NB Blog Feed

Whoopi Whines Young People Don’t Protest Anymore, ‘We Were Forced’

Four years after the Black Lives Matter Riots and just a couple of months after the pro-Hamas/anti-Semitic encampments on college campuses and the death threats to Congress over the possible ban of TikTok, ABC moderator Whoopi Goldberg took to Wednesday’s edition of The View to whine that young people supposedly don’t protest and “stand for stuff” like how she was “forced to do.” Their conversation was spurred on by former President Obama expressing that his daughters had no interest in getting into politics; a bit of news that gave The View the sads. “So, as funny as that is, it's also really sad. Does that mean that politics have gotten so nasty that young people don't want to go into it?” Goldberg lamented. “It is nasty. I miss Obama, though. I see him and I want him back,” co-host Joy Behar bemoaned. “That whole lie that went around that said Obama wasn’t born in this country. So, I don't think they want to subject their kids to such nonsense. I agree with that.” Staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) argued that it made sense that “a lot of black mothers, especially, would be nervous about their children getting into politics because of the racial bias that still exists in this country. The societal bias, the structural racism that still exists in this country…” “But you know, we need less influencers and more leaders. We do. We need fresh blood,” she proclaimed.     Possibly thinking of her own toxic opinions, Hostin added: “We need young people that are unafraid to give their unvarnished opinions and not as concerned about their brands and not as concerned about what other people will think…And stand on the right side of history for a change. And I’m so disappointed.” It was then that Goldberg inexplicably went off with her wild inaccuracy that young people supposedly didn’t protest things or took political action anymore: GOLDBERG: I think we have not taught them how to do that. We haven't -- HOSTIN: There's many, many people willing to do it. GOLDBERG: I have to tell you; we have not taught young people how to stand for stuff. They’re learning. HAINES: Yeah. GOLDBERG: But this is not something -- we were forced to do it because our brothers or sisters or uncles and cousins were thrown into wars. They were thrown into stuff.  Women wanted the opportunity to go to school. There were things we were fighting for. At no point did Goldberg explain what evidence she had that led her to that conclusion nor did she address how she would square her assertion with the recent campus protests against the Jews. But she did scold: “I think a lot of the problem is because people keep saying -- where are the grown-ups? Talking about us. And I say, we've done this. We've been doing it. We’re waiting for y'all to come.” The transcript is below. Click :expand" to read: ABC’s The View June 19, 2024 11:02:39 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: So, as funny as that is, it's also really sad. SARA HAINES: Yeah. SUNNY HOSTIN: Yeah. GOLDBERG: Does that mean that politics have gotten so nasty that young people don't want to go into it? JOY BEHAR: It is nasty. I miss Obama, though. I see him and I want him back. HOSTIN: Yeah, he just makes you smile. BEHAR: I love him. He was such a good president. But I think, you know, the Kennedys have a legacy. You know, they have that whole generation of guys. GOLDBERG: Not anymore. BEHAR: Until look what happened with the latest RFK Jr., the poor guy has a worm in his brain. [Laughter] Which is a problem if you're going to run the country. [Laughter] But the Obamas -- and the Kennedys are subject to the same kind of vitriol that any other president was. But with the Obamas, on top of that, you have racism coming at them. And these kids remember when Melania and Trump said he was a birther. That whole lie that went around that said Obama wasn’t born in this country. So, I don't think they want to subject their kids to such nonsense. I agree with that. HOSTIN: And I think a lot of black mothers, especially, would be nervous about their children getting into politics because of the racial bias that still exists in this country. The societal bias, the structural racism that still exists in this country, even though people think that that's not true. But you know, we need less influencers and more leaders. We do. We need fresh blood. We need young people that are unafraid to give their unvarnished opinions and not as concerned about their brands and not as concerned about what other people will think. BEHAR: Or about getting reelected. HOSTIN: And getting reelected. And stand on the right side of history for a change. And I’m so disappointed. GOLDBERG: I think we have not taught them how to do that. We haven't -- HOSTIN: There's many, many people willing to do it. GOLDBERG: I have to tell you; we have not taught young people how to stand for stuff. They’re learning. HAINES: Yeah. GOLDBERG: But this is not something -- we were forced to do it because our brothers or sisters or uncles and cousins were thrown into wars. They were thrown into stuff.  Women wanted the opportunity to go to school. There were things we were fighting for. HAINES: Their fighting for things now. And their wages are being squashed. GOLDBERG: I don't know if that's true. I think lot of the problem is, because people keep saying -- where are the grown-ups? Talking about us. And I say, we've done this. We've been doing it. We’re waiting for y’all to come. (…)

NB Blog Feed

Rachel Maddow & The View Fearmongering with Fake Trump Hit List

ABC’s The View played host to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Tuesday, allowing her to fear monger regarding the potential re-election of former President Donald Trump. Maddow explains the dangers she saw as a threat from the former President, and the possibility of his revenge. Painting Trump as an unhinged, vindictive, and violent threat to many, co-host Joy Behar, and other co-hosts agreed with Maddow.  Maddow was their featured guest for three full segments, and Behar’s first question was about how Trump was supposedly going to target Maddow and The View cast for “retribution,” rhetorically scoffing at those who say they’re being “overdramatic”: He always has somebody to blame, you know? So you said recently that you thought that you as an outspoken critic, could be a target yourself. Some people think that sounds overdramatic, but I'm right there with you. I think that he is so vindictive that he will go after -- however he has to, through the IRS maybe or even, you know, through sponsors to get us off the air maybe or you. How seriously should we be taking that?     Yet, she was still able to quip that he would be “seeking retribution … for his legal troubles, for his personal troubles, for his hair, whatever.” Characterizing Trump as a villain was no new headline in the news these days, so adding a hypothetical threat of personal revenge seems to be the only way of getting a good story for Maddow. Though in her original remarks on her true fear of Trump, the MSNBC host seemed to walk back her self-focused hysterics and suggested, though she was not necessarily worried for herself, as she has protection, she was worried for others:  Well, so, I was asked, “Am I worried about me?” And my answer was, I'm worried about all of us. I'm no worried about me than I am worried about everybody in the country. I think it's bad to have somebody saying, “Give me as much power as you can in this country so I can use it to go after other Americans, so I can use it to go after these subhuman internal enemies and I will destroy them.” That's just not a good system for anybody and I don't think anybody is safe if that's the sort of basis on which he wants to get more power. At one point, Behar exclaimed that Trump and his supporters were “going full Jim Jones” complete with “the Kool-Aid thing”: Once you have political violence you have fascism following that. So you've characterized some of Trump's rhetoric as being pornographically violent. That's a good phrase, I like it. In just the last weeks he's joked about his supporters committing suicide, listen to this, did you catch this, he tells them wouldn't it be bet tore commit suicide than to vote for Biden? He's going full Jim Jones now, you know? It's like the Kool-Aid thing. Is he losing it or what? Do they think he's kidding when he says that? What? “There is something going on that’s just, aside from the politics, that’s just deeply weird,” Maddow agreed. “Like who’s into Hannibal Lecter as a character?” Listening to this diatribe, it makes one wonder the real story behind all of this hypothetical nonsense. In reality there is none, save the goal of fear mongering their viewers. Maddow was asked onto this show, as she would get more airtime, The View would have an “outside” perspective, all as another excuse to complain about a politician, who has done nothing personal to you! An unsurprising display of poor media and overwhelming agenda, which has pervaded The View in recent months. Worst of all, when threats of violence towards conservatives have caught the attention of the media there is a far less empathetic reaction. The transcript is below, click “expand” to read: ABC’s The View 6/17/2024 11:22:21 AM EST Run Time: 3 minutes 27 seconds JOY BEHAR: Okay, so let me ask you this because there has been a lot of talk about Trump seeking retribution if he gets into office for his legal troubles, for his personal troubles, for his hair, whatever. [Laughter] He always has somebody to blame, you know? So you said recently that you thought that you as an outspoken critic, could be a target yourself. Some people think that sounds overdramatic, but I'm right there with you. I think that he is so vindictive that he will go after -- however he has to, through the IRS maybe or even, you know, through sponsors to get us off the air maybe or you. How seriously should we be taking that? RACHEL MADDOW: Well, so, I was asked, “Am I worried about me?” And my answer was I'm worried about all of us. I'm no worried about me than I am worried about everybody in the country. I think it's bad to have somebody saying give me as much power as you can in this country so I can use it to go after other Americans, so I can use it to go after these subhuman internal enemies and I will destroy them. That's just not a good system for anybody and I don't think anybody is safe if that's the sort of basis on which he wants to get more power. BEHAR: Well remember when Nixon had an enemy's list, that was a proud moment when they were on the enemies list. That was a proud moment for a lot of people if they made it onto the enemies list. Maybe we have to turn it around like that. MADDOW: I mean I don't – if he decides to go after you or me or anybody who is well-known, you know, we have resources, we will likely be fine, but I think there's a pattern where he picks out individual people and effectively terrorizes them. I mean, there's Stormy Daniels wearing a bulletproof vest to get into the courthouse. BEHAR: Once you have political violence you have fascism following that. So you've characterized some of Trump's rhetoric as being pornographically violent. That's a good phrase, I like it. In just the last weeks he's joked about his supporters committing suicide, listen to this, did you catch this, he tells them wouldn't it be bet tore commit suicide than to vote for Biden? He's going full Jim Jones now, you know? It's like the Kool-Aid thing. Is he losing it or what? Do they think he's kidding when he says that? What? MADDOW: There is something going on that’s just, aside from the politics, that’s just deeply weird. Like who’s into Hannibal Lecter as a character. SUNNY HOSTIN: And just throwing it out there. MADDOW: And just throw it out there. Like, first of all that movie is very old. WHOPPI GOLDBERG: Or the Sharks. MADDOW: Or the Sharks. HOSTIN: He’s afraid of sharks. MADDOW: When he talks about crime, he doesn't just talk about crime, he acts – he kinda draws you through it. And then they got stabbed and then they turned the weapon and then -- when he was talking  – the stupid thing about the sharks he had to go the extra detail to talk about the woman getting her leg bit off. HOSTIN: Stormy Daniels says he's afraid of sharks. MADDOW: I think he's afraid of sharks but I also think he’s trying to make us all afraid of everything. HOSTIN: But you know what if sharks vote for them he’ll like them again. MADDOW: There is something weird about talking about things in very bloody, violent terms all the time. I think it’s – GOLDBERG: When you don't have anything else to say, what do you do? MADDOW: He's trying to GOLDBERG:  He doesn't – MADDOW: He doesn’t reach people emotionally so that reason is off the table and we are just eating emotionally. GOLDBERG: Yeah well I think people are starting to go, you know what, this is exhausting. And I think people are starting to go, okay, whatever. You and your sharks, go with God. It's all good. MADDOW: You and Hannibal Lecter. Go have a swim.

NB Blog Feed

NBC Blames SCOTUS Bump Stock Ruling for Weekend Shootings, No Evidence

Over the weekend, three communities across the United States were victims of gun violence as parties and gatherings came to sudden ends when scumbags decided to kill people. NBC’s Today looked to exploit the tragedies on Monday by having correspondent Erin McLaughlin blame the murders on the U.S. Supreme Court, citing their decision to strike down the Trump-era bump stock ban. But none of the shootings involved bump stocks. “A mass shooting at a splash pad in Michigan, another at a Juneteenth celebration in Texas, and yet another at a gathering in Massachusetts, all just days after Friday's Supreme Court ruling that rejects a ban on bump stocks,” she announced at the top of the segment. McLaughlin delivered very glancing explanations of what allegedly happened at each of the shootings but never disclosed what kind of firearms were used: MCLAUGHLIN: In Rochester Hills, Michigan, a man opened fire at a splash pad, unleashing 28 rounds. The attack left nine injured, including children. Some seriously wounded. (…) MCLAUGHLIN: Police say the suspect later shot himself and are investigating his motive. (…) MCLAUGHLIN: While in Round Rock, Texas, police are searching for a shooter who killed two and injured more than a dozen others at a Juneteenth celebration. (…) MCLAUGHLIN: And at least eight people were injured by a shooting at a pop-up party in Methuen, Massachusetts with two victims in critical condition.     “The weekend shootings come just days after the Supreme Court struck down a Trump-era ban on bump stocks,” she proclaimed as if the shooting were direct result of the conservative justices defending gun rights and pushing back against the administrative state. “The gun accessories used to modify semi-automatic weapons so they can fire faster. But this morning, many are just searching for answers.” Despite her suggestion, there’s no evidence that bump stocks were used in any of the shootings. As of the publication of this piece, it appeared as though authorities had not yet released what kind of firearm was used in the Round Rock and Methuen shootings, but it’s likely that if it was an “AR-style” rifle, it would have been plastered everywhere. In fact, a handgun was recovered from the scene of the Rochester Hills, which was incompatible with bump stocks. McLaughlin actually put off mentioning the fact that bump stocks weren’t used but threw in a caveat for cover. “The shootings from over the weekend did not involve bump stocks to our knowledge, but experts say if they did they could have been so much worse,” she argued, seemingly suggesting the killings were coming. If that misinformation wasn’t bad enough, she also cited claims from the left-leaning Gun Violence Archive that, “So far this year, there have been 225 mass shootings in the U.S.” NewsBusters has repeatedly debunked their hyperbolic numbers and pointed out their deceptive methodology. Neither ABC’s Good Morning America nor CBS Mornings framed the shooting the same way. Actually, on GMA, chief justice correspondent Pierre Thomas admitted: “Most of the nation's major cities have seen double-digit decreases in shootings this year, with mass shootings falling dramatically as well.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: NBC’s Today June 17, 2024 8:04:14 a.m. Eastern HODA KOTB: We now turn to a wave of violence over the weekend. Mass shootings in Michigan, Texas, and Massachusetts. NBC's Erin McLaughlin joins us with these details. Hey, Erin, good morning. ERIN MCLAUGHLIN: Hoda, good morning. A mass shooting at a splash pad in Michigan, another at a Juneteenth celebration in Texas, and yet another at a gathering in Massachusetts, all just days after Friday's Supreme Court ruling that rejects a ban on bump stocks. [Cuts to video] This morning, friends and families across the country are grieving after multiple mass shootings this weekend. 9-1-1 DISPATCH: Multiple shootings, victim, from an active shooter [Transition] Deputies aren't on scene yet. MCLAUGHLIN: In Rochester Hills, Michigan, a man opened fire at a splash pad, unleashing 28 rounds. The attack left nine injured, including children. Some seriously wounded. SHERIFF MICHAL BOUARD (Oakland County, MI): An 8-year-old boy who has a gunshot wound to the head. MCLAUGHLIN: Police say the suspect later shot himself and are investigating his motive. BETTY PAWELSKI (Local business owner): It was heartbreaking, saddening, devastating. [Transition] Nothing like this has ever happened around this area. MCLAUGHLIN: While in Round Rock, Texas, police are searching for a shooter who killed two and injured more than a dozen others at a Juneteenth celebration. CHIEF ALLEN BANKS (Round Rock Police Department): These folks could care less about someone's life and took someone's life on a day we're here to celebrate community. MCLAUGHLIN: And at least eight people were injured by a shooting at a pop-up party in Methuen, Massachusetts with two victims in critical condition. PAUL TUCKER (D.A. Essex County): Here we see again gun violence that's striking at the heart of a community. MCLAUGHLIN: So far this year, there have been 225 mass shootings in the U.S., according to the Gun Violence Archive. The weekend shootings come just days after the Supreme Court struck down a Trump-era ban on bump stocks. The gun accessories used to modify semi-automatic weapons so they can fire faster. But this morning, many are just searching for answers. CHIEF SCOT MCNAMARA (Methuen Police Department): Our hearts go out to the victims and their families. These acts of senseless violence do not represent the values of our community. [Cuts back to live] MCLAUGHLIN: The shootings from over the weekend did not involve bump stocks to our knowledge, but experts say if they did they could have been so much worse. CRAIG MELVIN: Jeez. KOTB: All right, Erin. Thank you so much. We appreciate it.

