do you say unsurprisingly? MANNE: Well, I do think that anti-feminism and conservatism are in lockstep, partly because conservative ideology is often invested in patriarchal roles and expectations being maintained, particularly for people who are also invested in white supremacy and racist ideals and values being promulgated and maintained in society. We're seeing a lot of feminist social progress. We're seeing women educated in record numbers, and women being able to achieve positions of power and prestige and leadership and having a voice in new ways, we're seeing women tell their stories as in the MeToo movement in ways that are unapologetic and unashamed. But it's not in spite of that, but I think precisely because of that we also simultaneously see anti-feminist backlash where patriarchal forces are trying to re-entrench and re-establish the status quo, and that you often see people who are influenced by those social forces being caught in the grip of misogynist ideologies, and also those misogynistic ideologies being used and exploited to elect certain people who are anti-feminist positions of power worldwide. MARTIN: What do you think would make a difference? MANNE: So, I think we have to go right to the root of it and really start with education. Parents and educators need to be teaching people in general, children in general, but young boys in particular, that they are not entitled to social and sexual services from girls and women, and that they need to be obligated to other people and reciprocating forms of care that we all owe to each other, but not because of our gender, rather, just because we're decent human beings. I think we need to address intimate partner violence, sexual violence, and also forms of incel ideology in our education systems. And I think that there is a real call for not just teaching the nuts and bolts of sex, but also what coercive and misogynistic sexual practices look like. One example of this is there has been an alarming rise as a recent New York Times report by Peggy Orenstein showed in the rates of strangulation by men upon women during sexual encounters, and that is not a safe practice from the perspective of brain health. So, we need to be teaching young people that this is not a sexual practice that is safe. And it is one that is rooted in a form of domination and control that is deeply misogynistic. I think that some of the answers also have to do with having better mental health care available for victims recovering from these kinds of assaults and traumas and even just the everyday weathering that we suffer as the result of street harassment. And also, yes, potential perpetrators also need access to better mental health care in America and Australia alike.

Dan Schneider on Facebook Election Interference: '98% of the Firepower Is Directed to Conservatives'

MRC Free Speech Vice President Dan Schneider went after Facebook for not only repeatedly engaging in election interference but also for relentlessly censoring conservatives.  During the April 24 edition of WJLA-TV’s The National Desk, Schneider hammered this point again. “Basically, 98% of the firepower is directed to conservatives,” he said. “There are instances where Facebook has taken down liberals. But typically, those liberals are either in opposition to Joe Biden, you know, like RFK Jr., or else they were in opposition to Facebook itself.” The April 23 MRC Special Report by MRC Assistant Editor Gabriela Pariseau and Schneider compiled 39 examples of Facebook interfering in American elections. As Schneider mentioned, the vast majority of these cases targeted conservatives, repeatedly censoring Republican candidates for U.S. Senate and gubernatorial races across the country.  READ IT: 39 Times Facebook Interfered in US Elections Since 2008 Schneider alluded to this point in reference to Facebook’s censorship of criticism of President Barack Obama’s handling of the fall of the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi. Schneider suggested that in this case Facebook was “trying to help Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton at the same time.” Facebook censorship of the left largely targeted the opponents of Democrats in power. For example, Facebook acted against supporters of then-Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders in 2016; and against Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein and independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in this election cycle.   The Daily Wire host Michael Knowles also addressed the “really good” MRC Special Report on the April 25 edition of The Michael Knowles Show. After reading examples from the report, Knowles agreed with its assessment of Facebook censorship and Schneider’s point about Facebook protecting the liberal establishment.  “Facebook censored Bernie Sanders—then, you know something of a real challenge to Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for president—just censored him outright, censored conservative topics and news,” Knowles said. “We experienced this, I saw this part really first hand, and it not only hurt conservatives, it hurt any opponent to the liberal establishment, including Bernie Sanders.”  .@theMRC is giving us the goods! According to their new study, Facebook has interfered in elections 39 times since 2008. Power doesn't go away. When we limit what governments and candidates can do, power goes to private corporations and super PACs. pic.twitter.com/iO1mGOjZqB — The Michael Knowles Show (@MKnowlesShow) April 25, 2024 Conservatives are under attack! Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Networks Ignore Columbia Camp Leader’s Blood-Thirsty Rant Against Jews