NB Blog Feed

CNN Loves Sotomayor’s ‘Fiery’ But Mostly Ignorant Dissent on Bump Stocks

Friday marked a big win for gun rights advocates when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Trump administration-era ban on bump stocks by the ATF. In their immediate reactions to the 6-3 ruling, CNN Newsroom pontificators were largely unhappy with the court’s affirmation of a piece of plastic not being a machine gun and lauded the “fiery” dissenting opinion authored by liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Of course, the opinion just flaunted their ignorance of firearm mechanics. Chief legal analyst Paula Reid seemed rather disinterested while reading the majority opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas, who explained the technical details of the mechanical workings of a firearm that would lead to a machine gun designation: let me read you the top of Justice Thomas's opinion. The majority here. He writes that, “Congress has long restricted access to machine guns, a category of firearms defined by the ability to shoot automatically more than one shot by a single function of the trigger. Now, these are semi-automatic firearms which require shooters to re-engage the trigger for every shot are not machine guns.” He says, “This case asked whether bump stock, an accessory for a semi-automatic rifle. that allows the shooter to rapidly re-engage the trigger and therefore achieve a high rate of fire, converts the rifle into a machine gun. They hold that it does not.” She followed up by lauding Sotomayor’s “fiery” but ultimately ignorant take on machine gun mechanics. “When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck. A bump stock-equipped semi-automatic rifle fires automatically more than one shot without manual reloading by a single function of the trigger. Because I, like Congress, call that a machine gun,” the liberal justice proclaimed.     To use her duck analogy against her; Sotomayor might see a creature with a bill and webbed feet that lays eggs and loves to swim, but what she’s calling a duck is actually a platypus (Not to be confused with the 1911 Platypus from Stealth Arms, particularly their “Perry the” model). “And yes, you can read from that dissent from Sotomayor. She's frustrated and she's been making it clear. She's been frustrated lately on the Supreme Court,” host Jim Acosta sympathized with her. Luckily, Republican strategist and owner of GunsOut, LLC Shermichael Singleton was on set to school the liberals on the basic mechanics of firearms: There is a distinction between a bump stock and a fully auto weapon. I don't want to get into the nuances of the intricacies of this, but a bump stock uses the reciprocation recoil in order for the rifle to fire at a quicker rate than one pulling your finger. But I'm a competitive shooter. If you're a competitive shooter, you can fire a weapon pretty quickly, generally speaking, anyway. Fully auto allows the trigger to disengage and cycle freely. That is a huge mechanical difference between the two. “[So,] when you read that quote from Justice Thomas and this is not a machine gun, he is effectively accurate in that description, and that's an important thing to point out,” he argued. It all seemed to go over Acosta’s head as he shifted to former Biden assistant Meghan Hays for the emotional reaction. “This is really going to frustrate progressives,” he teed her up. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CNN Newsroom June 14, 2024 10:28:12 – 10:31:49 a.m. Eastern (…) JIM ACOSTA: And I do want to try to get a response from Meghan and Shermichael. You're both here. And, Shermichael, you own a gun company. You've talked about this issue in the past. Quick reaction from you, and then I want to get back to Paula Reid. SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON (CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR): Yeah I mean, look, I'm not surprised by the decision. I'm also not surprised that it was authored by Justice Thomas, who also authored the Bruen v. New York case in 2022. There is a distinction between a bump stock and a fully auto weapon. I don't want to get into the nuances of the intricacies of this, but a bump stock uses the reciprocation recoil in order for the rifle to fire at a quicker rate than one pulling your finger. But I'm a competitive shooter. If you're a competitive shooter, you can fire a weapon pretty quickly, generally speaking, anyway. Fully auto allows the trigger to disengage and cycle freely. That is a huge mechanical difference between the two. So, when that -- when you read that quote from Justice Thomas and this is not a machine gun, he is effectively accurate in that description, and that's an important thing to point out. ACOSTA: This is really going to frustrate progressives, Meghan. MEGHAN HAYS (FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO PRESIDENT BIDEN): Absolutely. And, look, I worked for MGM Resorts when this shooting happened, this was devastating to the community. This was devastating, not only financially to the company, but devastating to the community emotionally. This is going to have a huge impact. And, I mean, again, Congress does need to act. The president can't do anything further as we just saw President Trump got overturned. So, I mean, this is going to be -- I think people will rally around this, and this will be another call to action for Democrats. EVAN PEREZ: One last quick thing. I mean, this was -- the bump stock thing had been, you know, knocking around, to your point, even in the Obama administration. There had been this effort to address this. And in the Obama administration, they had decided we can't go that far. It doesn't work. The ATF had decided this doesn't work under the current law. And in the Trump administration, they had taken a second look and said, ‘no, actually we can do this.’ And so that's the irony here is that, you know, it's the Trump administration, as you pointed out, that had a very conservative view on this, that they're the ones that decided to do this when the Obama administration had decided that the law that the current statutes did not support the ATF being able to put this rule into effect. ACOSTA: And Paula, let me get back to you. You have more on this. PAUL REID: Yeah we’re taking the time to go through this opinion and for anyone, just tuning in, let me read you the top of Justice Thomas's opinion. The majority here. He writes that, “Congress has long restricted access to machine guns, a category of firearms defined by the ability to shoot automatically more than one shot by a single function of the trigger. Now, these are semi-automatic firearms which require shooters to re-engage the trigger for every shot are not machine guns.” He says, “This case asked whether bump stock, an accessory for a semi-automatic rifle. that allows the shooter to rapidly re-engage the trigger and therefore achieve a high rate of fire, converts the rifle into a machine gun. They hold that it does not.” But in a fiery descent, his liberal colleagues disputed this. For example, Justice Sotomayor wrote, “When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck. A bump stock-equipped semi-automatic rifle fires automatically more than one shot without manual reloading by a single function of the trigger. Because I, like Congress, call that a machine gun, I respectfully dissent.” So, a pretty fiery dissent from the liberal justices. Now Jim, we are still waiting for 20 other outstanding opinions from the high court, including that big other gun question that we were talking about earlier. There'll be no more opinions today, but we do expect to get more later next week all right. ACOSTA: All right. Very interesting. And yes, you can read from that dissent from Sotomayor. She's frustrated and she's been making it clear. She's been frustrated lately on the Supreme Court.

NB Blog Feed

CNN Presidential Debate Moderator Is at the Center of Defamation Suit

On Wednesday, three judges with the First District Court of Appeal for the State of Florida ruled that Plaintiff Zachary Young had sufficiently provided enough evidence to the court that they could proceed with his defamation suit against CNN for punitive damages. The network allegedly, knowingly lied about his security consulting company and their work amid President Biden’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. Jake Tapper, one of CNN’s presidential debate moderators was one of the journalists at the center of it all. The defamation suit stemmed from a segment on CNN’s The Lead with Jake Tapper about Young’s company Nemex Enterprises Inc. and the prices they were allegedly charging to get people out of Afghanistan. Tapper led into the segment by painting an image of “black market” hustlers who charged “exorbitant fees” taking advantage of desperate people: In our world today, the U.S. government, the Biden administration says that as of last week it had assisted in the departure of at least 377 U.S. citizens and 279 lawful permanent residents of the U.S. from Afghanistan since August 31st. Still, many Afghans, Afghans who desperately want to flee Taliban rule and Afghans who say their lives are at stake, they remain behind. As CNN's Alex Marquardt has discovered, Afghans trying to get out of the country, face a black market full of promises, demands of exorbitant fees, and no guarantee of safety or success. A NewsBusters investigation found that CNN has since deleted the segment in question from their CNN Transcripts archive page for the November 11, 2021 episode of The Lead. There’s no note about the missing segment. CNN correspondent Alex Marquardt singled out Young’s company, not mentioning any others known to be working in-country to get people out.     “According to Afghans and activists we've spoken with desperate Afghans are being exploited like that young man, told they can get them or their families out if they pay exorbitant often impossible amounts,” he said. “One LinkedIn user posted messages with Young, where Young said it would be $75,000 for a car to Pakistan. He told another, it would be 14 and a half thousand per person to get to the United Arab Emirates or Albania for another 4,000. Prices well beyond the reach of most Afghans.” At no point did they mention anything about the dangers involved with getting people out of a country controlled by terrorists and freshly abandoned by the Biden administration. Those facts didn’t stop them from taking parting shots at Young as they concluded the segment: MARQUARDT: In another message, that person offering those evacuations, Zackary Young, wrote “availability is extremely limited and demand is high.” Jake, he goes on to say, “that's how economics works, unfortunately.” TAPPER: Unfortunately, Hmm. Alex Marquardt thanks so much for that important report. But, according to legal filings, internal CNN emails allegedly show that they knew the story was not sound or backed up with facts. “Young proffered CNN messages and emails that showed internal concern about the completeness and veracity of the reporting—the story is ‘a mess,’ ‘incomplete,’ not ‘fleshed out for digital,’ ‘the story is 80% emotion, 20% obscured fact,’ and ‘full of holes like Swiss cheese,’” the judges wrote. The messages also allegedly showed that CNN reporters were operating out of malice for Young, a key component of a defamation suit: Young proffered internal communication showing, at minimum, CNN employees had little regard for him. In those messages, CNN employees called him a “shitbag” and “a-hole” and remarked they were “going to nail this Zachary Young mfucker.” Marquardt referred to him as “fucking Young” and quipped, “it’s your funeral bucko.” (…) Young sufficiently proffered evidence of actual malice, express malice, and a level of conduct outrageous enough to open the door for him to seek punitive damages. Though not a direct quote of CNN, the judges wrote that CNN’s defense for their internal attacks on Young was “journalistic bravado.” Will Tapper put that journalistic bravado on display during the first presidential debate?

NB Blog Feed

Sore Losers: Networks Ignore GOP Blowing Out Dems in Charity Baseball Game

In an insane 20-point blowout Wednesday night, the Republicans beat the Democrats in the annual Congressional Baseball Game for charity for the fourth game in a row. More impressive than the 31-11 victory was the $2.2 million raised for local DC charities! But none of that was covered by the sore losers on the morning newscasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC. NBC’s Today, on Thursday morning, did acknowledge that the game happened but co-host Craig Melvin only wanted to hype the crazy climate change lunatics that stormed the field: Several protesters were arrested last night after running onto the field during the Congressional Baseball Game in Washington, D.C. This happened during the second inning in Nationals Park. Capitol Police officers tackled the guys and took eight protesters into custody. The group wore t-shirts that read “end fossil fuels.” The annual charity baseball game features Democrats and Republicans from the House and Senate. There was no mention of the final score nor the amount raised for charity.   Sore losers: NBC's Today was the only broadcast network this morning to mention the Congressional Baseball game last night. They touted the climate protesters, omitted the Republicans routing the Democrats in a 31-11 victory, and no mention of the $2.2 million raised. pic.twitter.com/nk4XyIwWvf — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 13, 2024   ABC and CBS relegated the game to their websites and they too made it largely about the protesters. “8 climate protesters arrested during Congressional Baseball Game: Police,” ABC wrote. “Eight climate protesters were arrested after being tackled on the field during the Congressional Baseball Game, U.S. Capitol Police said in a statement.” “Climate protesters disrupt congressional baseball game, Republicans have 31-11 decisive victory,” the CBS headline stated. Reporter Kaia Hubbard did note the impressive victory for charities: “The charity event broke records this year, bringing 30,000 fans to Nationals Park and raising $2.2 million for local charities, according to the Congressional Sports for Charity.” On the specific charities helped, the Washington Examiner added: “Proceeds from the game benefit the Boys and Girls Clubs of Greater Washington, the Washington Literacy Center, the Washington Nationals Philanthropies, and the United States Capitol Police Memorial Fund.” The transcript is below: NBC’s Today June 13, 2024 8:04:42 a.m. Eastern CRAIG MELVIN: Several protesters were arrested last night after running onto the field during the Congressional Baseball Game in Washington, D.C. This happened during the second inning in Nationals Park. Capitol Police officers tackled the guys and took eight protesters into custody. The group wore t-shirts that read “end fossil fuels.” The annual charity baseball game features Democrats and Republicans from the House and Senate.

NB Blog Feed

CBS, NBC Ignore Antisemitic Mob Threatening Jews on the NYC Subway

Good-hearted Americans were horrified on Wednesday after new video surfaced of an antisemitic mob threatening Jews on a New York City subway, the same mob that had just held a rally where they flew a banner glorifying the October 7 terrorist attack on Israel. The story went untold during the Wednesday evening and Thursday morning newscasts of CBS and NBC. Only ABC called out the hate being directed at Jews in the liberal media’s backyard. Instead of pointing out the far-left liberals behaving badly, CBS Evening News hyped President Biden signing a 10-year commitment to Ukraine and CBS Mornings questioned: “Aliens living among us?” Meanwhile, NBC Nightly News liked that the liberal ACLU was suing the Biden administration over his asylum executive order while NBC’s Today went to China to gush about Pandas. Contrast that with ABC’s World News Tonight anchor David Muir who led into the segment by announcing: “Here in New York City, authorities are describing that chilling anti-Semitic scene on the subway. Protesters asking, ‘Zionists to raise their hands and get off the train.’ Authorities say others defacing the home of a museum director who is Jewish.” Senior investigative correspondent Aaron Katersky highlighted “this video shows a frightening moment on a New York City subway car, when protesters demanded riders raise their hands if they're Zionists.” And it was clear the mob was looking to hurt people: ANTISEMITE 1: Raise your hand if you're a Zionist! ANTISEMITIC MOB: Raise your hand if you’re a Zionist! ANTISEMITE 1: This is your chance to get out! ANTISEMITIC MOB: This is your chance to get out! ANTISEMITE 1: Okay. No Zionists. We're good.     CBS and NBC were once aghast at flags being flown when they were innocuous and uncontroversial symbols being hoisted outside the homes of a U.S. Supreme Court justice. But they had no interest in covering what Katersky did. “[The mob] had just come from a rally where the flags of terror groups Hamas and Hezbollah were waved. Another saying, ‘Long live October 7th,’” he reported. Come Thursday morning, those networks were still uninterested in the story even after Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) condemned the antisemitism on the floor of the Senate: KATERSKY: Majority Leader Chuck Schumer showed pictures on the Senate floor. SCHUMER: This is not even close to free speech. It is intimidation, invasive attacks loaded with the threat of looming violence. Katersky also noted that the anti-Semites were also responsible for “Red paint and a threatening sign defaced the home of the director of the Brooklyn museum, who is Jewish. On the door they painted an inverted red triangle, a symbol used by Hamas.” “[W]hat you heard on that subway car is no longer a matter of free speech, asking Zionists to identify themselves; the NYPD is now considering an implicit threat. They’re looking to charge the leader of the call-and-response with attempted coercion,” he concluded. The transcripts are below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s World News Tonight June 12, 2024 06:42:14 PM EST [NEWS HEADLINE: NYC Protests Trigger Backlash] DAVID MUIR: Meantime as I mentioned, back in the U.S. tonight, here in New York City, authorities are describing that chilling anti-Semitic scene on the subway. Protesters asking, “Zionists to raise their hands and get off the train.” Authorities say others defacing the home of a museum director who is Jewish. And tonight, the New York City mayor's warning about this hate. Here's Aaron Katersky. [Cuts to video] AARON KATERSKY: Tonight, this video shows a frightening moment on a New York City subway car, when protesters demanded riders raise their hands if they're Zionists. ANTISEMITE 1: Raise your hand if you're a Zionist! ANTISEMITIC MOB: Raise your hand if you’re a Zionist! ANTISEMITE 1: This is your chance to get out! ANTISEMITIC MOB: This is your chance to get out! ANTISEMITE 1: Okay. No Zionists. We're good. KATERSKY: The train held at Union Square for a police inspection. Officers in riot gear seen on the crowded platform. Protesters clashing with police. They had just come from a rally where the flags of terror groups Hamas and Hezbollah were waved. Another saying, "Long live October 7th." Protesters breaking through barriers, setting off smoke bombs and flares outside an exhibit remembering the victims of the October 7th Hamas attack on Israel. The Monday incident part of an escalating series of provocations that go beyond protest and into what Mayor Eric Adams has called "Overt, unacceptable anti-Semitism." MAYOR ERIC ADMAS (D): I thought it was despicable. It was disgusting what we saw. And you cannot call for peace while you’re celebrating what happened on October 7th. KATERSKY: And this morning, vandals threw red paint and posted a threatening sign at the home of the director of the Brooklyn Museum, who is Jewish. On the door, they painted an inverted red triangle, a symbol used by Hamas. [Cuts back to Live] KATERSKY: David, this vandalism police say may be the work of the same people who splashed red paint on the ground outside a Palestinian office here in Manhattan, and scattered leaflets that called for more violence against Israel. David? MUIR: Aaron Katersky, here in New York. Thank you, Aaron. ABC’s Good Morning America June 13, 2024 7:08:45 a.m. Eastern WHIT JOHNSON: Now a series of anti-Israel incidents around New York City, raising concerns and condemnation from top officials, including a disturbing scene caught on camera on the subway. Senior investigative correspondent Aaron Katersky joins us with more. Aaron, good morning. AARON KATERSKY: And good morning to you, Whit. This escalating series of provocations in the city has moved beyond protest and toward what the mayor here has called overt, unacceptable anti-Semitism. [Cuts to video] Mass protests took over this New York City subway car and demanded riders identify themselves if they're Zionist. ANTISEMITE 1: Raise your hand if you're a Zionist! ANTISEMITIC MOB: Raise your hand if you’re a Zionist! ANTISEMITE 1: This is your chance to get out! ANTISEMITIC MOB: This is your chance to get out! ANTISEMITE 1: Okay. No Zionists. We're good. KATERSKY: The train was held in the station. Officers in riot gear descend onto the platform as some protesters clashed with police. They were part of a rally that included a large banner “Long Live October 7th” and the flags of terror groups Hamas and Hezbollah. Protesters chanted “long live the intifada,” a reference to Palestinian uprisings and set off flares outside an exhibit remembering the victims of the October Hamas attack on Israel. Mayor Eric Adams called it reprehensible and vile. MAYOR ERIC ADAMS (D): I thought the actions we saw in front of the exhibit was just despicable. KATERSKY: This surveillance video shows people getting out of a truck spilling red paint on the street outside the Manhattan office of the Palestinian Authority and scattering leaflets that called for more violence against Israel. Red paint and a threatening sign defaced the home of the director of the Brooklyn museum, who is Jewish. On the door they painted an inverted red triangle, a symbol used by Hamas.  [Cuts back to live] KATERSKY: Police are now investigating whether this hateful vandalism is the work of the same people. And Michael, what you heard on that subway car is no longer a matter of free speech, asking Zionists to identify themselves; the NYPD is now considering an implicit threat. They’re looking to charge the leader of the call-and-response with attempted coercion. Michael. MICHAEL STRAHAN: All right, Aaron. Thank you so much for that.