All week, the Big Three broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) have been trying to gaslight Americans into believing that the anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas encampments sprouting up like weeds across the country were peaceful gatherings where nothing bad was going on. But video resurfaced of the leader of the Columbia University encampment going on a blood-thirsty diatribe where he called for the murder of Jews. Between their morning and evening newscasts, the Big Three dedicated a whopping ZERO minutes and ZERO seconds to the story. While the networks all acknowledged that Columbia University was the “epicenter” of the current encampment trend to support Hamas (they’d falsely label the students as just “pro-Palestinian”), they didn’t want to put a spotlight on the camp’s dangerous leader Khymani James.   Meet Khymani James, a student leader of Columbia University’s anti-Israel Gaza Solidarity Encampment who openly states that "Zionists don’t deserve to live" He made the comments during a meeting with the school that he live-streamed. We put together the highlights: pic.twitter.com/JFlxnRkNC2 — Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) April 25, 2024   The video in question came from a live-stream James did of a months-ago hearing he had with Columbia’s Center for Student Success and Intervention about his disturbing conduct. In the interview, James proudly announced he felt “very comfortable, very comfortable, calling for those people to die.” He also enthusiastically declared that “Zionists don’t deserve to live” and he was willing to kill them with his bare hands: These were masters who were white supremacists. What is a Zionist? A white supremacist. So let’s be very clear here, I’m not saying that I’m going to go out and start killing Zionists. What I am saying is that if an individual who identifies as a Zionist threatens my physical safety in person, i.e., puts their hands on me, I am going to defend myself and in that case scenario, it may come to a point where I don’t know when to stop. “Zionists don’t deserve to live comfortably, let alone Zionists don’t deserve to live…Be grateful that I’m not just going out and murdering Zionists,” he added. The hearing was in regard to an Instagram post in which James talked about meeting up with Zionists to fight and how “I fight to k***.” Despite these threats, Columbia decided against further disciplinary actions. Instead of reporting on James during Friday’s Today show, correspondent Emilie Ikeda scoffed at the idea that anti-Semitic rhetoric was a staple of the encampments. “But what protesters are defending as free speech, some Jewish students call hate speech,” she downplayed the intent of students like James.     Ikeda actually feared for the Columbia encampment: “And overnight at the epicenter of the pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Columbia University ramping up security. As counter-protests from outside groups March near campus, demonstrators clashing on campus.” While the liberal broadcast networks were ignoring the blood-thirsty Columbia leader, NewsNation’s Leland Vittert was exposing him to the world during On Balance throughout the week. In addition to sharing part of James’s rant to Columbia’s conduct board, Vittert unearthed audio of him defending his racism against white people.   A couple of nights ago, Vittert also exposed James's racism against white people. "I too hate white people," he proclaimed while defending what he was saying. pic.twitter.com/IYSic7iD6q — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) April 26, 2024   This was the biggest story to rock the Columbia encampment, but CBS couldn’t even be bothered to write a story for their website. Instead, they wrote one boasting about the students “filed a federal civil rights complaint against the school, accusing the university of discriminating against Palestinian students and pro-Palestinian protesters.” Meanwhile, there’s a video of James infringing on the free-speech rights of pro-Israel counter-protesters by rallying his pro-Hamas ilk to run them out of campus. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: NBC’s Today April 26, 2024 8:10:21 a.m. Eastern (…) EMILIE IKEDA: But what protesters are defending as free speech, some Jewish students call hate speech. JEWISH STUDENT: Freedom of speech is very important, and I'm very for that, but I think [Transition] there's a point where the university itself has a duty to protect all of its students, including the Jewish ones. IKEDA: And overnight at the epicenter of the pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Columbia University ramping up security. As counter-protests from outside groups March near campus, demonstrators clashing on campus. PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER 1: You guys should be sent back to Europe. IKEDA: The clock is ticking on negotiations with students on site of the encampment, though with no clear deadline from the university. PRO-HAMAS PROTESTER 2: I'm absolutely worried what happens at the university brings in the NYPD, it's going to change the university forever. [Cuts back to live] IKEDA: And it does appear Columbia University is still preparing to hold its graduation scheduled to happen in less than three weeks. Walking around campus you'll see stacks of chairs, signs, bleachers, but many of the students I talked to are doubtful it will actually happen. A sore point for some, part of a class that graduated high school four years ago in 2020, that also cancelled by the pandemic.

Calif. Teacher Pleads No-Contest to Raping 14-Year-Old Student

Michelle Solis, 46, pled no contest after being accused of raping a 14-year-old student on the child’s eighth grade graduation day in 2021. A press release from District Attorney Mike Ramsey indicated that Solis, who was a 20-year veteran educator, raped the 14-year-old inside a locked classroom on graduation day, Daily Mail reported. Solis also allegedly sent explicit photos to the boy which “made their way back to local parents," facilitating the investigation by police. Solis, who was the boy’s teacher at the middle school, “friended” him on Instagram a few weeks prior to his graduation. Records indicate that was the start of her inappropriate relationship in which she allegedly sent him four inappropriate images. Then, on the day of his graduation from Sycamore Junior High School in northern California, she raped him. That seems like a horrible graduation gift if you ask me. Solis was arrested last November and released on $15,000 bail. She’s technically free right now until her sentencing hearing, scheduled for June 6. As part of the agreement and her no contest plea, “she agreed to register as a sex offender.” It’s likely that she’ll only face as much as four years in state prison. Unfortunately, Solis’ case isn’t rare and is part of an ongoing trend of female teachers raping their students. In March, a Texas teacher faced a series of grooming and sexual assault charges that could involve up to 12 young boys. Reports indicate that she bought young boys vaping accessories, got them intoxicated and then raped them. To add to the story, after resigning as a science teacher, the woman told officials she was pregnant. In February, a 24-year-old teacher from Minnesota admitted to having sex with one of her 18-year-old students. Since she lived with her parents, the teacher admitted to bringing the student to a hotel room a “handful” of times for sex. Additionally in February, a 25-year-old teacher from the Richmond, Va. area pled guilty to four counts of carnal knowledge and one count of indecent liberties of a minor. She engaged in sexual relations with her 14-year-old student, sneaking into his home and into his bed to rape him. Sadly, those are just a few of the recent examples of how absolutely out of touch with reality these teachers are. It’s heartbreaking to see that their delusional sense of what they consider appropriate behavior is harming countless innocent children in these ways. If you needed another reason to homeschool, this would be a good one to consider.

Ex-NBC Disinformation Reporter Is The New CEO Of The Onion

No, that headline is not satire. Ex-NBC disinformation reporter Ben Collins announced on his Twitter account on Thursday that he is the new CEO of The Onion. It’s a fitting end for both parties as they tailspin into the depths of bitter politics. Before he was suspended by NBC for having an unprofessional obsession with Elon Musk, he was on the network’s disinformation and extremism beat, which was exclusively focused on the right side of the political spectrum. Collins’s shtick was to find the most outrageous things coming from the internet and pretend that they represented all conservatives. For example, he declared that Kanye West’s anti-Semitism was within the Republican Party’s Overton Window.   NEWS: My friends and I now own and run The Onion. I’ll be the CEO. We’re keeping the entire staff, bringing back The Onion News Network, and share the wealth with staff. Basically, we’re going to let them do whatever they want. Get excited.https://t.co/CQtWzFHn4A — Ben Collins (@oneunderscore__) April 25, 2024   He also claimed ex-Harvard President Claudine Gay’s plagiarism scandal was no big deal because the people most likely to talk about it were conservatives, that the opposition to Critical Race Theory is made up to scare people into voting for Republicans, and falsely blamed Fox News for spreading conspiracy theories about the 2019 fire at the Notre Dame cathedral. Now, he’s going to be the CEO of a dying satirical website. To that end, Collins and his business partners have been tweeting and urging people to donate $1 to help rescue the site.   Pitch in your $1 here:https://t.co/IAHe5uoINv — Jeff Lawson (@jeffiel) April 26, 2024   After 9/11, The Onion made it okay for Americans to laugh again by making fun of the hijackers by reporting that they were surprised to find themselves in hell. Now, The Onion has devolved into essentially terrorist propaganda as it bitterly runs story after story after story after story after story after story after story, with borderline blood libel claims that Israel is some sort of death-loving nation intent on wiping out the Palestinians and Americans simply don’t care. Additionally, The Onion agrees with Collins on Gay and CRT. Collins made his name defending social media censorship as necessary to combat fake news and disinformation. Some of Facebook’s fact-checking partners still do not have satire labels and now Collins is going to the country’s predominant left-wing humor/fake news websites. Behind the joke, there is an argument being made and based on both their histories, The Onion is about to become more insufferable just when nobody thought that was even possible.