NB Blog Feed

CBS Lectures Viewers About ‘Rendering Verdicts Based on the Facts’

Ignoring the fact that Special Council David Weiss was set to give Hunter Biden a sweetheart deal to avoid his felony gun charges (and let the statute of limitations expire on other charges) before the judge rejected the deal, CBS Mornings spent part of their Wednesday newscast having chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett lecture their viewers about how the convictions of Biden and former President Trump represented “the facts and the law” winning the day. Teeing up Garrett, co-host Tony Dokoupil chided Trump for not accepting his convictions and “promis[ing] to fight [them]” in appeal; giving the false impression that Hunter was rolling over for his by conflating Trump (the subject of the case) with President Biden (the father of the subject): You know, when Donald Trump was convicted, he called the decision rigged. He promised to fight it. With President Joe Biden he said he would accept this result in his son's case, and he wouldn't pardon him. So, there's a contrast there. But politics is all around this. So, talk to us if you could about the intersection between our judicial system and the political world these days.     Hunter’s legal team had signaled that they too planned on appealing the convictions, just like Trump’s. Garrett responded by trying to make both trials about how the legal system treated wealthy elites writ-large and dismissed the naked political nature of the Trump trial (Click “expand”): We've always debated what justice means in America, Tony and everyone. Typically, that has been about how does justice affect the powerless. We have rarely had a conversation – except maybe when business executives or celebrities are involved – about how the powerful operate in the judicial system. And we've never had a conversation about the judicial system taking to task someone who is a former president or a sitting president's son. And that creates for the country an entire debate about what does justice mean and does it apply equally. And President Biden and those around him say it does apply equal, no one is above the law. Former President Trump wants the country to believe that this entire system, our entire judicial network, is a raid against one person in this country and one person only: former President Trump. And some Republicans echo that. What Garrett obfuscated from CBS viewers was the fact that Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg had gotten elected to his office by promising to send Trump to prison. He also omitted the fact that the judge overseeing the trial had donated to the Biden campaign in 2020. “But this dual application of justice at the highest levels of political power with a president staring across the courtroom at jurors or a first lady staring across the courtroom at jurors, and juries, the intervening force, rendering verdicts based on the facts and the law remind the country that the justice system remains,” Garrett bloviated. “Politics may swirl around it, but this a fundamental aspect of our American life, and – though it will be debated – remains so.” Democratic Party donor and vacation pal of the Obamas, Gayle King wanted Garret to answer if he saw “this verdict having a political impact for either President Biden or President Trump?” Garrett gave away the game in regards as to why the left needed to own and downplay the issue of a politicized justice system; the final tally for the 2024 election hinged on the margins: And just remember this: of the six most important battleground states, not one of them was decided by more than three percentage points. Four were decided by 1.2 percentage points or less. Any small shift in any of those states – as it regards to these verdicts – could affect the presidential election. Garrett’s analysis mirrored what a Media Research Center/Polling Company poll discovered following the 2020 election in that the media’s omission of key details and damaging stories aided the Biden campaign to victory. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CBS Mornings June 12, 2024 7:05:32 a.m. Eastern TONY DOKOUPIL: We are joined by CBS News chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett for more on all this. Major, good morning to you. You know, when Donald Trump was convicted, he called the decision rigged. He promised to fight it. With President Joe Biden he said he would accept this result in his son's case, and he wouldn't pardon him. So, there's a contrast there. But politics is all around this. So, talk to us if you could about the intersection between our judicial system and the political world these days. MAJOR GARRETT: We've always debated what justice means in America, Tony and everyone. Typically, that has been about how does justice affect the powerless. We have rarely had a conversation – except maybe when business executives or celebrities are involved – about how the powerful operate in the judicial system. And we've never had a conversation about the judicial system taking to task someone who is a former president or a sitting president's son. And that creates for the country an entire debate about what does justice mean and does it apply equally. And President Biden and those around him say it does apply equal, no one is above the law. Former President Trump wants the country to believe that this entire system, our entire judicial network, is a raid against one person in this country and one person only: former President Trump. And some Republicans echo that. But this dual application of justice at the highest levels of political power with a president staring across the courtroom at jurors or a first lady staring across the courtroom at jurors, and juries, the intervening force, rendering verdicts based on the facts and the law remind the country that the justice system remains. Politics may swirl around it, but this a fundamental aspect of our American life, and – though it will be debated – remains so. GAYLE KING: That's a good reminder for all of us, Major. You know, do you see this verdict having a political impact for either President Biden or President Trump? President Trump because he's always said the system is rigged, certainly rigged against Republicans. It would be hard for him to use that argument now considering this conviction of Hunter Biden. GARRETT: Something that Republicans, Gayle, will privately acknowledge though some of the Trump allies will say, “No, it's still a two-tiered system of justice.” But the American public is going to make up its own mind about this. And our polling unit and lots of polling teams will try to assess what the country thinks about this. I believe that's going to be a very hard process because we've never seen this before and I think people are going to absorb is in due time. And just remember this: of the six most-important battleground states, not one of them was decided by more than three percentage points. Four were decided by 1.2 percentage points or less. Any small shift in any of those states – as it regards to these verdicts – could affect the presidential election. We should keep that in mind and understand that people are going to process this over the summer like we've never seen before. Political conventions, nominating process, a fevered presidential campaign against the backdrop of what our legal system actually means. NATE BURLESON: The American people are paying attention to every single moment as we get ready for the election. Major, thank you so much.

NB Blog Feed

ABC Outs Juror No. 10 in Hunter Biden Trial, CBS/NBC Obscure Identity

Following the three felony convictions of Hunter Biden on Tuesday, ABC seemingly exposed the identity of one of the jurors against his will. The contrast was obvious, ABC broadcasted his face across the country while CBS News and NBC News both noted that he didn’t want his identity revealed and took precautions to protect him. ABC senior national correspondent Terry Moran seemingly ambushed Juror 10 in a parking garage somewhere and shoved the camera in his face, wanted to know why and how they convicted President Biden’s “only survived son”: MORAN:  First the jury was divided according to juror number ten. JUROR 10: Believe it or not, it was a split vote. MORAN: 6-6. JUROR 10: 6-6. MORAN: That was the first vote? JUROR 10: That was the first vote.     “So, you didn't buy the notion that for those few days around the purchase of the gun, he wasn't abusing drugs?” Moran pressed Juror 10. “No, not at all,” the juror responded. “But after sleeping on it, they decided there was enough evidence to prove that Hunter was abusing drugs in the critical timeframe, including from his own text messages; especially one sent the day after he bought the gun saying he was waiting for a dealer name Mookie,” Moran admitted. Contrast Moran’s interaction with that of CBS’s Weijia Jiang, who apparently interviewed Juror 10 on a sidewalk. “We spoke to juror number 10. who asked not to be identified,” she said, the interview was conducted with the juror’s back to the camera. Over on NBC, Capitol Hill Correspondent Ryan Nobles and more of a sit-down interview with Juror 10. “Juror number 10 telling NBC, Hunter's powerful family played no role in their decision-making process. He asked us to conceal his identity,” he said. Nobles’ interview with him also had the camera pointed at the back of Juror 10’s head and took the added step of blurring his form. It would be bizarre for Juror 10 to give ABC permission to show his face but deny it for the others. It seems as though ABC may not have disclosed that protecting his identity was an option.

NB Blog Feed

ABC Primes Pump for Biden to Intercede in Hunter’s Felony Conviction

For months, the liberal media have praised President Biden as a supposed pillar of the rule of law and touted his promise that he would accept any verdict in his son Hunter’s felony gun crime trial. But following the three guilty verdicts on Tuesday, ABC News seemed to prime their audience to expect him to intercede with the full powers of the presidency. The network also pouted about the court reading the verdict without First Lady Jill Biden in the room. Following the verdict, ABC interrupted The View to mournfully deliver the heartbreaking and devastating news for the Biden family. Chief legal analyst Dan Abrams was the first to float the idea that Biden could use a slippery technique to help his son. Abrams pointed out that while Biden had promised not to “pardon” his son, commuting whatever sentence he received could still be on the table: ABRAMS: But, you know, David [Muir], one other interesting question. You had asked President Biden in your interview with him, whether he would pardon his son. And his answer was, ‘no. He'd respect the verdict, etc.’ Remember, there's also the possibility of commuting the sentence. So, if there is a sentence that comes down, even if he's not officially pardoned, there's also the possibility of commuting the sentence at some point down the road. MUIR: And again, just to Dan, alluding to this interview I did with President Biden in Normandy just a couple of days ago. About five minutes later, chief Washington correspondent and anti-Trump author Jon Karl recalled that the President was insistent “that his son had done nothing wrong.”     “So, while you had asked him and he said that he would respect this jury verdict entirely, that he would not pardon his son, I am sure there are some interesting conversations happening right now inside the Biden family and at the White House,” Karl teased. Earlier in the break-in, anchor David Muir and investigative reporter Olivia Rubin pouted about how the verdict was read without the First Lady present: MUIR: Olivia, we're looking at pictures right now of First Lady Jill Biden. As you point out, she was there for the trial every day but one; she was not in the courtroom for the verdict? RUBIN: She was not in the courtroom for the verdict. And I can tell you, David, as I sprinted out of the courtroom to come down to you as it was after wrapped up there, she was heading in just as I was heading out. She was rushing through that lobby, appearing. You know, we don't know if they intended for her to not be here for Valerie, but it certainly does appear as if it's possible that they missed the reading of the verdict. “It happened quite quickly from when it came down just after 11. Her clerk, the judge's clerk, came into the courtroom to say that the verdict had been reached. And just moments later it was being read,” Rubin seemed to huff. Of course, this was part of their sympathetic framing of the Biden family. “[The First Lady] took a whirlwind trip to France to join the president for the D-Day commemorations and came right back to be with her son,” senior national correspondent Terry Moran noted, falsely suggesting Hunter was her biological son. Rubin also quibbled over one of the jurors allegedly smiled just before the verdict was read. “Again, something we have talked about before the jury not looking at Hunter Biden. One of the jurors actually took his seat smiling, which was quite striking to see him smiling right before that verdict was read,” she claimed, without evidence. ABC's immediate coverage didn't include reaction from the Trump campaign or Republicans, but following the Trump felony convictions they made sure to report that there were "cheers inside" the Biden HQ. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View – Break-In for Hunter Biden Trial Verdict June 11, 2024 11:19:53 a.m. Eastern (…) DAVID MUIR: Terry, let me ask you about the show of support in the front rows of that courtroom. As we know, the first lady, Jill Biden, there supporting her son every day but one in this trial, multiple members of the family and friends close to Hunter Biden all there. We know in the closing arguments, the prosecution well aware of that image right there in front of the jurors, saying of family members, the first lady, the friends who had gathered, essentially, that does not matter here. TERRY MORAN: That's exactly what they said, David. None of that matters. Pointing at the Biden family, at the first lady who was here almost every day, took a whirlwind trip to France to join the president for the D-Day commemorations and came right back to be with her son. And yet it was partly part of the closing argument of prosecutors there, prosecutors saying no one is above the law, no matter what their name is, no matter who is in court. (…) 11:21:15 a.m. Eastern MORAN: And in part, David, because of the law that the judge read to them. The judge, as is customary, as is part of the process, reads the jurors, the law that they will apply to the facts that they heard in this case. And part of that law was that drug use, for the purpose of this law, did not have to occur on the day that Hunter Biden bought the weapon and checked that federal form, that it could be evidence of a pattern of drug abuse or drug addiction around that. And that certainly was clear in this case. So, the defense was fighting an uphill battle, not only really against the facts, but against the law. As the judge gave it to the jurors here. Now, I should say that in court, the defense, as is customary right after the conviction was announced, renewed an appeal for an acquittal from the judge that in order to preserve an appeal and gave notice essentially that they will appeal this case. (…) 11:25:51 a.m. Eastern DAN ABRAMS: But, you know, David, one other interesting question. You had asked President Biden in your interview with him, whether he would pardon his son. And his answer was, ‘no. He'd respect the verdict, etc.’ Remember, there's also the possibility of commuting the sentence. So, if there is a sentence that comes down, even if he's not officially pardoned, there's also the possibility of commuting the sentence at some point down the road. MUIR: And again, just to Dan, alluding to this interview I did with President Biden in Normandy just a couple of days ago. Dan, thank you. (…) 11:28:29 a.m. Eastern MUIR: Olivia, we're looking at pictures right now of First Lady Jill Biden. As you point out, she was there for the trial every day but one; she was not in the courtroom for the verdict? OLIVIA RUBIN: She was not in the courtroom for the verdict. And I can tell you, David, as I sprinted out of the courtroom to come down to you as it was after wrapped up there, she was heading in just as I was heading out. She was rushing through that lobby, appearing. You know, we don't know if they intended for her to not be here for Valerie, but it certainly does appear as if it's possible that they missed the reading of the verdict. It happened quite quickly from when it came down just after 11. Her clerk, the judge's clerk, came into the courtroom to say that the verdict had been reached. And just moments later it was being read. And you could kind of almost sort of sense what that verdict was going to be initially when they walked the jury in. Again, something we have talked about before the jury not looking at Hunter Biden. One of the jurors actually took his seat smiling, which was quite striking to see him smiling right before that verdict was read. But again, Jill Biden not in the courtroom, and again, the least amount of Biden's essentially, that we have seen in the courtroom for the reading of the verdict. MUIR: The first lady not there for the verdict, though. There just about every other day of this trial to show her support. Olivia, thank you for the color inside the courtroom. (…) 11:31:08 a.m. Eastern JON KARL: And as we know, President Biden had said, not long ago, when asked about all of this, all of the legal troubles swirling around Hunter, that his son had done nothing wrong. So, while you had asked him and he said that he would respect this jury verdict entirely, that he would not pardon his son, I am sure there are some interesting conversations happening right now inside the Biden family and at the White House. (…)

NB Blog Feed

ABC, NBC Pounce on Deceptive SCOTUS Audio to Distract from Pelosi Vid

On Monday, Congressional Republicans released unused video from a January 6 documentary by Alexandra Pelosi which showed her mother, then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) admitting that the lack of security was her “responsibility.” But after ignoring the video that night, the Tuesday morning newscasts of ABC and NBC pounced on unauthenticated (a status they admitted to) audio of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito being pestered by a progressive activist masquerading as a conservative and secretly recording him. In the newly released video of then-Speaker Pelosi, the Democrat exclaimed: “Why weren’t the National Guard there to begin with?!” An unidentified female voice suggested they thought they had “sufficient” security before Pelosi snapped, saying: “No, that is not a question of how they had – They don’t know! They clearly didn’t know! And I take responsibility for not having them just prepare for more.” But the liberal broadcast networks were given an out by progressive activist Lauren Windsor, who conveniently just released highly edited audio she secretly recorded at the Supreme Court Historical Society’s annual gala last week. Audio she recorded while deceptively claiming to be a conservative Catholic. It was another excuse for the liberal media to continue their campaign to rip at the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court. Ultimately, what she released was nothing of consequence, but that didn’t stop NBC’s Today from framing it as “More controversy this morning surrounding Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and his wife,” as described by senior Washington correspondent Hallie Jackson. “Those recordings, getting a lot of attention this morning, capturing the outlook of Justice Alito who’s devoutly Catholic along with his wife and the chief justice,” she gawked.     But what did Alito say that was supposedly so controversial? Well, one side wins in political battles, and getting along is difficult: JACKSON: Alito asked by Windsor about a nation divided between left and right, saying -- ALITO: One side or the other is going to win. There can be a way of working, a way of living together peacefully, but it's difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can't be compromised. Congratulations liberal media! You caught Alito describing politics in a democracy. Truly groundbreaking. Jackson did note that “NBC News has not heard the full recordings, only what's been posted online, and not able to confirm what edits have been made,” but that didn’t stop her from using them. Over on ABC’s Good Morning America, chief justice correspondent Pierre Thomas announced, “we’re not airing [the audio clips] here” because “ABC News has not authenticated the audio.” Instead, he decided to cherry-pick quotes to read with little context (not that there was much context provided by the progressive activist to begin with): In one exchange, Windsor poses a leading question to Alito suggesting there can be no compromise between the left and right. Alito appearing to agree saying, there are fundamental differences that are, quote, “difficult to resolve.” Windsor kept pushing Alito saying, quote, “people I this county who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that, to return our country to a place of godliness.” Alito responds, saying, “I agree with you. I agree with you.” “This morning there are serious questions about Windsor's tactics of lying and misleading the justices,” Thomas concluded. Meanwhile, Jackson reported: “The Historical Society, which hosted the event where the recordings were made, says in a statement they ‘condemn the surreptitious recording of justices’ there, which they say is ‘inconsistent with the spirit of the evening.’” CBS Evening News and CBS Mornings didn't report on either the Pelosi video or the Alito audio. The transcripts are below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America June 11, 2024 7:06:46 a.m. Eastern GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: We’re going to turn now the Supreme Court in the spotlight again this morning after secret records of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito were released. Our chief justice correspondent Pierre Thomas has the story. Good morning, Pierre. PIERRE THOMAS: George, good morning. Today, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts are in the spotlight after a woman posing a conservative Christian allegedly secretly recorded them at a black tie event last week. Lauren Windsor seeking out the justices at the Supreme Court Historical Society’s annual gala in an apparent attempt to engage them in a culture wars debate. At one point the liberal filmmaker starts a conversation with Justice Alito, a well-known, staunch conservative on the court. Windsor has posted what appears to be edited audio on X. ABC News has not authenticated the audio and we’re not airing it here. In one exchange, Windsor poses a leading question to Alito suggesting there can be no compromise between the left and right. Alito appearing to agree saying, there are fundamental differences that are, quote, “difficult to resolve.” Windsor kept pushing Alito saying, quote, “people I this county who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that, to return our country to a place of godliness.” Alito responds, saying, “I agree with you. I agree with you.” George. STEPHANOPOULOS: Very different responses from Chief Justice Roberts? THOMAS: That’s right, George. Windsor also approaches Roberts, a moderate conservative, suggesting to him that America is a Christian nation. Roberts pushes back, quote, “Yeah, I don't know that we live in a Christian nation. I know a lot of Jewish and Muslim friends who would say maybe not. And it's not our job to do that. It's our job to decide the cases as best we can.” This morning there are serious questions about Windsor's tactics of lying and misleading the justices. We sought comment from Windsor and justices but have not heard back. George. STEPHANOPOULOS: Okay. Pierre Thomas. Thanks very much. NBC’s Today June 11, 2024 7:07:59 a.m. Eastern HODA KOTB: Let's turn to those audiotapes being made public of Supreme Court Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito, along with Alito's wife. They were secretly recorded by a progressive activist at a recent event. NBC’s senior Washington correspondent Hallie Jackson is on that story. Hey Hallie, good morning. HALLIE JACKSON: Hey Hoda, good morning. Those recordings, getting a lot of attention this morning, capturing the outlook of justice Alito who’s devoutly Catholic along with his wife and the chief justice. Now, we should note that NBC News has not heard the full recordings, only what's been posted online, and not able to confirm what edits have been made. But this is the latest spotlight on the court as it barrels toward the end of a consequential term. [Cuts to video] More controversy this morning surrounding Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and his wife after they were secretly recorded at a gala dinner last week. Alito approached by Lauren Windsor a progressive activist known for recording conservative political figures while posing as an ally. Alito asked by Windsor about nation divided between left and right, saying -- JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO: One side or the other is going to win. There can be a way of working, a way of living together peacefully, but it's difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can't be compromised. JACKSON: After Windsor said the country needs to return to a place of godliness, Alito responding, “I agree.” The conversation recorded during the Supreme Court Historical Society's annual dinner June 3rd. Alito, who’s on the conservative-wing of the court, has recently been embroiled in controversy after pictures emerged of flags associated with, among other things, election denial and January 6th rioters flying outside his house. Alito had responded that his wife, Martha-Ann raised the flags. She was also recorded by Windsor who told her she was being persecuted. Mrs. Alito responding. MARTHA-ANN ALITO: I'm German from Germany. My heritage is German. You come after me, I’m going to give it back to you. JACKSON: And discussing other flags she wanted to fly at their house. M.A. ALITO: You know what I want? I want a sacred heart of Jesus flag because I have to look across the lagoon at the pride flag for the next month. JACKSON: Windsor approached Chief Justice John Roberts who responded more cautiously to her questioning asked about whether the court should lead the country on a more moral path -- CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS: No, I think the role for the court is deciding the cases. JACKSON: The Chief Justice also pushing back on Windsor's assertion that the U.S. is a Christian nation and the court's role is to guide it on that path. ROBERTS: I don't know that we live in a Christian nation. I know a lot of Jewish and Muslim friends who would say maybe not, and it's not our job to do that. [Cuts back to live] JACKSON: The court has not responded to a request for comment, but the Historical Society, which hosted the event where the recordings were made, says in a statement they “condemn the surreptitious recording of justices” there, which they say is “inconsistent with the spirit of the evening.” Hoda. KOTB: All right, Hallie Jackson for us there in D.C. Hallie, thank you.

NB Blog Feed

ABC Doesn’t Think Saving Hostages Is a Good Reason to Blow Up Hamas

Over the weekend, Israeli Defense Forces soldiers put their lives on the line in a daring raid into a Hamas stronghold to rescue four of the October 7hostages. But during a moment of triumph for the forces of good, ABC host Martha Raddatz sided with evil during Sunday’s This Week. Throughout her interview with IDF spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Peter Lerner (Ret.), Raddatz repeatedly interrupted, demanding to know why the soldiers decided to kill terrorists instead of letting themselves and the hostages be slaughtered. After Lerner recounted how Saturday “was a very, very jubilant day” in Israel with people “cheering on the beaches of Tel Aviv and dancing outside the hospital where the hostages were brought,” Raddatz attempted to kill that mood. Parroting unverifiable Hamas propaganda that 274 civilians were supposedly killed, Raddatz was less concerned about the lives of Israelis and more concerned with airstrikes on Hamas fighting positions. “Colonel, part of this mission were the air strikes we saw, buildings destroyed in a civilian area in broad daylight,” she huffed. Raddatz refused to admit the fact that Hamas chose to use human shields and Lerner schooled her on it. “Martha, every civilian life lost in this war is a tragedy,” he said. “Every civilian life lost in this war is a result of how Hamas has operated. Let's think about, just for a moment, where they were holding the hostages, within civilian houses, within people's apartments.”     As Lerner was explaining how Hamas was trying to kill the hostages in the midst of the rescue operation, Raddatz interrupted him again to demand an explanation for the air strikes as if saving the hostages wasn’t good enough: LERNER: And, indeed, when we extracted and snatched the hostages, Noa Argamani, Almog Meir Jan, Andrey Kozlov, Shlomi Ziv – When we extracted them out, the forces came under extensive attack in an attempt to kill both them and the hostages. RADDATZ (interrupting): And is that the reason for the air strikes? Tell me why those air strikes were necessary, why buildings were destroyed in that attack. LERNER: The forces came under fire from a 360-degree threat. RPGs, AK-47s, explosive devices on the way, mortar rounds. “It was and is a war zone,” Lerner told her off. “And so, civilians in that -- the tragedy of civilians being caught up in this is precisely because of how Hamas is battling us on the battleground.” He tried to warn that Hamas couldn’t be allowed to survive because “they will” try to take innocent civilians hostage again and bring them to “places like Nuseirat in apartment buildings,” but Raddatz wasn’t having it. Interrupting him for a third time, Raddatz questioned the idea that the IDF ever thought about Palestinian civilians. “Again, again, Colonel, we are all grateful the hostages are safe, but just one final question. Would you carry out a similar rescue mission to get the other 116 hostages, no matter the cost to civilians in Gaza?” she pressed. “We would not have to be at war at all with Hamas and the war can be over today if Hamas lets the hostages free. Is that too much to ask?” Lerner pushed back. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America June 9, 2024 11:07:36 a.m. Eastern MARTHA RADDATZ: I'm joined now by Israeli Defense Forces spokesperson and retired Lieutenant Colonel Peter Lerner. It is good to see you this morning, Colonel. We are also happy those hostages are safe. Give us a picture of the scale of this mission. We just heard James report with some of the detail, but the ground troops, the air strikes, how long this lasted. LT. COL. PETER LERNER (Ret., IDF spokesman): Martha, this was an effort conducted and planned over several weeks in order to get the best result. And indeed it came together with extensive intelligence, a map of intelligence that created a good grasp of how the enemy were holding the four hostages, and that then was translated into an operational plan to actually bring them out. There was so much that could have gone wrong in this rescue mission. We need to keep in mind that all of our war efforts is crafted and designed about bringing back the hostages, so for the success of this operation at this time, I believe that it was a huge feat from a professional perspective, but also on the level of morale and here in Israel. And it was a very, very jubilant day yesterday where people were cheering on the beaches of Tel Aviv and dancing outside the hospital where the hostages were brought later for their medical examinations. So, the operational side absolutely reflects and spills over into societal issues and there is a hope that we can continue to bring home the hostages either through negotiations or in special force operations like we did yesterday. RADDATZ: And, Colonel, part of this mission were the air strikes we saw, buildings destroyed in a civilian area in broad daylight, there were people on the street during this attack through the air. Did you factor in the loss of so many Palestinians in this operation? LERNER: So, we don't know how many casualties were caused in the strike in the release and rescue operation. And I would be very cautious at accepting any figures and numbers that Hamas are putting out. RADDATZ (Interrupting): But even the Israelis -- Hamas is putting out 274, but even the Israelis, another spokesman from the IDF, said there were fewer than 100. That's a significant amount of casualties. Did they come from those air strikes in broad daylight? LERNER: Martha, every civilian life lost in this war is a tragedy. Every civilian life lost in this war is a result of how Hamas has operated. Let's think about, just for a moment, where they were holding the hostages, within civilian houses, within people's apartments. In the same apartment they were being held were the families that own the apartments. This exemplifies specifically how Hamas are operating. And, indeed, when we extracted and snatched the hostages, Noa Argamani, Almog Meir Jan, Andrey Kozlov, Shlomi Ziv – When we extracted them out, the forces came under extensive attack in an attempt to kill both them and the hostages. RADDATZ (interrupting): And is that the reason for the air strikes? Tell me why those air strikes were necessary, why buildings were destroyed in that attack. LERNER: The forces came under fire from 360-degree threat. RPGs, AK-47s, explosive devices on the way, mortar rounds. It was and is a war zone. And so, civilians in that -- the tragedy of civilians being caught up in this is precisely because of how Hamas is battling us on the battleground. Our responsibility, first and foremost responsibility, is to rescue the hostages, to bring them home, to create a better security situation for Israelis, and I would say for Palestinians alike. Hamas have to go. Hamas can't be trusted with the powers of government because that is what they will do, they will build a terrorist army, they will infiltrate into Israel and abduct partygoers from the nova party and hold them hostage in places like Nuseirat in apartment buildings. RADDATZ (interrupting): Again, again, Colonel, we are all grateful the hostages are safe, but just one final question. Would you carry out a similar rescue mission to get the other 116 hostages, no matter the cost to civilians in Gaza? LERNER: There can be a rescue mission like what happened yesterday, but there also could have been negotiations that create the opportunity. Our role is to create the conditions either way that Hamas realize that they should give back the hostages, they should set the hostages free. We would not have to be at war at all with Hamas and the war can be over today if Hamas lets the hostages free. Is that too much to ask? RADDATZ: We appreciate your time this morning. Thank you. LERNER: Good day.