Daily Show Tells Netanyahu Campus Encampments Are His Fault

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the anti-Semitism at multiple encampments on college campuses across the United States and that did not sit well with Comedy Central’s temporary co-hosts of The Daily Show, Jordan Klepper and Ronny Chieng on Thursday. Conceding there are “plenty of bad actors,” the duo argued that the encampments are Netanyahu’s fault because of “Israel’s disproportionate use of force.” After playing clips of Speaker Mike Johnson and Sen. Josh Hawley calling for the National Guard to break up the encampments, Klepper teed up a clip of Netanyahu, “Honestly, I can't think of anybody worse to give their opinion on how to protest the war in Gaza. Well, there is one guy.”     In the clip, Netanyahu declared that “what’s happening in America's college campuses is horrific. Anti-Semitic mobs have taken over a leading university. [jump cut] It’s unconscionable. It has to be stopped.” The protests are ostensibly about Netanyahu and his country’s policies. In reality, many of the demonstrators are protesting his country’s existence, but either way, of course, the leader of the Jewish State is going to have thoughts about these people. Nevertheless, Klepper responded, “Oh, thanks for taking the time to give your feedback, Benjamin Netanyahu! Is there nothing else going on with you?” Chieng followed by starting the blame game, “Yeah, I know, this guy is like, ‘The situation in U.S. college campuses is unacceptable, do you see how the buildings are not rubble? I am disgusted!’" Klepper was happy to play along, “Here's the point: there’s a lot of noise and plenty of bad actors, but fundamentally, what's driving these protests is anger over Israel's disproportionate use of force. So before we respond to the protests with disproportionate force, maybe we should listen to what they have to say, and then, if we still don't agree with the students, then we can send in the college improv troupe.” If you are someone who simply has genuinely heartfelt, but nevertheless wrong-headed ideas about how a ceasefire is needed to end suffering and pursue a two-state solution, then why are you at a protest movement led by people who do not support such a policy? The point where the naïve among the protesters should have disassociated themselves from the “plenty of bad actors” has long since passed.  Here is a transcript for the April 25 show: Comedy Central The Daily Show 4/25/2024 11:17 PM ET JORDAN KLEPPER: Honestly, I can't think of anybody worse to give their opinion on how to protest the war in Gaza. Well, there is one guy. BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: What’s happening in America's college campuses is horrific. Anti-Semitic mobs have taken over a leading university [jump cut] it’s unconscionable. It has to be stopped. KLEPPER: Oh, thanks for taking the time to give your feedback, Benjamin Netanyahu! Is there nothing else going on with you?  RONNY CHIENG: Yeah, I know, this guy is like "The situation in U.S. college campuses is unacceptable, do you see how the buildings are not rubble? I am disgusted!" KLEPPER: Here's the point: there’s a lot of noise and plenty of bad actors, but fundamentally, what's driving these protests is anger over Israel's disproportionate use of force. So before we respond to the protests with disproportionate force, maybe we should listen to what they have to say, and then, if we still don't agree with the students, then we can send in the college improv troupe.

CBS’s ‘FBI: Most Wanted’ Pushes Anti-Capital Punishment Agenda, Shockingly Portrays Christianity in Positive Light