NB Blog Feed

NBC Decries Israel Rescuing Hostages, Could Hurt Biden Deal With Hamas

How much does NBC hate Israelis? Well, during Monday’s Today, the network actually decried the successful operation by the Israeli Defense Forces over the weekend to free four civilians who had been held hostage by Hamas terrorists since October 7. NBC was upset because the rescue emboldened the resolve of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to rescue his citizens and could hurt President Biden’s unilateral negotiations with the terrorists. NBC senior White House correspondent Gabe Gutierrez quickly tried to wash Biden’s hands of the operation. Noting: “The Biden administration confirmed the U.S. did not participate militarily in the rescue operation but the U.S. provided intelligence in support of it.”     He then pivoted to the “concerns that Saturday's rescue may hurt efforts to reach a ceasefire and free the remaining hostages.” According to Gutierrez, saving the lives of four hostages was a serious problem because it could hurt the Biden administration’s effort to negotiate with Hamas terrorists and emboldened the right-wing Netanyahu government to continue to eliminate the threat to Israeli civilians: Secretary of State Antony Blinken is in the region today to try and secure a deal, but the rescue will likely make his efforts even more difficult and that's why the administration may negotiate directly with Hamas to release the remaining American hostages if the current proposal fails, according to U.S. officials. They say this latest rescue only strengthened Netanyahu's determination to keep pushing for military operations in Gaza instead of pursuing a ceasefire. One senior administration official calling this a very real option, citing the fact that Hamas could have an incentive to deal directly with the Americans because it would strain relations between the U.S. and Israel and possibly put even more pressure on Netanyahu. In their coverage of the operation itself, NBC noted the happy reunions but correspondent Raf Sanchez also lamented the “searing grief inside Gaza.” He parroted the unverifiable claims from the Gaza Ministry of Health that some “270” civilians “were killed by Israeli fire during the raid, including around 60 children.” Instead of admitting the fact Hamas is known to use human shields, he framed it as a claim made by Israel: “Israel says that Hamas deliberately holds the hostages in crowded civilian areas.” There was also no mention of the fact that hostages were found in the home of a Gaza-based journalist for Al Jazeera, Abdallah Aljamal who was killed in the raid. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: NBC’s Today June 10, 2024 7:06:29 a.m. Eastern HODA KOTB: Let's bring in NBC's senior White House correspondent Gabe Gutierrez. Gabe, tell us what we know about the U.S.'s involvement in this particular rescue and tell us why the White House believes it might be feasible to negotiate directly with Hamas. GABE GUTIERREZ: Hey there, Hoda. Good morning. The Biden administration confirmed the U.S. did not participate militarily in the rescue operation but the U.S. provided intelligence in support of it, according to a U.S. Official with knowledge of the matter. Still, there are concerns that Saturday's rescue may hurt efforts to reach a ceasefire and free the remaining hostages, including the eight Americans, three of which are believed to have been killed. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is in the region today to try and secure a deal, but the rescue will likely make his efforts even more difficult and that's why the administration may negotiate directly with Hamas to release the remaining American hostages if the current proposal fails, according to U.S. officials. They say this latest rescue only strengthened Netanyahu's determination to keep pushing for military operations in Gaza instead of pursuing a ceasefire. One senior administration official calling this a very real option, citing the fact that Hamas could have an incentive to deal directly with the Americans because it would strain relations between the U.S. and Israel and possibly put even more pressure on Netanyahu. Another reason, it might even pressure the Prime Minister to agree to a version of the current ceasefire deal, but all of it could be a complicated path to take, considering the potential backlash. The White House declined to comment. Hoda. KOTB: All right. Gutierrez for us there at the White House. Gabe, thank you. (…) 8:03:24 a.m. Eastern RAF SANCHEZ: But while there are celebrations here in Israel, there is searing grief inside of Gaza. The Health Ministry says around 270 people were killed by Israeli fire during the raid, including around 60 children. Israel says that Hamas deliberately holds the hostages in crowded civilian areas. (…)

NB Blog Feed

Hostin Says Black Republicans Don't Exist, 'Like Looking at Unicorns'

Staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host of ABC’s The View, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) was at it again; spewing her hate on Friday’s show and claiming that black Republicans didn’t exist at all, just like “unicorns.” She was joined by the liberal white ladies who lectured black Republican Congressman Byron Donalds (FL), who they suggested was ignorant of black history and should go back to school. What had them triggered was Donalds talking to a group of black Republicans about black families and how liberal government policies work against them. They took an out-of-context, 27-second clip pushed by the Biden campaign and claimed he was romanticizing Jim Crow. Hostin, who once scoffed that black Republicans was an “oxymoron” term, proclaimed that black Republicans simply didn’t exist and were mythical creatures. She also suggested that the black vote belonged to the Democratic Party: I thought it was interesting that the framing was a room of black Republicans. Where are they? Where are they? Because if you look at the stats, 77 percent of – 81 percent, I'm sorry, of black men are part of the Democratic Party. Black voters consistently align with the Democratic Party.  Ninety -- Over 95 percent of black women are part of the Democratic Party so these black men that he was speaking with, I'd love to see them. It would be like looking at unicorns. It makes sense that Hostin would think black people belonged to the Democrats since they and her family kept them as property for a long time.     Her rant was teed up by Friday moderator and white liberal woman, Joy Behar, who condescendingly questioned Donalds’ intelligence. “So, my question to you, Sunny, is it stupidity like she says or is it something else?” she asked. Casting doubt on a black man’s intelligence was a recurring theme for Behar during the segment. “So, my question is, does Byron Donalds, does he not know the history, or is he just wanting to pander?” she asked pretend-independent and fellow white liberal woman Sara Haines. Just over a year ago, Behar scolded Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and suggested they didn’t know what it was like to be black in America. In her response, Haines argued that Donalds and the other black people in the audience needed to go back to school to be more educated like her: What’s scary is when you hear the audio there are a lot of people going, “uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh.” So, it feels like a class needs to be taught to everyone in that room, segregation left you with no choice. Like, you weren't picking the family. They were literally making you go to different places. They didn't allow for -- so, talking about a black person choosing to be with your family and then looking at the greater social scheme and the injustice of that, he must not know what it is? I mean, that seems like a far leap not to understand Jim Crow, segregation, and the separation of the race. I don't understand. Of course, faux-conservative co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin (who flip-flops between being white or Middle Eastern, depending on what role she needs to play) was useless in explaining that the clip was out of context. Instead, she took part in the Donalds bashing because he supported former President Trump. “Byron Donalds is one of many jockeying to be Donald Trump's running mate…I consider him to be kind of in the second tier,” she chided. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View June 7, 2024 11:03:54 a.m. Eastern JOY BEHAR: So, my question is, does Byron Donalds, does he not know the history, or is he just wanting to pander? SARA HAINES: Nor did anyone else in the room know – What’s scary is when you hear the audio there are a lot of people going, “uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh.” So, it feels like a class needs to be taught to everyone in that room, segregation left you with no choice. Like, you weren't picking the family. They were literally making you go to different places. They didn't allow for -- so, talking about a black person choosing to be with your family and then looking at the greater social scheme and the injustice of that, he must not know what it is? I mean, that seems like a far leap not to understand Jim crow, segregation and the separation of the race. I don't understand. ANA NAVARRO: If he doesn't know, shame on him, because there is nothing worse, I think, that when people achieve certain status and certain rights and don't appreciate, take for granted the struggles, the death, the fights, the marches, everything it took to be able to give Byron Donalds the opportunity he has now. Because under Jim crow he couldn't vote, he wouldn't have been in Congress, he couldn't have married his wife. He's married to a lovely woman named Erica, who’s white. Interracial marriage was illegal in Florida until 1969. He could have not gone to Florida State University for over 100 years black students were not admitted to that university. Over 250 blacks were lynched in Florida under Jim crow. HAINES: That we know of. NAVARRO: For him to be waxing nostalgic about that era that elicits so much pain that was such a dark period in the history of the United States is offensive, and for him to be doing it as a black man, as a person of color is even more offensive. What really drives me crazy, though is that it's like every three months a Republican says something more stupid about black history and slavery, right? [Applause] I mean, last year we had Ron DeSantis saying -- defending that there was good things about slavery, skills that were learned that could be put to good use, then we had Nikki Haley who couldn't admit that slavery was the cause of the Civil War – BEHAR: So, my question to you, Sunny, is it stupidity like she says or is it something else? HAINES: I think it's pandering. I don't think it's stupidity. BEHAR: To whom? HOSTIN: It’s pandering to Donald Trump. I thought it was interesting that the framing was a room of black Republicans. Where are they? Where are they? Because if you look at the stats, 77 percent of – 81 percent, I'm sorry, of black men are part of the Democratic Party. Black voters consistently align with the Democratic Party.  Ninety -- Over 95 percent of black women are part of the Democratic Party so these black men that he was speaking with, I'd love to see them. It would be like looking at unicorns. And so I think that the sad thing is, you know, I agree with you, Ana, is that this came from the mouth of a black man, right? And so, if you're pandering yourself and your community and your history to a man like Donald Trump who is a disgraced, one-term, twice impeached, convicted felon, we get to say now, is even more despicable in this country. BEHAR: Alyssa. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: And well, in the broader context here, Byron Donalds is one of many jockeying to be Donald Trump's running mate. He’s among the names that reportedly Donald Trump has requested materials from and is wanting to look seriously into. I consider him to be kind of in the second tier. I don't think he's one of the top contenders. (…)

NB Blog Feed

CBS Promotes Violence and Dismisses 'Nonviolence' for Political Change

While the liberal media have been trying to scare people into voting for President Biden by insisting Republicans were violent, anti-American terrorists looking to destroy democracy, CBS Mornings proved once again that politically motivated violence was (D)ifferent when it was coming from the left. In hyping a book about “black resistance,” the network elevated a far-left author; and together they tried to dismiss nonviolence as a way to get political change in a country. They were speaking with Professor Kellie Carter Jackson of Wellesley College about her new book We Refuse: A Forceful History of Black Resistance. Co-anchor Gayle King boasted that the book was “about hard conversations, not focused on right or wrong,” but “what works” in terms of getting results for an agenda. Carter Jackson admitted that she “wrote this book because [she] was mad” and “frustrated” that the Black Lives Matter riots weren’t “achieving the purpose that people had set out to accomplish when they wanted to reckon with all of this racial injustice.” “And so I think we have this very limited flat, like one-dimensional perspective. When we talk about protests, you know, the question is, are you going to be violent or are you going to be nonviolent? As those are the only options,” she huffed.     She also ridiculously seemed to suggest that white people had “never” experienced hate crimes: I think about the fact that we`ve never seen four little white girls killed in a church. We`ve never had a white man assassinated in his driveway. We`ve never had a black man be welcomed into a white church, and then him proceed to shoot it up. And so I really wanted to talk about these very skewed ways that we think about violence and how we don`t interrogate the violence of white supremacy enough. The network’s promotion of political violence became more obvious when co-anchor Vladimir Duthiers hyped a passage from the book denouncing how, “Our culture`s fixation on nonviolence has caused us to miss entire histories of Black responses to white supremacy. Nonviolence on its own is not at all expansive enough to rectify the harm that has been caused by racism.” Duthiers requested that she “set that in the context of the Haitian Revolution.” Carter Jackson obliged and proceeded to suggest the American Revolution was not a real revolution because slavery remained after we gained our independence: Well, when we think about revolution, I think we don`t have a proper understanding of it. Because for me, revolution is about replacing an unjust system with a just one. And so in Haiti, the whole purpose was not just to overthrow a colonial power, but to abolish the system of slavery. And that`s what was achieved in Haiti. We don`t have that in the United States, we have an American Revolution, but slavery persists almost for another hundred years after the American Revolution. Carter Jackson did say, "when we think about black resistance" it's not about choosing "between violence or nonviolence" and that there was an "array of tools." But she warned that one of the "limitations" of nonviolence was that it becomes “performative and not really achieve the goals that we set out to accomplish.” This whole exchange was eerily similar to when NBC’s Chuck Todd twice gave a platform to Antifa supporter Mark Bray in 2017; just two months after the Congressional Baseball Shooting carried out by a far-left MSNBC fan. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CBS Mornings June 6, 2024 8:18:02 a.m. Eastern (…) GAYLE KING: Wellesley Professor Kellie Carter Jackson highlights in her new book, it`s called We Refuse: A Forceful History of Black Resistance. And we`re very happy to tell you that she joins us first on CBS Mornings. Good morning to you, Professor. KELLIE CARTER JACKSON: Hi. KING: I learned so much, Professor Carter Jackson things I didn`t know it was -- it was eye opening to me. And you say in the book: We Refuse is a book about hard conversations, not focused on right or wrong, but what happens, what works when Black resistance and liberation is at the center to understand Black humanity in rage in pursuit of freedom. Wow. CARTER JACKSON: Yeah, yeah. I wrote this book because I was mad. I wrote this book because I was frustrated and because I had thought about everything that happened in 2020, not just the pandemic, but also this racial reckoning. And I didn`t feel like marches and protests and hashtags were sort of achieving the purpose that people had set out to accomplish when they wanted to reckon with all of this racial injustice. And so I think we have this very limited flat, like one-dimensional perspective. When we talk about protests, you know, the question is, are you going to be violent or are you going to be nonviolent? KING: Yes. Yes. CARTER JACKSON: As those are the only options. And when I think about the history of this country, you know, I think about the fact that we`ve never seen four little white girls killed in a church. We`ve never had a white man assassinated in his driveway. We`ve never had a black man be welcomed into a white church, and then him proceed to shoot it up. KING: Yes. CARTER JACKSON: And so I really wanted to talk about these very skewed ways that we think about violence and how we don`t interrogate the violence of white supremacy enough. VLADIMIR DUTHIERS: One of the things you write in the book, speaking of non-violence: Our culture`s fixation -- I`m quoting the book now -- on nonviolence has caused us to miss entire histories of Black responses to white supremacy. Nonviolence on its own is not at all expansive enough to rectify the harm that has been caused by racism. I want you to set that in the context of the Haitian Revolution. CARTER JACKSON: Yeah. DUTHIERS: Where we saw a revolution that was able, essentially to overthrow the shackles of slavery on what was then the world`s superpower. CARTER JACKSON: Yeah, yeah. Well, when we think about revolution, I think we don`t have a proper understanding of it. Because for me, revolution is about replacing an unjust system with a just one. And so in Haiti, the whole purpose was not just to overthrow a colonial power, but to abolish the system of slavery. And that`s what was achieved in Haiti. We don`t have that in the United States, we have an American Revolution, but slavery persists almost for another hundred years after the American Revolution. And so how should we think of revolutions? And what makes them revolutionary? What really shifts sort of the structures that we live in? And so -- KING: Because you say, they don`t require bloodshed, but they do require sacrifice? CARTER JACKSON: Absolutely. KING: And when you look at the cover of your book, We Refuse, it is a Black woman holding a gun. I thought, oh, Kellie is coming in hot. And you say, okay, everybody -- What is -- what is the message that you were really trying to send? Because I looked at it, you`re trying to highlight about black humanity. CARTER JACKSON: Yes. Yes. KING: Because so often, black people are seen through the lens of criminality. CARTER JACKSON: Yes. I wanted to push back on these ideas and say that when we think about black resistance, we have an array of tools in front of us and it is not just force and guns. I think about revolution, I think about protection. I have a whole chapter on flight and a chapter on joy. Joy, I see has been one of the most potent weapons that we have to fight against, sort of the erosion of white supremacy. And so I wanted us to have this expansive idea to understand that you don`t just have to choose between violence or nonviolence, that yes, there are certainly limitations to violence. We all understand that. KING: Yes. CARTER JACKSON: there`s also limitations to the use of nonviolence and how we think about how quickly it can become performative and not really achieve the goals that we set out to accomplish. (…)

NB Blog Feed

The View Whines Biden 'Forced' into Border Order in an Election Year

After spending almost four years claiming there was nothing he could do about securing the U.S.-Mexico border (which echoed his claim about lowering inflation), President Biden finally issued an executive order to supposedly secure it. The purported effectiveness of the orders remained to be seen, but the liberal ladies of ABC’s The View spent the first part of their Wednesday show touting the move while simultaneously whining about Biden being “forced” into doing it by Republicans. Near the top of the segment, staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) tried to suggest Biden’s move proved that Democrats – the party of sanctuary cities and amnesty – was not weak on border security: I think we should all remember Obama was called the (…) deporter-in-chief and deported more undocumented people than ever before and Biden was his vice president. So, the notion somehow that Democrats are so light on immigration is just actually a misnomer, it's not true. And I think he's doing the right thing. She admitted it was just a political decision during an election year, “but at least he's doing something.” Faux-conservative co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin quoted Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) in proclaiming that “it's not xenophobic to care about border security.” She added that “the left flank of the party” got it “wrong” when they made it their position that “you're bigoted and racist if you think there needs to be some level of border security.” “He's got five months to prove that he can help solve this process and I would say this: Joe Biden can't live in fear of his left wing or he's going to lose,” she stated.     Co-host Joy Behar, who recently admitted that she self-censors her criticism of Biden to help him get elected, spun Biden’s limitations on asylum claims from the left as eventually returning and claimed former President Trump wanted to put people in “camps”: What Trump said he would do is he would basically he would round them up and put them in detention camps. Total different. It's a little different. One is an extreme way to deal with this issue and one is somewhat humanitarian and it'll be changed eventually, rechanged and people able to come in here legally again. But if you put Donald Trump in there, he's going to put people in, like, these sort of camps. Pretend-moderate co-host Sara Haines also admitted Biden’s executive order was wholly intended to stop the bleeding in the polls but insisted “this is a Band-Aid like that he's been forced to do” by Republicans. She also blamed Trump for the increase in border crossings during the Biden presidency, despite Biden letting Title 42 expire. Moderator Whoopi Goldberg took on the role of parroting one of the more intellectually lazy arguments of the far-left wing of the Democratic Party: claiming red states sending illegal immigrants to the so-called sanctuary cities that were telling them to come was somehow human “trafficking”: GOLDBERG: So, here's my question. So, people arrive in a country. HOSTIN: Yes. GOLDBERG: They are then put on buses and sent to other cities and towns. Isn't that trafficking? BEHAR: They send them to sanctuary cities. GOLDBERG: Isn’t that trafficking? Last year, The View was all for “tracking” illegals out of their city. Haines demanded that they be “resettled elsewhere” in America because it’s “a massive country.” Goldberg obviously didn’t care about American sovereignty because she previously demanded other countries come into America and control our border security and immigration system. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View June 5, 2024 11:05:01 a.m. Eastern (…) SUNNY HOSTIN: I think we should all remember Obama was called the ex—the WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Deporter-in-chief. HOSTIN: I was going to say exporter. Deporter-in-chief and deported more undocumented people than ever before and Biden was his vice president. So, the notion somehow that Democrats are so light on immigration is just actually a misnomer, it's not true. And I think he's doing the right thing. He's doing it, yes, because it's a political threat. It's five months before an election but at least he's doing something. [Applause] JOY BEHAR: What is he doing? Tell us what he’s doing. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Well, he's using an executive action to basically limit the number of asylum seekers that can come in. But I'm basically just frustrated with how this debate has gone in the country and I think there’s responsibility on both sides. John Fetterman who I feel like is one of those people who is a straight shooter said, very wisely, ‘it's not xenophobic to care about border security.’ Every nation on Earth deals with this issue. I remember being in a meeting with then-Chancellor Angela Merkel saying, ‘we’re dealing with the Syrian Refugee Crisis, we’re dealing with a border crisis.’ So, I think what Democrats got wrong early in this – and especially the left flank of the party – is to basically say you're bigoted and racist if you think there needs to be some level of border security. What Republicans got wrong is that they got the best border package in decades and they blocked it because Donald Trump. It is a crisis. It ranks as the top issue for voters. And I think a lot of folks think it's a border state issue, doesn't affect us. So, New York City, this was interesting. Hotel prices have gone up because 15 percent of hotels are housing migrants in New York City. So, there are real impacts that we have. He's got five months to prove that he can help solve this process and I would say this: Joe Biden can't live in fear of his left wing or he's going to lose. BEHAR: So, Biden is saying when you reach a certain number like over 2,500, is it? HOSTIN: It’s 2,500. BEHAR: Then that's the end of asylum? HOSTIN: Yes, because – BEHAR: What Trump said he would do is he would basically he would round them up and put them in detention camps. Total different. It's a little different. One is an extreme way to deal with this issue and one is somewhat humanitarian and it'll be changed eventually, rechanged and people able to come in here legally again. But if you put Donald Trump in there, he's going to put people in, like, these sort of camps. FARAH GRIFFIN: He's talking about people who are already here, the DACA population. BEHAR: He wants to send them back too. Right? SARA HAINES: The problem with the executive order – which I feel like his has was forced because he didn't have the vote and that border bill was designed by a very conservative Republican Senator James Lankford, the one they blocked. The problem with this executive order in making Biden do that, is it doesn't include a lot of the more comprehensive parts that that bill does, which is quick -- they have antiquated systems down there. They don't have enough help, not enough judge, social workers, al the things. HOSTIN: Path to citizenship. HAINES: That bill included so much more. So, this is a Band-Aid like that he's been forced to do. And so, some people are calling it political but I'll take what Sunny said, something needs to be done because if we've watched this happen for decades and decades and decades and now it's exploded as people started, like, seeing the numbers come in – because it did get really after Donald Trump and that 42 -- FARAH GRIFFIN: Title 42. HAINES: Title 42 expired the numbers have gotten too great. But it would be really nice if they could just do their jobs. Because now you have nine senators I think it is, a group of Senate Republicans vowing to oppose legislation and Biden nominees in the wake of Trump's conviction. So, now you've got time and they're just saying I'm not going to do my job. GOLDBERG: So, here's my question. So, people arrive in a country. HOSTIN: Yes. GOLDBERG: They are then put on buses and sent to other cities and towns. Isn't that trafficking? BEHAR: They send them to sanctuary cities. GOLDBERG: Isn’t that trafficking? HOSTIN: In a way. They're processing them first. GOLDBERG: Are they, though? HOSTIN: This is supposed to be the land of the free and we’re supposed to be welcoming people. And so, they process them. But right now there are about 3,700 crossings a day over the last three weeks. And so, they want them to be about 2,500. So now, even if you have an asylum claim that's valid, you will not be heard and you have a five-year minimum ban for returning. GOLDBERG: So, you come across and you get here and they take you and they send you someplace else. They don't send money. The other states don't say, and here's some money to help you with the thing. HOSTIN: No. GOLDBERG: It feels like trafficking and feels like we only have 30 seconds so talk fast. FARAH GRIFFIN: The Biden administration has put in a policy of taking lateral flights where they relocate migrants to where there may be more places with economic opportunities and so on. But, I  mean, it just underscores how bad the crisis is. GOLDBERG: This blanket sending people wherever. HOSTIN: States aren’t necessarily helping, like Texas. GOLDBERG: Yes. Yeah.

NB Blog Feed

The View’s Faux Conservative Whines Hunter Biden Trial Is a ‘Distraction’ from the Issues

Hunter Biden was finally brought to trial this week to answer for his alleged crime of lying on a federal background check form when purchasing a firearm, a felony. But ABC’s Alyssa Farah Griffin, one of The View’s faux-conservatives, finally found a trial she didn’t like. After previously cheering on the ethically dubious trial of former President Trump, on Tuesday’s show she was decrying the trials as a distraction from the real issues. For months prior to Tuesday, Farah Griffin had touted the trial against Trump because polling data suggested that a non-insignificant portion of Republican voters would ditch him if he was convicted. But now that a conviction had been scored, she was finished with all the trial coverage now that Biden was under the microscope. “I'm not particularly interested in this case but I think I am frustrated this election cycle the media coverage feels like it's trial this, conviction this, this trial, him walking into the courtroom,” she huffed. She got close to admitting the truth when she lamented that the media’s obsessive coverage of the trials was distracting from real issues like the economy: FARAH GRIFFIN: And it’s like, why aren't we talking about what people care about, their ability to afford utilities this summer, the economy, addressing border security? It just becomes this convoluted distraction that I worry is making people tune out the news and not wanting to be engaged politically. BEHAR: Well, you say the media – FARAH GRIFFIN: Yes, but it feels like – BEHAR: But everybody in the media is responsible including us because you sit here and talk about all the accomplishments of Biden administration, people tune out! FARAH GRIFFIN: Well, I’m not interested in talking about the Biden accomplishments, but what's happening in the country that voters care about. Distracting from Bidenomics is the point, Alyssa.     Near the top of the segment, moderator Whoopi Goldberg beclowned herself again by declaring, “Don't you think if he [President Biden] had that much power, Hunter probably wouldn't be on trial?” Staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) built off of Goldberg by adding that the trial showed that “no one is above the law.” This ignored the fact that the prosecutor was going to give the President’s son a sweetheart plea deal that would have avoided prosecution on the gun charges before the judge stepped in and rejected the deal. A bit shockingly, Hostin declared that she didn’t “have a problem with him being on trial” because “that's how this country should be.” “It's a case about buying a firearm and lying on your application saying that you have never used drugs and he was an active addict at the time,” she explained. “So, out of the cases that are investigated, there are 80 million Americans that have purchased firearms. Only about a thousand a year are investigated. 12 were prosecuted. That is 0.09 percent of the cases. Less than one percent of the cases are investigated but guess what, Hunter is one of them.” Back in September, The View cast decried the gun charges with fake Republican Ana Navarro arguing that all addicts “lie” and “commit crime” so Hunter was nothing special. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View June 4, 2024 11:17:01 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Don't you think if he [President Biden] had that much power, Hunter probably wouldn't be on trial? SUNNY HOSTIN: Of course. And I love that question, because not only is Hunter Biden on trial showing that no one is above the law. GOLDBERG: No one. HOSTIN: President Biden has indicated if he is convicted he will not pardon him. GOLDBERG: No. HOSTIN: Okay? Because no one is above the law. And the other thing that I will say is, this is an interesting case. It's a case about buying a firearm and lying on your application saying that you have never used drugs and he was an active addict at the time. Some people argue that you're always an addict. That you live day to day, right? SARA HAINES: Does it ask you if you've never or just if you currently addicted to something? HOSTIN: I'm not sure. I'm not sure. So, out of the cases that are investigated, there are 80 million Americans that have purchased firearms. Only about a thousand a year are investigated. 12 were prosecuted. That is 0.09 percent of the cases. Less than one percent of the cases are investigated but guess what, Hunter is one of them. And I say that's how this country should be. GOLDBERG: That’s how it’s supposed to be. Yes. HOSTIN: That's how the country is supposed to work. I don't have a problem with him being on trial. I suspect he'll get a drug diversion. (…) 11:19:11 a.m. Eastern ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Listen, let the facts play out. I'm not particularly interested in this case but I think I am frustrated this election cycle the media coverage feel like it's trial this, conviction this, this trial, him walking into the courtroom. And it’s like, why aren't we talking about what people care about, their ability to afford utilities this summer, the economy, addressing border security? It just becomes this convoluted distraction that I worry is making people tune out the news and not wanting to be engaged politically. BEHAR: Well, you say the media – FARAH GRIFFIN: Yes, but it feels like – BEHAR: But everybody in the media is responsible including us because you sit here and talk about all the accomplishments of Biden administration, people tune out! FARAH GRIFFIN: Well, I’m not interested in talking about the Biden accomplishments, but what's happening in the country that voters care about. (…)

NB Blog Feed

The View Has Suspicion COVID’s Origin ‘Wasn’t in this Country,’ Maybe a Lab

ABC News is not sending us their best. That much was obvious during Tuesday’s edition of The View when the Cackling Coven went to bat for Dr. Anthony Fauci following a House hearing the previous day. Mid their rambling, one of them shared their new sneaking suspicion that the origin of the COVID-19 virus lay outside the United States. Not only that, another heard rumors that it came from a laboratory somewhere. Staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) huffed that the House had “15 months of an investigation spending real taxpayer dollars” and “They say they cannot find out what happened here in the United States in terms of the origin of COVID.” It was then that Hostin floated her suspicion, which most Americans already understood for years by this point: “Well, maybe because the origin wasn't in this country. Maybe it was in another country and maybe they need to now start looking for – at other countries.” What made Hostin’s apparently new theory even more ridiculous was the fact that at no point was there a serious idea that it originated in any place other than Wuhan, China. But the dumb didn’t stop there. Co-host Joy Behar added that she heard it originated someplace more specific. “Didn’t they say it possibly came out of a lab?” she asked, to which Hostin responded with a “Yes.”     The irony of this exchange was that Behar had just finished mocking Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene for being stupid. “The other thing about it is that Marjorie Taylor Greene has no business being on a committee about science,” she proclaimed. “She's really dumb!” Earlier this year, Behar suggested it was NATO that defeated Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. Just adding to the pile of stupidity, moderator Whoopi Goldberg seemingly went on a rant talking about Republican on the committee supposedly suggesting that the coronavirus wasn’t even real: GOLDBERG: Can we point this other thing out too? Real people died during this. This was not something people made up. This was not something that, you know, people were fooling around with. So, if you're concerned – because I listened to a bit of it. This is why I don't turn the television on, because all I want to do is put my foot through the TV because I don't understand real people died. BEHAR: Yeah. GOLDBERG: Families lost love – lost children, lost grandparents and you're questioning the validity of this thing saying people made it up. Of course, she provided no evidence of her claim. And she may not have even seen it herself since she huffed: “This is why I don't turn the television on…” Faux-conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin whined that Republicans were grilling her best friend. “This has my blood pressure like through the roof, today. Dr. Fauci is my friend. It was my honor to serve with him,” she said. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View June 4, 2024 11:05:40 a.m. Eastern (…) JOY BEHAR: The other thing about it is that Marjorie Taylor Greene has no business being on a committee about science. First of all – [Laughter] This is the woman who says – [Cheers and applause] SUNNY HOSTIN: Yeah. BEHAR: Let me finish. She says that Jewish space lasers cause fires. That was the first thing. But first of all, she has skipped seven of the ten hearings. Okay? That's another point. But this is something that she said that I think is just hilarious. She has publicly questioned this, “If the Earth spins at a thousand miles an hour why can't we feel ourselves moving?!” [Laughter] She's really dumb! HOSTIN: Did she say that during a committee meeting? BEHAR: She's dumb. It's a quote. She's really stupid, you know, and so disrespectful to Dr. Fauci. And, by the way, science evolves. What you know on Monday, what -- WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Can change. BEHAR: Can change on Thursday. This was an evolving disease also we didn't really know anything about. SARA HAINES: It was changing as well. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: This has my blood pressure like through the roof, today. Dr. Fauci is my friend. It was my honor to serve with him. (…) 11:08:36 a.m. Eastern HOSTIN: And the other thing that I will just say is, 15 months of an investigation. We have real problems in this country. 15 months of an investigation spending real taxpayer dollars really, really just gets to me. GOLDBERG: Yeah. HOSTIN: And I think that people like Marjorie Taylor Greene and other people need to start doing the work of the people as opposed to try to send these messages. They say they cannot find out what happened here in the United States in terms of the origin of COVID. Well, maybe because the origin wasn't in this country. Maybe it was in another country and maybe they need to now start looking for – at other countries. BEHAR: Didn’t they say it possibly came out of a lab? HOSTIN: Yes. GOLDBERG: Can we point this other thing out too? Real people died during this. This was not something people made up. This was not something that, you know, people were fooling around with. So, if you're concerned – because I listened to a bit of it. This is why I don't turn the television on, because all I want to do is put my foot through the TV because I don't understand real people died. BEHAR: Yeah. GOLDBERG: Families lost love – lost children, lost grandparents and you're questioning the validity of this thing saying people made it up. (…)