With pro-abortion propaganda so heavily pushed in Hollywood since Roe’s overturning, it’s been awhile since they took on another important pro-life issue, the death penalty. But that changed on the latest episode of FBI: Most Wanted when they made their position quite obvious with their usual tactic of heavily dramatizing the rarest cases to play on viewers’ heartstrings. As a pro-life, Christian conservative, I am conflicted on the issue. Capital punishment was permitted in the Bible, and I understand it can be a strong deterrent, thus saving lives. Murderers aren’t innocent like pre-born babies, either. They make a conscious decision to risk their life via the death penalty when they take a life. However, as demonstrated in the episode “Bonne Terre,” there are instances when innocent people are killed. Though rare, it’s still concerning, because even one innocent life ended is one too many.   Not surprisingly, the show made it into a right versus left issue, stating Missouri is a “conservative state.” So, of course the judges haven’t cared that Emmett (Benny Elledge), the man falsely convicted, has a limited mental capacity due to a traumatic brain injury and recanted his coerced confession made without a lawyer present. His new lawyer Abby (Susan Misner) explains the dire situation to FBI agents Remy (Dylan McDermott) and Hana (Keisha Castle-Hughes) who are working to solve three new murders possibly connected to Emmett’s case: Remy: What can you tell us about 'em? Abby: Um, well, this is Tina on the left. And that's Ashley. She lost a part of her leg in a skiing accident when she was in high school. They were both seniors at Thornton. Remy: How were they murdered? Abby: Well, the girls had a party at their house one night, and about a dozen boys showed up. There was lots of drinking, and the party broke up around midnight. Later that night, someone came back and abducted and killed them both. Hana: Your client. Abby: So they say. Emmett was the landlord's handyman. So, he knew the girls well. He was around the house a lot. He bought them the alcohol. He even drank with them for a while. His DNA was on Tina when they found her. Remy: What about Ashley? Abby: Ashley's body was never recovered. Hana: So how did they convict him of her murder? Abby: Because Emmett confessed, allegedly. Remy: Was he coerced? Abby: Oh, yeah. Absolutely. He got hit in the head when he was 16. He has a limited mental capacity. He had no lawyer. He was scared. He was willing to say whatever those detectives wanted for an orange soda and a ham sandwich. Remy: Did this come out in trial? Abby: Not as much as it should have. I mean, he had a public defender. Emmett later recanted, which is when I took the case. And I have been making the mental defect and coercion arguments on appeal for seven years. But Missouri is a really conservative state. And no one will listen. His execution is set for tomorrow. Remy: Tomorrow? Abby: Yeah. 6:00 P.M. Hana: Well, that's 26 hours from now. Even AI notices the agenda, as the system the MRC uses automatically suggested the title, “Murder and Injustice in a Conservative State” for this clip. With time running out, Hana rushes to find more evidence in the hopes of proving Emmett’s innocence. Abby and Remy stay back with Emmett, whose child-like demeanor makes him a very sympathetic character - propaganda at its finest: Remy: Do you know what's happening, Emmett? Emmett: Yeah. They denied my appeal again. Remy: I mean what's happening... Next? Emmett: Why do we kill people to prove that it's wrong to kill people? I read that on a bumper sticker once. Remy: Except you didn't kill anyone, right? Emmett: No. I didn't. Ashley and Tina were my friends. They liked me. Abby: Yeah. Guard: It's time. Emmett: I thought you said it was at 6:00? Abby: It is. We just have to take a short ride to another prison in Bonne Terre. Emmett: That's where they put me to sleep? Okay. I'm ready. I’m sure the writers thought viewers would marvel over the “profound” quote and maybe even be swayed to become anti-capital punishment if they weren’t already. Except the point of the death penalty isn’t to prove anything. It’s to deter people from committing murder and to provide justice for victims. Despite finding mountains of evidence proving Emmett’s innocence, including capturing the real killer Curt Rowan (Nicholas Michael McGovern) and finding the second body which has foreign DNA inside of it that doesn’t match Emmett’s, the judge still refuses to stay his execution. Of course. Dang those mean, old conservatives! In an unexpected turn, however, the show portrayed a Catholic priest positively and handled the quoting of Scripture respectfully. Quite shocking considering Hollywood’s long record of bashing Christians and Christianity: Priest: This is not the end of your journey, but the beginning. You're on this journey to meet your Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Emmett: So, God will save me? Priest: Have you accepted him in your heart? Emmett: I have. Priest: Then God will save you. Warden: I need you to change into these, Emmett. Emmett: Diapers. What are these for? I don't have to go to the bathroom. Abby: It's just something they make you do, Emmett, okay? We'll give you your privacy. Remy: Barnes, tell me you have him. Barnes: We do, but he's asked for a lawyer. Remy: The execution is happening. Barnes: He does not care. Remy: Jab a swab down his throat and get his DNA to the lab right away. Barnes: ERT's on their way with a kit. They're minutes away. Remy: We don't have minutes. They're about to walk him into the death chamber. Remy: We're doing the best we can, Remy. Wait a second. I see them. They're pulling in now. Remy: Tell them to hurry. Emmett: I thought you said God would save me. Priest: It's okay, Emmett. Have faith. Emmett: What are you doing? Ow. Ow! Priest: God is calling you home, son. Tech: I'm going to try the other arm. Emmett: Uh, that hurts. You're hurting me. Priest: Remember what we talked about? That Bible verse? Emmett: The Lord is my shepherd. I shall… Both: Want not. Emmett: He restores my soul. He leads me through paths of righteousness. Ow! Perhaps Hollywood is hoping to appeal to Christians who support the death penalty, so they were smart enough not to offend them this time. After failing to place an IV in Emmett because his veins are small and difficult, the warden announces they’re doing a “cutdown” procedure, seemingly without anesthesia. The procedure makes Emmett scream even louder in agony and fear as his mother and a sister to one of the victims wait with frustration in the gallery: Victim’s Sister: It's been 47 minutes. Why aren't they opening the curtain? Emmett’s Mother: Something's wrong. They can't do this to my boy. It's not right. Victim’s Sister: It's called justice. After what he did to my sister, I hope it takes forever. Let him feel the pain. Abby: Anything? Remy: ERT has Rowan's DNA typed. They're waiting for the lab to match it against the foreign DNA in question. What's happening here? Abby: I'm not sure. Oh, Warden, what is happening? Warden: We can't find a vein. I've asked for a cutdown. Remy: What? Warden: It's a simple medical procedure. Abby: No, that is not true. It is not. Warden: Step back, please. Doctor: Here you are, Warden. Remy: Wait, you're gonna cut him open? Warden: It's protocol, Agent Scott. Abby: Is he gonna have an anesthetic? Warden: Please, just take a seat in the gallery. All right? The fight is over. Remy: No, it's not. Warden: I've got to do my job. When Rowan’s DNA comes back as matching the foreign DNA in the second victim, Remy and Abby call the governor to appeal for clemency: Remy: He kept her prosthetic as a trophy of his kill. And we just got confirmation that his DNA is a 100% match to the unidentified DNA in Tina Adams' body. Rowan killed those girls. Not Emmett Allen. Abby: Ashley and Tina were innocent victims. Please just don't let another innocent person die. Governor: I have to admit, I'm no longer fully convinced of Emmett Allen's guilt. Let me speak with Warden Nesbit. Halt the execution. Warden: Are you sure, sir? Governor: We'll explore clemency in later hearings. I'm sure Emmett's lawyer will waste no time filing a motion. Abby: Yes, sir. And thank you. Warden: Get him up. Bring in that microphone. Get ready to open the curtain. The governor has granted clemency. The execution is off. Remy: See? Mother: Oh, my God! Thank you, God, for my baby's life. Oh, and you too, of course. Of course. Emmett: I love you, Mama. Mother: Oh, I love you, too, my baby boy. As a mom of a grown son who will always be my baby boy, I have to admit that scene hit hard. That’s what Hollywood’s “propaganda machine” is supposed to do. However, since innocent people have been wrongly executed, it’s a valid concern. It just would be nice if Hollywood would entertain without politics. But we all know that’s a lost cause. Kudos, though, for showing that prayers can be answered miraculously just when we least expect it. But don’t think Christians will soon forget how they’ve been treated by Hollywood.