NB Blog Feed

The View’s Fake Republican Compares Rubio to a ‘Dog’ for Defending Trump

Ana Navarro claims to still be a Republican despite actively campaigning for President Biden’s reelection effort and repeatedly defending allegedly corrupt Democrats such as New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez. And on Monday’s show, in the wake of former President Trump’s felony convictions under questionable circumstances, she raged at Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio for defending Trump by comparing him to a “dog.” In the midst of The View’s whining about Republican politicians speaking out in support of the party’s presumptive presidential nominee, Navarro bloviated about how, “You know, some people have emotional support dogs. Donald Trump has emotional support senators.” She suggested they were fighting among “themselves as to who kisses his ass more” to become his vice president. “But worse amongst them is the senator from my state of Florida, Marco Rubio,” she declared. After playing a soundbite of Rubio comparing the Trump trial to the show trials of communist Cuba after the revolution, Navarro exploded: NAVARRO: How dare you, Marco?! How dare you?! GOLDBERG: Oh, God! NAVARRO: 5,600 Cubans, at least, were shot in front of firing squads! Another1,200 were shot and died because of extrajudicial hearings! How dare you use their name in vain so you can suck up to this man! I know you want to be his vice president, but don't you dare use the name of these people who died protecting freedom and compare our U.S. judicial system to what happens in Cuba, what happens in Nicaragua, what happens in Venezuela!     Moderator Whoopi Goldberg built off of Navarro and lectured Cuban-Americans about supporting Trump; insinuating that they were either hypocrites or stupid for doing so: Let me ask, because I don't understand. All my life I have heard the Cuban people say, “we never want to see that. We're going to make sure it never happens here.” How can -- how can they not recognize when the man says, ‘I'm going to be this guy?’ What's -- what are we missing? “And the reason I was so curious about Marco Rubio saying something like that is because you heard all these stories. Who do you think they were talking about? A dictatorship that ate the country. I don't understand how you think it's going to be different,” Goldberg bloviated. Navarro was still fuming: “He knows better. He knows exactly what he's doing. He just thinks that the person that says the most outrageous thing will be rewarded by being Donald Trump's vice president.” The hypocrisy of their outrage was on full display as pretend-independent co-host Sara Haines opined about how Trump and “the people around him have to stop sowing mistrust in our systems.” “The percentage of trust in our institutions right now is down so low, only 27 percent of Americans have confidence in the Supreme Court,” she decried. “And I do mention the Supreme Court because it's also important to remember, you're not going to agree with everything everyone does…So, we have got to stop teaching people that when it doesn't go your way, something's wrong with the system.” But just last week alone, The View ran multiple segments where they actively tore at the fabric of American institutions by attacking the legitimacy of the court. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View June 3, 2024 11:05:36 a.m. Eastern (…) ANA NAVARRO: You know, some people have emotional support dogs. Donald Trump has emotional support senators, and they have been outdoing themselves as to who kisses his ass more. Who can kiss the ring? Who can – [Applause] And I get it. They're trying to audition to be vice president, and that is a big part of being his vice president is who can suck up to me. But worse amongst them is the senator from my state of Florida, Marco Rubio. I would like us to take a look at what he said. [Cuts to video] SEN. MARCO RUBIO (R-FL): This is the quintessential show trial. This is what you see in communist countries. This is what I grew up having people in this community tell me about that happened in the days after the Castro Revolutions. Now obviously, those led to executions. This on the other hand, is an effort to interfere in an election. [Cuts back to live] NAVARRO: How dare you, Marco?! How dare you?! GOLDBERG: Oh, God! NAVARRO: 5,600 Cubans, at least, were shot in front of firing squads! Another1,200 were shot and died because of extrajudicial hearings! How dare you use their name in vain so you can suck up to this man! I know you want to be his vice president, but don't you dare use the name of these people who died protecting freedom and compare our U.S. judicial system to what happens in Cuba, what happens in Nicaragua, what happens in Venezuela! [In Spanish: tells Rubio he should be ashamed of himself] [Applause] GOLDBERG: Let me ask, because I don't understand. All my life I have heard the Cuban people say, “we never want to see that. We're going to make sure it never happens here.” How can -- how can they not recognize when the man says, ‘I'm going to be this guy?’ What's -- what are we missing? (…) 11:09:50 a.m. Eastern SARA HAINES: I think Trump and the people around him -- Trump won't stop, but the people around him have to stop sowing mistrust in our systems. Sometimes you lose, and the other person didn't cheat and the system's not always rigged. The percentage of trust in our institutions right now is down so low, only 27 percent of Americans have confidence in the Supreme Court, eight percent in congress, less than 20 percent in the media. And I do mention the Supreme Court because it's also important to remember, you're not going to agree with everything everyone does, and our systems are not perfect. They have a dirty history of not being perfect, but they are perfect by comparison to a lot of other places in this world, and I wouldn't want to be anywhere else. So, we have got to stop teaching people that when it doesn't go your way, something's wrong with the system. GOLDBERG: Everybody doesn't always win. HAINES: Yeah. GOLDBERG: Isn't that what we have been talking about for years? But I just hope that people recognize history. This is why history's so important to know because if you don't know what happened, you don't know what can happen. And I just -- And the reason I was so curious about Marco Rubio saying something like that is because you heard all these stories. Who do you think they were talking about? A dictatorship that ate the country. I don't understand how you think it's going to be different. HOSTIN: There's a lack of world – ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: He knows better. NAVARRO: He knows better. He knows exactly what he's doing. He just thinks that the person that says the most outrageous thing will be rewarded by being Donald Trump's vice president. (…)

NB Blog Feed

NewsBusters Podcast: Media React to Guilty Trump: Faux Sobriety, Gleeful, Hunger for More

The last 24 hours have been like drinking water out of a firehose for us here at NewsBusters as the liberal media have been sounding off nearly non-stop on former President Trump being found guilty on 34 felony counts. Managing Editor Curtis Houck and I pour out the media reactions into their respective buckets ranging from gleeful to a hunger for harsher punishments to a faux-sobriety that everyone can see through. Houck notes that the faux-sobriety bucket was occupied by the likes of CBS’s Special Report where the panel of anchors and correspondents opined on the “extraordinary” moment America could herself in and the “enormous gravity” of the situation. In that bucket, I include CNN’s Jake Tapper who has a personal hatred of Trump but pretended like he was dispassionate about the outcome of the case. I also point out that CNN legal analyst Karen Friedman Agnifilo soiled their coverage with the contents of the second bucket: the hunger for the harshest punishment. As we discussed, Friedman Agnifilo was joined by the Cackling Coven of ABC’s The View who call for Trump to be sent to Rikers Island and anything short of a prison sentence was somehow special treatment. As for the third bucket, MSNBC was treating it like a swimming pool. We discuss the blog written by NewsBusters Analyst Alex Christy about the far-left cable outlet waxing poetic about the verdict. This podcast is chalked full of treats, like Christy’s peace about many liberal outlets falling for a dramatic and buffoonish Trump supporter who turned out to be a phony. Take a listen for the rest! Enjoy the podcast below or wherever you listen to podcasts.

NB Blog Feed

The View Was 'Leaking' in Excitement After Trump Was Found Guilty, Want Prison

Friday’s edition of ABC’s The View was exactly what one expected it to be after former President Trump was found guilty on 34 felony counts. Between TMI admissions that they were “leaking” with excitement in the aisle of a store and pearl-clutching exasperations of how far America had fallen and the obligatory demands he be sent to prison, the Cackling Coven’s reactions had it all. From the get-go, things were out of the ordinary as moderator Whoopi Goldberg was on set. “Now, do not adjust your TV set. Yes, I'm here on a Friday. Because this is a very unique moment in history. That's why we're all at the table,” she announced, showing off all six co-hosts. With co-host Joy Behar telling her not to “choke” when announcing the news, Goldberg had to stifle a laugh and flubbed when she proclaimed Trump was a “confected” felon before correcting herself. She also uncharacteristically used Trump’s full name (Donald John Trump) instead of her usual “you-know-who.” According to Behar’s own admission, news of Trump’s conviction (via her smartwatch) left her so excited that her incontinence kicked in and she wet herself in the aisle of her local Costco: BEHAR: Well, my reaction I was at Costco buying ten boxes of Keurig coffee and my watch started to buzz and I got so excited I started leaking a little bit. [Laughter] But wait, this is what I had to say! GOLDBERG: So, you're the leaker. BEHAR: I'm the leaker.     Faux-Republican Ana Navarro self-diagnosed her reaction with schizophrenia: I really felt and still feel like I'm in a surrealist Fellini movie. Is this really happening? And I was schizophrenic because part of me was like, “yay” and part of me was like, “you know, this is really serious,” “yay,” “this is really serious,” now this is a man – “yay” – This is a man who made my life a living Hell for four years, has made the life of our country a living Hell for six years, so he deserves to be accountable. Pretend-independent Sara Haines lamented how she was going to explain all of this to her son. “Because to sit here as a parent or a teacher or an auntie or any leader in this and try to explain to your child that someone who could not vote in this country because they’re a convict could run and rule the country,” she bemoaned. “More questions are coming and I don't know if I’m ready for them, but it’s scary.”   Sara Haines says it's "scary" to think about how to explain to her kids how a felon who can't vote (Trump) could be allowed to run for president. pic.twitter.com/UG0IAF7dOq — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 31, 2024   On the more serious end, staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) proclaimed, “I felt like I won” and hinted that she had sources in the district attorney’s office that said they were going to try to get Trump sentenced to a year in prison. “And that is because when you spend a year in prison in New York or under, you serve in Rikers Island,” Hostin boasted. She was also eager to see Trump inevitably fail his probation check-ins when he got out and be sent back: And finally very, very quickly. When you violate parole, there's something called a VOP, a violation of probation hearing. You have to show up to probation. A man with a temperament of a toddler cannot withstand the -- all of the things that you would have to do to be on probation and that means he could be sent BACK to Rikers!   She also looks forward to Trump violating his parole and being sent back to Rikers after his prison sentence: "a man with a temperament of a toddler cannot withstand all of the things that you would have to do to be on probation and that means he could be sent back to Rikers!" pic.twitter.com/hx3aSnCpd2 — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 31, 2024   Further, Goldberg chimed in with a common refrain among some in the liberal media that anything less than prison time would be Trump getting special treatment: But I want the judge to give him six months. Can I tell you why and then you tell me everything? I want him to give him six months, because one of the things that we're hearing from all these young men that we've been talking to is that they love him because he has no consequences. He's a man -- they keep talking about how manly he is. He doesn't have to do anything -- And I feel like if we're going to treat this man who used to be president like everybody else, you're convicted of felonies, you got to do a little bit of time and then you have to say to the judge, “You know, I did this, I'm sorry.” He has -- you know, this is what you would all have to do if you were trying to get out. She was also hoping that Merchan wouldn’t give Trump any time to prepare and send him straight to prison after sentencing. “He could say, ‘Yeah, you're going to do this and you're going in tomorrow,’” she declared, pretending to the judge. Faux-conservative co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin was nervous that the conviction would give Trump an extra push to win the election and he “get away.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 31, 2024 11:02:29 a.m. Eastern WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Now, do not adjust your TV set. Yes, I'm here on a Friday. Because this is a very unique moment in history. That's why we're all at the table. [Cheers and applause] So, I'm going to say something you've never ever heard me say before, but [dramatic pause and stifled laugh] Donald John Trump [dramatic pause] JOY BEHAR: Don't choke. [Cheers] GOLDBERG: Is a confected – convicted felon. [Cheers and applause] (…) 11:05:09 a.m. Eastern BEHAR: Well, can I say one thing? GOLDBERG: Yeah, what was your reaction? BEHAR: Well, my reaction I was at Costco buying ten boxes of Keurig coffee and my watch started to buzz and I got so excited I started leaking a little bit. [Laughter] But wait, this is what I had to say! GOLDBERG: So, you're the leaker. BEHAR: I'm the leaker. (…) 11:07:33 a.m. Eastern ANA NAVARRO: I really felt and still feel like I'm in a surrealist Fellini movie. Is this really happening? And I was schizophrenic because part of me was like, “yay” and part of me was like, “you know, this is really serious,” “yay,” “this is really serious,” now this is a man – “yay” – This is a man who made my life a living Hell for four years, has made the life of our country a living Hell for six years, so he deserves to be accountable. (…) 11:09:49 a.m. Eastern SARA HAINES: I'm trying to be open and honest and teach him how to have his own opinions and things. And as I'm sitting there I'm thinking, “Thank God he asked me on Saturday or Sunday.” Because to sit here as a parent or a teacher or an auntie or any leader in this and try to explain to your child that someone who could not vote in this country because they’re a convict could run and rule the country. He understands criminal, he understands jail, he understands policemen. If you say man is doing this and try to explain how it's possible -- more questions are coming and I don't know if I’m ready for them, but it’s scary. (…) 11:10:49 a.m. Eastern SUNNY HOSTIN: I didn't feel somber! I felt like the Knicks won the tournament! I felt like America won! BEHAR: Yep. HOSTIN: I felt like New York won! I felt like the Manhattan DA's office won! I felt like I won! (…) 11:17:40 a.m. Eastern GOLDBERG: So, welcome back. These are the things that I wanted to ask y'all about because I want -- because this is great to see that our justice system can work. It does work because we haven't seen this for a while, and particularly with him. But, you know, the judge is going to have to sentence him and one of the things that's been bothering me is, I keep hearing all these pundits saying, “You know, he’s a first-time offender. You know, it's not going—”  And I'm thinking to myself, “Wait a minute, you got 175,000 cases where people are coming for you, so you're not a first-offender and wouldn't this go to the kind of habits that you have in terms of your rhetoric?” But I want the judge to give him six months. Can I tell you why and then you tell me everything? I want him to give him six months, because one of the things that we're hearing from all these young men that we've been talking to is that they love him because he has no consequences. He's a man -- they keep talking about how manly he is. He doesn't have to do anything -- And I feel like if we're going to treat this man who used to be president like everybody else, you're convicted of felonies, you got to do a little bit of time and then you have to say to the judge, “You know, I did this, I'm sorry.” He has -- you know, this is what you would all have to do if you were trying to get out. NAVARRO: Show remorse. GOLDBERG: Show remorse. HOSTIN: Can I answer that question because – BEHAR: So, lock him up basically at least. HOSTIN: -- I think it's a very important point. Judge Merchan has -- I think he has really done a good job in terms of keeping that courtroom together. I spent the morning speaking to someone in the Manhattan District Attorney’s office. They’re called street fighters. He believes they will recommend a one-year term in prison. And that is because when you spend a year in prison in New York or under, you serve in Rikers Island. Okay? [Applause] Also, I did some research. The other thing I'd like to say is the other reason that they will do this is because he has shown an utter disregard for our institutions. And prosecutors, when you are recommending a sentence, you are not just recommending a sentence so that they can be rehabilitated or so that they can be punished, you are sending a message to the community. GOLDBERG: Yes. HOSTIN: That this is not going to happen again. This is not okay. The other thing I want to say is that there's another thing that they will likely recommend is a six-month split. Six months at Rikers and then the rest, five years, 4 1/2 years of probation. That is under New York law. BEHAR: And six months at this table! [Laughter] HOSTIN: And finally very, very quickly. When you violate parole, there's something called a VOP, a violation of probation hearing. You have to show up to probation. A man with a temperament of a toddler cannot withstand the -- all of the things that you would have to do to be on probation and that means he could be sent BACK to Rikers! (…) 11:21:33 a.m. Eastern GOLDBERG: You know, one of the things that we always have to remember is the judge, this is at his discretion. He will make this decision. HOSTIN: Yes, it is. Yes, it is. GOLDBERG: He could say, yeah, you're going to do this and you're going in tomorrow. HOSTIN: And sentencing is July 11th. And I think that he has the chutzpa to do that. (…)