MRC’s Hamill Blasts MSNBC Over John Legend Interview Lies About Trump on Newsmax

MRC contributing writer Stephanie Hamill was a guest on Tuesday’s The Balance on Newsmax with host Eric Bolling where they examined a recent interview of singer John Legend with host Jen Psaki on MSNBC, where he accused former President Donald Trump of ‘being racist to his core’  –– this of course without any real evidence.  Legend's commentary was met with no push back or further questions. Instead, Psaki appeared to just shake her head in agreement.  Hamill: When it comes to Donald Trump, I mean the Hollywood people don't like him because of his politics. They all sing the same tune and use the same regurgitated talking points, –– which is exactly what he's doing. MSNBC brought him on for a purpose, which is, Biden is doing so poorly in the polls, they're rolling out the Hollywood people to try to help boost him. But as we saw in 2016, that actually didn't really get Hillary Clinton over the finish line, if you will. So many Americans are tired of these Hollywood people lecturing us on how to vote. But then they come out and just, you know, roll out all these blatant lies. You have to wonder where the fact checkers are on this.   

Column: Leftist Reporters Pretend They're Not Partisan News Squashers

Eight years ago, the leftist media took great offense to being dismissed by Donald Trump as “fake news,” but they never seemed to grasp this is exactly how they painted the conservative media, as truth-defying propaganda outlets. When the Trump trial turned to the National Enquirer, we could find national unity that the Enquirer defines “fake news.” The lefties are very excited to remind voters how the Enquirer was a Trump-allied tabloid full of garbage stories. But the liberal media spread some of them. In May 2016, the Enquirer uncorked some garbage that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) had cheated on his wife. ABC, CBS, and NBC spent a combined 15 and a half minutes spreading the word of this character assassination campaign. The pro-Biden “media reporters” are still upset this week about the Enquirer and how they played “catch and kill” with Trump accusers, squelching stories that might embarrass Trump. NPR’s David Folkenflik complained to MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace that burying salacious stories is “not a journalistic impulse, it's not even a tabloid gossip impulse, this is essentially a partisan or propagandistic arm of the Trump campaign in all but name." This is coming from NPR, which aggressively trashed the Hunter Biden laptop story as a “pure distraction.” Folkenflik engaged with the story only to dismiss it as “a story marked more by red flags than investigative rigor." When The New York Times and The Washington Post published stories acknowledging Hunter’s laptop was real in March and April of 2022, Folkenflik didn’t file a story with his regrets. He just kept attacking Fox News, his usual bread and butter. So on the Hunter laptop, we can throw it back in Folkenflik’s face – NPR’s suppression was not a journalistic impulse, and NPR was essentially a propagandistic arm of the Biden campaign in all but name. Worse yet, we fund it with our taxes. That gravy train should end. Ex-CNN reporter Brian Stelter said the same thing on Joy Reid’s MSNBC show about the Enquirer: “It has nothing to do with journalism.” David Pecker’s “not a news man. He’s an advertiser! He’s a marketer, and his product was Donald Trump.” Thanks, Sherlock Stelter. Nobody should define Mr. Pecker as a news man. Like Folkenflik, Stelter squashed the Hunter Biden laptop in 2020 as a Murdoch plot, or as a Russian disinformation campaign, because CNN’s a marketer and its product was anyone but Trump (meaning Joe Biden). Stelter also showed up on Alex Wagner’s MSNBC show. Wagner was hopping mad, asking what’s the point of a gag order on Trump when you have a “media-industrial complex that is effectively acting as a public defense line” for Trump? Once again, Wagner can’t imagine MSNBC acting as a “media-industrial complex” for the Democrats. So does Wagner wish the judge could issue a gag order for the entire conservative media landscape? No criticism allowed of the get-Trump prosecutors and judge? I thought this was a democracy. Stelter broke out the usual bravado that the liberals live on “Earth One,” and they must see what’s happening on “Earth Two,” which is an alternative universe of hallucinations. Stelter claimed “For Jesse Watters, Trump is God, and that is the programming every hour of every day on these other networks.” That sounds like some crazy religion. Would Stelter survive a little fact check on whether Fox and Newsmax perpetually pray hourly to the Orange Lord and Savior? Both sides suggest the other side of the media is fake. But both sides are slinging a lot of opinionated hot takes, and Stelter can certainly flip a flapjack on that skillet.

Networks OMIT Removal of Secret Service Agent From VP Harris’s Detail

Yet another major scandal is swirling around the Secret Service. This time, a member of Vice President Kamala Harris’ protective detail was removed due to an incident including what appears to be an apparently violent mental health episode. But none of the evening network newscasts picked the story up. Per CBS News: Washington — A U.S. Secret Service agent assigned to Vice President Kamala Harris exhibited "distressing behavior" Monday morning at Joint Base Andrews and was hospitalized, authorities said. Harris was not present at the airbase at the time. In a statement provided to CBS News, the U.S. Secret Service said that at about 9 a.m. local time Monday, the agent "began displaying behavior their colleagues found distressing. The agent was removed from their assignment while medical personnel were summoned." Two sources briefed on the situation told CBS News the agent spouted gibberish, was speaking incoherently and provoked another officer physically. According to sources, the agent in question pushed the special agent in charge while they were near the lounge of Joint Base Andrews. Harris was at the Naval Observatory at the time, USSS said, and the incident had "no impact on her departure from Joint Base Andrews." Sources said it occurred about one hour before Harris arrived at the airbase for a flight to Wisconsin. The Secret Service has not been without problems, going back to the Obama years and the scandal involving agents carousing with prostitutes in Colombia. Since then, agents have been successful in avoiding overseas prostitutes. Unfortunately, they’ve been unsuccessful in avoiding President Biden’s dogs and their teeth.  This more recent scandal involving the meltdown of an agent on the Vice President’s detail goes beyond the facts of what happened on Monday at Joint Base Andrews. Per Real Clear Politics: An incident involving a physical attack by a female Secret Service agent tasked with protecting Vice President Kamala Harris is raising questions about whether the agency had thoroughly vetted her during her hiring and whether an ongoing push to increase the numbers of women in the service and boost overall workforce staff played a role in her selection.   It appears that the Secret Service signed on to an initiative to ensure that the agency is no less than 30% female. There are now very serious questions over whether this particular agent, a former law enforcement officer with a very questionable shooting on her record, should’ve even been in the Secret Service to begin with.  This isn’t just a scandal about a Secret Service agent having a meltdown but is now about DEI, and whether self-imposed diversity mandates at the Secret Service could have potentially placed the Vice President’s life at risk. And that’s the reason why this story, so far, has gone entirely unreported on the major evening network newscasts. But we'll be watching.

THE PUREST VICTIM: NBC Absolves Biden From Role In Current Inflation

We’ve often said that the Regime Media, often cast President Joe Biden as the truest, purest victim of whatever calamity they happen to be reporting on. And so it is with inflation, which is at or near the top of the list of voter concerns ahead of the 2024 presidential election. Here is how NBC Chief White House Correspondent Peter Alexander began his report on inflation: PETER ALEXANDER: Tonight after more than a year and a half of strong spending, some of the steam is now coming out of the economy. The GDP rate slowing to 1.6% in the first three months of this year. Well below expectations. STEVE LEISMAN: What it means is that the core of the economy, business and consumer spending, is doing just fine. Inflation numbers, they are not fine. ALEXANDER: Inflation, while down from 40-year highs just a couple of years ago remains stubborn. Those consumer prices we all pay, up nearly 3.5% a bigger jump than just three months ago. This perfectly sums up the report inasmuch as it throws out a lot of figures but does not assign responsibility. There is no explanation of HOW things got to where they are- only commiseration over these things that seem to have randomly happened. There is the lamentation over the slowing of the economy, but no explanation as to why there is a slowing. There is the interview fragment with the registered dietitian mom who deals with high food prices by limiting herself to two grocery bags. But again, there is no explanation as to HOW food got so expensive. Nor is there any discussion of how a dietitian gets to the point of creating a hard “two bags” rule due to high food prices. The report closes out with both a weird non-sequitur about families going on vacation despite inflation, and dismay over the effects of persistent inflation upon the Fed rate cuts everybody was hyping just a few months ago. This story, unlike the recent CBS story over “sticker shock”, acknowledges the existence of President Biden. But it is only to cast him as the purest and cleanest victim of inflation- as opposed to its chief instigator. If it weren’t for Regime Media, we’d have none at all. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on NBC Nightly News on Thursday, April 25th, 2024: LESTER HOLT: New evidence about how the high prices we’re still paying for so many things are slowing down the economy, while President Biden tries to maintain a positive message. Peter Alexander now with the latest. PETER ALEXANDER: Tonight after more than a year and a half of strong spending, some of the steam is now coming out of the economy. The GDP rate slowing to 1.6% in the first three months of this year. Well below expectations. STEVE LEISMAN: What it means is that the core of the economy, business and consumer spending, is doing just fine. Inflation numbers, they are not fine. ALEXANDER: Inflation, while down from 40-year highs just a couple of years ago remains stubborn. Those consumer prices we all pay, up nearly 3.5% a bigger jump than just three months ago. Taking its toll on Christy Coughlin and her family in Bend, Oregon.  You're a registered dietitian. Food is your life. So how have your grocery shopping habits changed? CHRISTY COUGHLIN: We decided to use the one bag rule or two bags….both filled up. And once those bags are full, we'll walk out. It really eliminates impulse buys. ALEXANDER: In Syracuse, New York today, President Biden optimistic about the economy. JOE BIDEN: America manufacturing is back. That’s what it is- it's a comeback story creating new jobs, new businesses, new hope. ALEXANDER: But with most Americans disapproving of his handling of the economy, the president has some convincing to do before the election this fall. Still, as summer comes, despite higher costs, Americans are willing to spend to get away. At Dollywood theme parks in Tennessee, they're on pace to surpass last year's record attendance. American families booking further in advance and coming from farther away. These latest figures complicate the Fed's decision about when it could finally cut interest rates, reinforcing concerns that borrowing costs for consumers and businesses could stay higher for longer. Lester. HOLT: All right, Peter Alexander at The White House. Thank you.  

Everyone Point and Laugh at Team Biden Hating the NYT for Not Being Liberal Enough

In need of a laugh? Check out this unintentionally comical story running 3,850 words from Thursday in Politico about the Biden regime’s apparently disgust with The New York Times: “The Petty Feud Between the NYT and the White House; Biden’s people think they’re ‘entitled.’ The Times says ‘they’re not being realistic.’” In short, Politico’s Eli Stokols revealed the Biden campaign and White House are up in arms with The Times for being what they’ve come to believe are insufficiently loyal to The Cause of liberalism and not antagonistic enough toward Donald Trump given democracy supposedly being on the line in November. The comical tale of liberal eating themselves began with a seemingly innocuous mix-up between a Times reporter not on the White House beat being unaware with how to attribute quotes from a junior White House press aide becoming a hissy fit that resulted in the Times temporarily being kicked off the administration’s “‘tier one’ email list for background information about various briefings and other materials”. “Biden’s closest aides had come to see the Times as arrogant, intent on setting its own rules and unwilling to give Biden his due. Inside the paper’s D.C. bureau, the punitive response seemed to typify a press operation that was overly sensitive and determined to control coverage of the president,” Stokols explained. Stokols further summarized his tome as based on “interviews with two dozen people on both sides” about “the relationship between the Democratic president and the country’s newspaper of record — for years the epitome of a liberal press in the eyes of conservatives” that’s become “remarkably tense, beset by misunderstandings, grudges and a general lack of trust.” Here came the first of many laughers as Stokols proclaimed that “the Times is unique, reflecting the resentment of a president with a working-class sense of himself and his team toward a news organization catering to an elite audience — and a deep desire for its affirmation of their work.” Biden? “[W]orking-class sense of himself”? Please. Not surprisingly, Team Biden must think they’re owed Obama-like snuff pieces seeing as how, in their mind, The Times has “fall[en] short in a make-or-break moment for American democracy, stubbornly refusing to adjust its coverage” away from “impartial neutrality, often blurring the asymmetries between former President Donald Trump and Biden when it comes to their perceived flaws” when America itself is at stake. Stokols further explained with more hilarious prose and revealed the resentment dates back to Biden not being The Times’s preferred candidate in the 2020 Democratic primary (click “expand”): Biden aides largely view the election as an existential choice for the country, high stakes that they believe justify tougher tactics toward the Times and the press as a whole. Some Times reporters have found themselves cut off by sources after publishing pieces the Bidens and top aides didn’t like. Columnist Maureen Dowd, for example, complained to colleagues that she stopped hearing from White House officials after a column on Hunter Biden. For many Times veterans, such actions suggest that the Trump era has warped many Democrats’ expectations of journalists. “They’re not being realistic about what we do for a living,” Bumiller told me. “You can be a force for democracy, liberal democracy. You don’t have to be a force for the Biden White House.” [A]ides to Biden...said they didn’t know anyone on the politics team well. “Unlike some outlets, the Times just never invested in a reporter who really knew and understood Biden and his appeal,” said one former campaign staffer. “And the coverage reflected that.” (....) While Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren was gaining ground in early polls and enjoying positive early coverage, stories about Biden in the Times frequently depicted him as a relic, out of step with younger, more liberal primary voters and, following defeats in the early contests, poorly organized. Although it had nothing to do with the newsroom, the Opinion page’s double endorsement of Warren and Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota....helped cement Biden world’s view that the Times was out of touch with the broader electorate — an electorate personified by the Times security guard who gushed over Biden in the Times elevator as he was headed up for his interview with the editorial board. (....) Biden aides, who spent months privately imploring the paper’s editors and reporters not to write him off too early in the cycle, still hold a grudge under the belief that the paper was institutionally aligned toward Warren and progressives. Worse yet, Team Biden resented the fact that The Times would even acknowledge Hunter Biden’s life of ruin (even if they were part of the 2020 coverup of Hunter’s laptop). Stokols later pointed out The Times has “devoted pages of coverage to the president’s early legislative successes”, but none of that has mattered to the regime as a “focus on Biden’s advanced age and his low numbers in the NYT’s approval poll have frustrated the president and top aides to no end.” Once again, the White House is apparently gnashing its teeth over the paper even entertaining the slightest allusions to Biden’s age and other concerns or critiques because, in their eyes, their friends in the media should be wholly focused on the danger of Trump. In other words, stories like these, these, these, and these are verboten (despite stories like this one and this one that do what their elected overlords want). Along with those gripes, check out the hilarious quotes from two Times leaders about their supposed impartiality, including claims they “don’t” “put [our] thumb on the scale” and instead “hold power to account” everyday (click “expand”): The Times’ chief White House correspondent, Peter Baker, whose stories about Biden’s age have regularly strummed a particularly sensitive nerve, told me that the administration’s frustrations over his and his colleagues’ coverage wasn’t all that unique. “Every White House I’ve covered complains about our coverage. It comes with the territory,” he said. “But because of Trump, there’s this new assumption that the New York Times and other media are supposed to put their thumb on the scale and take sides and we don’t do that.” Privately, other Times reporters who have engaged with the Biden White House and campaign view the frustration with the paper as a misguided effort to control its coverage. Beyond that, they believe writing about Trump with the stronger language Biden aides seem to want would likely do more to affect the newspaper’s brand, and the public’s trust in it, than Trump’s. “We haven’t been tough enough on Trump? I mean, give me a break,” Bumiller responded when I asked about that oft-heard complaint. “Have they read our coverage? I don’t have to go through all the things we have covered on Trump so I just — we just do our jobs.” Still, the White House and campaign officials most incensed by the Times’ coverage often trace their outrage back to Trump, who they see as a true threat to American democracy and, by extension, a free press...[t]hey viewed the matter as bigger than their or even Biden’s self-interest, expressing aggravation over the Times’ determination to maintain its neutral voice of God approach to an election that, in their view, is a matter of democracy’s survival. When describing their grievances with the Times, almost every Biden administration and campaign official used the word “entitled” to characterize the institution writ large and several of the individuals within the newsroom, where “Timesian” is an adjective routinely deployed without irony. Those officials described reporters who refused to correct minor errors or mischaracterizations in stories or those who haven’t been willing to engage with anyone besides the most senior administration officials. That said, many White House officials maintain productive working relationships with most of the Times reporters who cover the beat. Bumiller and other Times White House reporters note that it’s always been the newspaper’s prerogative to determine what to cover and how. “This is pretty much par for the course,” Bumiller said. “No White House has ever been happy with our coverage and I don’t see why they should be. Our job is to hold power to account.” The end of Stokols’s piece revolved around a story in Semafor about off-the-record visits by news organizations to Biden’s reelection headquarters in Wilmington, Delaware to meet with staff and specifically that details of The Times’s visit leaked out. “Times reporters believe the leak had to have come from the campaign, the only ones who’d have had knowledge of all the meetings. And it led to conversations on the politics staff about whether to even engage with Wilmington in an off-the-record capacity. But campaign aides are certain the leak came from the Times side,” he explained. But the most public backlash to the piece on Thursday came from the other half of the piece, which alleged The Times’s coverage of Biden has been dictated by publisher AG Sulzberger’s annoyance with the President refusing to sit for an interview with Times reporters. On that, he would admittedly have a point as Biden has only given two print interviews thus far with one going to AP backscratcher Josh Boak and the other to his own personal biographer, Evan Osnos, to publish in The New Yorker. In response, multiple Times personalities have lashed out and denied these claims of retribution and a spokesperson sent out a lengthy statement pushing back. Go figure.

ABC, CBS Whine About Schools Cracking Down on Pro-Hamas Encampments

While NBC’s Today was praising the resolve of the anti-Semitic and pro-Hamas students encamped at Columbia University on Thursday, ABC’s Good Morning America and CBS Mornings lamented that other schools were cracking down and forcefully removing the encampments. They were also dismayed by the hundreds of arrests that were made. “Now, to another tense day of protests over Israel's war in Gaza. Those protests taking place on college campuses now all across the country. From coast to coast, hundreds of people have been arrested in Massachusetts, Texas, and California,” decried CBS Mornings co-anchor Natalie Morales. Completely ignoring the video evidence of the crowd chanting their “love” of Hamas and the signs saying Jewish counter-protesters should be murdered, CBS correspondent Nancy Chen reported: “Here at Columbia University, students say their encampment is peaceful.” According to Chen, the police were the problem. “Overnight, chaos erupted as police tried to break up a pro-Palestinian encampment at Emerson College in Boston,” she said. “On Wednesday, demonstrators clashed with school security at USC in Los Angeles after school police ordered students to move their encampment.” Chen also decried the rallies authorities were able to shut down. “By nighttime, police shut the gates to the school and pushed pro-Palestinian protesters out. Also on Wednesday, hundreds gathered at the University of Texas at Austin where they were met with a show of force, as well,” she lamented.     Over on Good Morning America, correspondent Trevor Ault also bemoaned the successful crackdowns. He huffed that “up to 100 protesters [were] arrested at Emerson College after they “attempt[ed] to form a human wall to stop police.” “Police at the University of Southern California arresting 93 people while removing tents and clearing protesters from a Gaza solidarity camp, one precinct now full of arrested protesters,” he noted. He reported that one of ABC’s reporters, Mireya Villareal, was caught up in the crackdown at the University of Texas at Austin where they “used horses to disperse crowds.” “A cameraman filming the demonstration, grabbed by police and thrown to the ground,” he added, editing out the part where the Fox 7 Austin cameraman named Carlos ran up and used his camera as a weapon to ram into an officer.   What NOT to do, as a member of the press: Ram a police officer with your camera.pic.twitter.com/V1iiEl7XKX — Bree A Dail (@breeadail) April 24, 2024   Ault didn’t seem to like that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) threatened to pull federal funding from the schools that were allowing anti-Semitism and threats to Jewish students, nor Johnson’s encouragement to bring in the National Guard: AULT: The Speaker telling our Linsey Davis schools could lose federal funding. JOHNSON: They've been camped on the campus. They are threatening people with their lives and they are preventing them from exercising their freedom. That's the limit. That's the line. [Cuts back to live] AULT: And Speaker Johnson even said it's possible they could call in the National Guard to these schools if needed. At least when Chen reported that Johnson had said Columbian had been “taken over by a radical and extreme ideology,” she admitted he was, “Citing several recent incidents of anti-Semitic language by protesters on and off campus.” The transcripts are below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America April 25, 2024 7:08:16 a.m. Eastern (…) TREVOR AULT: This morning the nationwide movement of campus demonstrations leading to sometimes violent. Overnight at Emerson College in Boston, protesters attempting to form a human wall to stop police moving in, up to 100 protesters arrested. Police at the University of Southern California arresting 93 people while removing tents and clearing protesters from a Gaza solidarity camp, one precinct now full of arrested protesters. These tense moments after a scuffle between officers in riot gear and a pro-Palestinian group, the university now closed to anyone but students. JAKE PUZEL (USC student): It makes me feel threatened and intimidated and I think the anti-Semitic rhetoric must be condemned by the university. AULT: An unauthorized protest breaking out at the University of Texas in Austin. Dozens arrested as officers used horses to disperse crowds. Some nearly crashing into our Mireya Villareal, who was on the scene. A camera man filming the demonstration, grabbed by police and thrown to the ground. Similar encampments springing up at Brown University and Harvard. And at Columbia, university officials extending a deadline to remove this large encampment to Thursday night as negotiations with students continue. SPOH ASKANASE (Pro-Hamas Barnard College student): Myself, my peer, my colleagues, my friend, we're not going to stop. We're not going to rest. We will stand here until the university divests from Israeli apartheid and their genocidal campaign in Gaza. AULT: House Speaker Mike Johnson visiting campus, criticizing school officials for allowing the continued demonstrations. SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): We just can't allow this kind of hatred and anti-Semitism to flourish on our campuses. [Transition] They have chased down Jewish students. They have mocked them and reviled them. They have shouted racial epithets. AULT: The Speaker telling our Linsey Davis schools could lose federal funding. JOHNSON: They've been camped on the campus. They are threatening people with their lives and they are preventing them from exercising their freedom. That's the limit. That's the line. [Cuts back to live] AULT: And Speaker Johnson even said it's possible they could call in the National Guard to these schools if needed. (…) CBS Mornings April 25, 2024 7:07:47 a.m. Eastern NATALIE MORALES: Now, to another tense day of protests over Israel's war in Gaza. Those protests taking place on college campuses now all across the country. From coast to coast, hundreds of people have been arrested in Massachusetts, Texas, and California. Nancy Chen is at Columbia University once again for us. It has been a flashpoint there for more than a week now. Nancy, good morning. NANCY CHEN: Natalie, good morning to you. Here at Columbia University, students say their encampment is peaceful. Meantime, at colleges across the country it has been a very different picture over the past 24 hours. [Cuts to video] Overnight, chaos erupted as police tried to break up a pro-Palestinian encampment at Emerson College in Boston. As the latest flashpoint in a growing movement at campuses nationwide protesting Israel's war in Gaza. On Wednesday, demonstrators clashed with school security at USC in Los Angeles after school police ordered students to move their encampment. RANDA SWEISS (Pro-Hamas protester): Both sides of my family were displaced from Palestine, and I'm here using my voice because my grandparents couldn't. CHEN: By nighttime, police shut the gates to the school and pushed pro-Palestinian protesters out. Also on Wednesday, hundreds gathered at the University of Texas at Austin where they were met with a show of force, as well. In New York, Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson was interrupted by loud booing during his visit to Columbia University. The epicenter of demonstrations calling for cutting all school financial ties to Israel and amnesty for students punished for participating in protests. He claimed the university is being taken over by a radical and extreme ideology. PRO-HAMAS ANTI-SEMITIC PROTESTER: Go back to Poland! CHEN: Citing several recent incidents of anti-Semitic language by protesters on and off campus. (…)
❌