NB Blog Feed

CNNer Frets Trump Will Get Special Treatment and Not Be Sent to Prison

In the wake of the consequential ruling that saw former President Trump convicted on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, CNN’s tone was mostly sober as they went through the play-by-play of what happened in the courtroom and what procedures needed and were to unfold in the coming days, weeks, and months. However, legal analyst Karen Friedman Agnifilo had a pretty major concern: that Trump would get special treatment and not be imprisoned. She explained that Trump would have to “report to probation” so they could put together a “pre-sentencing report where they take certain information.” Included in that “certain information” was “whether or not he expresses remorse” for his crimes because Judge Juan Merchan factors that into his consideration for sentencing. According to her, anyone else not named “Trump” would “absolutely without a doubt” get thrown behind bars and he could get special treatment: If you removed the name Donald Trump from his consideration, and it was somebody who came before him pre-sentence that also had three open other felony indictments in three other jurisdictions in both state and federal court. He is somebody who has been convicted of 34 felony counts, was held in contempt ten times for disobeying Judge Merchan's orders. He would absolutely fall within that 10 to 30 percent who would be sentenced to prison. But because his name is Donald Trump, who knows what will happen. But those are the exact factors that any judge in New York State would take into consideration. And those are the people who are convicted of E felon - felonies that would go to prison.     “There are a wide range of options he could get up to four years,” she elaborated. Friedman Agnifilo also suggested that Trump could be sentenced to “do weekends in jail … where you literally report to jail for weekends.” On the lighter end, she said Trump could be sentenced to “probation. He could do community service where he has to pick up trash on the subways … He could do home arrest.” Citing her “30 years” working a district attorney’s office and having “seen hundreds of thousands of cases and sentences,” she was convinced that if Trump – a first-time, non-violent offender – got anything less than a prison sentence, he would be getting special treatment: And absolutely without a doubt, any other defendant who was similarly clearly situated to Donald Trump, who is not going to show remorse and who, I am sure, will push the bounds of the still-remaining gag order after this, we'll see what happens. But anyone else in that position would get - would get prison. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CNN’s The Situation Room May 30, 2024 6:08:40 p.m. Eastern (…) JAKE TAPPER: Karen, the sentencing process tell us more about that. KAREN FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO: Yes. So, what will happen is that Donald Trump will have to report to probation and probation will prepare what's called a pre-sentencing report where they take certain information and this is something they do in every case before sentencing. Certain information about him, including whether or not he expresses remorse because that is something that is normally taken into consideration for sentencing. When Judge [Juan] Merchan actually sentences any defendant, he takes many factors into consideration. If you removed the name Donald Trump from his consideration, and it was somebody who came before him pre-sentence that also had three open other felony indictments in three other jurisdictions in both state and federal court. He is somebody who has been convicted of 34 felony counts, was held in contempt ten times for disobeying Judge Merchan's orders. He would absolutely fall within that 10 to 30 percent who would be sentenced to prison. But because his name is Donald Trump, who knows what will happen. But those are the exact factors that any judge in New York State would take into consideration. And those are the people who are convicted of E felon - felonies that would go to prison. Now, he could he could – he could – There are a wide range of options he could get up to four years. He could also do weekends in jail there's – there's – that’s as option if Judge Merchan wanted to do that, where you literally report to jail for weekends. He could do probation. He could do community service where he has to pick up trash on the subways. JAMIE GANGEL: Could he do home arrest? FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO: He could do home arrest. Every option is on the table with a class-E felony like this. But I wanted to just put a perspective for people of what any other defendant – Because I worked in the DA's office for about 30 years. I've seen hundreds of thousands of cases and sentences, and those are the factors that would’ve gone into that equation. And absolutely without a doubt, any other defendant who was similarly clearly situated to Donald Trump, who is not going to show remorse and who, I am sure, will push the bounds of the still-remaining gag order after this, we'll see what happens. But anyone else in that position would get would get prison. (…)

NB Blog Feed

The View & Jill Biden: ‘We Will Lose All of Our Rights’ If GOP Get Elected!

The scent of desperation permeated the set of ABC’s The View on Wednesday as the liberal ladies teamed up with First Lady Jill Biden to shriek like banshees about how, if Republicans won in November and got to put another conservative justice on the Supreme Court, “We will lose all of our rights!” Co-host Joy Behar also shrilly vented to Biden about people questioning her husband’s mental acuity. Near the end of the second of three segments, Dr. Biden implored everyone to “think of the Supreme Court, for God's sake!” “Talk about things getting worse,” she added, “Can you imagine if we put any more Republicans on the Supreme Court?” “We’re finished,” Behar announced. Biden then fear mongered that “We will lose all of our rights” and got resounding agreement from moderator Whoopi Goldberg: BIDEN: So, we're talking about women's rights, gay rights, I mean, we will lose our rights and freedoms! GOLDBERG: Voting rights! BIDEN: Voting rights, yes! GOLDBERG: Voting rights. All of this is up at stake. Earlier in the first segment, Behar lamented that the American people didn’t trust President Biden’s mental fitness for office. She defended him by boasting about how he once told her he exercised “every day.” “Yes, every day,” the First Lady agreed.     “What do we have to do to tell people that the man is competent, alert, and doing the job and it's not about his age?” Behar raged. Ignoring all of Biden's senior moments, she lashed out at former President Trump, declaring: “The other one is doddering and doesn't remember anything and can't put a sentence together and has like brain farts in the middle of a paragraph and they go after Joe.” Biden suggested that the election was “not about age” because they were similar in age, but rather “about character.” Further in the interview, pretend independent Sara Haines shared her enthusiasm for how heavy CNN would be with their “guardrails” during the debate because they would have control of Trump’s microphone. “Donald Trump will gaslight, he over-talks,” she griped. Asked about “what is the strategy” her husband would be using, Biden laughably suggested that her husband doesn’t “scream” at anyone. “No, they built that in where they’re gonna turn off the mics so that somebody can't ramble or scream at somebody, you know, not that my husband would be the one doing that,” she asserted. But according to an Axios article from the summer of 2023, “Biden angrily yells, curse at aides in private.” “Behind closed doors, Biden has such a quick-trigger temper that some aides try to avoid meeting alone with him. Some take a colleague, almost as a shield against a solo blast,” national political reporter Alex Thompson wrote. Of course, faux-conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin was her usual useless self and didn’t push back on any of it. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 29, 2024 11:18:17-11:19:07 a.m. Eastern (…) JOY BEHAR: But I know, I have met him a couple of times. He seems right on top of it. I said last time he was here, “do you work out?” He said, “Yes. Every day.” JILL BIDEN: Yes, every day. BEHAR: What do we have to do to tell people that the man is competent, alert, and doing the job and it's not about his age? The other one is doddering and doesn't remember anything and can't put a sentence together and has like brain farts in the middle of a paragraph and they go after Joe. BIDEN: Well, you know - This is – This election is not about age because like you said -- I mean Donald Trump's going to be, what, 78? And Joe is 81. They're basically the same age. BEHAR: Right. BIDEN: But it’s about character. (…) 11:19:35-11:20:43 SARAH HAINES: Donald Trump will gaslight, he over talks- there are no guardrails. So- BEHAR: He stalks. HAINES: Yeah, well I happen to believe it's really important more than ever to have a debate with guardrails. What is the strategy that the president has going into this, any tips you’d have for a debate that we could pull off where we could actually hear our candidates? BIDEN: No, they built that in where they’re gonna turn off the mics so that somebody can't ramble or scream at somebody, you know, not that my husband would be the one doing that. And so, that's already been negotiated and, you know, I think -- but I think the American people deserve a debate because you need to see your choices. You need to see Trump and you need to see the President and you need to see the differences. And my husband -- and you're going to see how smart he is and the experience he has and then you'll see somebody who, like you're saying, I'm gonna use Joy's words, can't put a sentence together and everything is beautiful and it is wonderful- BEHAR: Tremendous. SUNNY HOSTIN: Bigly. BIDEN: Yeah, yeah tremendous. (…) 11:23:09-11:23:39 BIDEN: But we cannot take things for granted because they can – And think of the Supreme Court, for God's sake, talk about things getting worse. Can you imagine if we put any more Republicans on the Supreme Court? HOSTIN: No, no.

NB Blog Feed

Author John Grisham Fantasizes About Killing SCOTUS Justices 'Again'

Almost two years after a far-left extremist attempted to assassinate conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, ABC’s The View invited author John Grisham on the show to fantasize about a follow-up to The Pelican Brief where even more justices would be assassinated. Of course, the liberal ladies rushed to his defense. He also pushed long-debunked conspiracy theories about the 2000 election being decided by the court. Being that their guest had written about the Supreme Court in the past, co-host Joy Behar teed him up to give his two cents about the current media smear campaigns. “I mean, let's take the Supreme Court right now. A lot of people have issues with them. There are some scandals plaguing the Supreme Court. Do you have any thoughts on that and maybe write a book or make a movie out of that?” she wondered. “I wrote a great book called The Pelican Brief… In which two Supreme Court justices were assassinated,” he boasted (it was also turned into a movie in 1993). “You sure did!” staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) commended him. Seemingly inspired by Behar’s question about the current Supreme Court, Grisham then floated the idea of writing another book about justices getting assassinated, which immediately prompted the cast to jump to his defense: GRISHAM: And I thought about doing it again! BEHAR: No. No. No. No. [Crosstalk as they try to explain what he meant] WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Writing part two! He's talking about writing part two! GRISHAM: It's all fiction. HOSTIN: It's all fiction! GRISHAM: It’s all fiction. GOLDBERG: It’s all fiction! GRISHAM: Don't get upset. BEHAR: It's just fiction. It's made-up stories.     “The court has never looked this bad in my lifetime,” he proclaimed. “Some of the rulings, the ethical challenges…” Grisham dove into election denialism when he suggested the court started going “downhill in 2000 when five Republicans on the court chose to elect a president.” His debunked conspiracy theory got agreement from Behar as he doubled down on the false claim: BEHAR: Oh, yes. Al Gore. GRISHAM: That was the most political – Bush v. Gore and that's when it all started really going downhill. BEHAR: I agree with that. GRISHAM: The 5-4 decision and the court – it gets worse every term. It was a false claim because even with the court’s decision – for a case brought to them – George W. Bush had the votes to carry Florida. It was a fact even supported by a recount funded by the left-leaning The Miami Herald and USA Today. “So, I have no solution because you can't get rid of them,” Grisham added. “The solution is make them all retire at the age of 75. Every federal judge should have to retire at the age of 75.” And by total coincidence (not really), 75 was how old Justice Clarence Thomas was and how old Justice Samuel Alito would be next year. It’s worth noting that The View cast were among those in the liberal media who encouraged mobs of liberal radicals to assail the conservative justices at their homes and denounced calls for increased security after the assassination attempt. And a little over a year ago, far-left liberal extremist Jane Fonda was on the show and proposed “murder” as the final solution to the Pro-Life problem. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 29, 2024 11:50:36 a.m. Eastern (…) JOY BEHAR: You're art imitating life, really, I think is what you're doing. But life right now in a courtroom is getting a little scary. I mean, let's take the Supreme Court right now. A lot of people have issues with them. There are some scandals plaguing the Supreme Court. Do you have any thoughts on that and maybe write a book or make a movie out of that? JOHN GRISHAM: I wrote a great book called The Pelican Brief. SARA HAINES: Yes! SUNNY HOSTIN: You sure did! [Applause] BEHAR: Yep. GRISHAM: In which two Supreme Court justices were assassinated. BEHAR: I know. HOSTIN: Yes. GRISHAM: And I thought about doing it again! BEHAR: No. No. No. No. [Crosstalk as they try to explain what he meant.] WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Writing part two! He's talking about writing part two! GRISHAM: It's all fiction. HOSTIN: It's all fiction! GRISHAM: It’s all fiction. GOLDBERG: It’s all fiction! GRISHAM: Don't get upset. BEHAR: It's just fiction. It's made up stories. GRISHAM: The court has never looked this bad-- BEHAR: No. GRISHAM: -- in my lifetime. Some of the rulings, the ethical challenges, the -- It went downhill in 2000 when five Republicans on the court chose to elect a president. BEHAR: Oh, yes. Al Gore. GRISHAM: That was the most political – Bush v. Gore and that's when it all started really going downhill. BEHAR: I agree with that. GRISHAM: The 5-4 decision and the court – it gets worse every term. HOSTIN: Wow. GRISHAM: So, I have no solution because you can't get rid of them. The solution is make them all retire at the age of 75. Every federal judge should have to retire at the age of 75. BEHAR: How about term limits like everybody else? The president gets term limits. Why do they have these lifetime jobs? [Crosstalk] ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: I did want to ask about the book. (…)

NB Blog Feed

NewsBusters Podcast: Deconstructing ‘Detrans’ With Mary Margaret Olohan

Detrans: True Stories of Escaping the Gender Ideology Cult is out Tuesday and we spoke with its author — 2023 MRC Bulldog Award winner and Daily Signal senior writer Mary Margaret Olohan — about what she’s discovered in speaking with several young men and women who had fallen victim to transgender ideology. We also discussed the Orwellian doublespeak in media style guides from groups like GLAAD and the Human Rights Campaign and received an update on the many lawsuits filed against allegedly unethical medical providers. One of the country’s most connected and esteemed pro-life reporters, Olohan has spent years accruing sources and cultivating relationships with Americans the liberal media ignore on topics such as abortion, the Catholic Church, culture, education, freedom, life, protecting children, and, as we discussed, defending the simple fact that men are men and women are women. After the interview, we discussed our takeaways from the book. Nick pointed out the unethical nature of the apparent psychiatrist-to-hormone/surgery pipeline, which industry professionals bragged about as very lucrative. He also highlighted their insistence that transitioning was a silver bullet to treat gender dysphoria. As for Curtis, he observed how the book points to the high correlation between autism spectrum disorder (or ASD, which sometimes goes undiagnosed), the deceitful pull of transgenderism, and the lack of mental health resources for treating children with ASD or other developmental challenges.

NB Blog Feed

He’s ‘Trash’: The View Tries to Pressure Radio Host to Endorse Biden

For the second time in a week, the liberal ladies of The View were told to go pound sand by a guest after they tried to pressure them into becoming a shill for President Biden’s reelection effort like they were. On Wednesday’s show, they spoke with radio host Charlamagne the God and wanted him to do more for Biden than say former President Trump was a danger to democracy and unfit for office. Proclaiming she wanted the conversation to “get real,” staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) decried Charlamagne for not endorsing Biden this time around: Now, you have a massive platform reaching millions of listeners – and you and I have talked about it before – you endorsed Joe Biden back in 2020, but this time around you say you're not going to endorse anybody. Charlamagne, now is not the time in my opinion to sit this one out! “I didn’t say that. I never said I was sitting it out,” Charlamagne shot back. “I'm definitely voting on November, but what I like to focus on issues not individuals…”     Hostin interrupted and continued to harangue their guest about not endorsing their candidate (Click “expand”): HOSTIN: But why not endorse? CHARLAMAGNE: Huh? HOSITN: Why not endorse Biden? CHARLAMAGNE: Because if I'm sitting here telling my listeners that you have somebody out there who is a threat to democracy, you have somebody out is there who said they want to, you know, suspend the Constitution to overthrow the results of an election; and you saw this person try to lead an attempted coup of this country and I'm telling people this guy is a threat to democracy, have you ever read "Project 25." There's only two candidates out there. So, if I'm saying that about this individual, the choice is clear, right? And I – [Applause] And I've seen you do this on The View before. I saw y’all do this to Killer Mike when he was on The View… “Why do y'all need us to say this if we don't feel comfortable saying it?” he wanted to know. Moderator Whoopi Goldberg interjected to explain “It's not that we need you to say it but other folks need to hear…” Without evidence, Goldberg whined that the media was somehow not helping Biden out enough. She asserted that “getting facts out through the media has been very -- seems to be very difficult…” “I feel like I've just spewed some facts,” Charlamagne scoffed; drawing swift rebuke from Goldberg and Hostin: GOLDBERG: Yes, but we need you to do it on your show. HOSTIN: Yes, but an endorsement from you will matter. “Well, the reality is I think both candidates are trash,” Charlamagne announced. “I am going to vote in November and I'm going to vote my best interest and I'm going to vote who I think can preserve democracy. So, if I think both are trash and don't feel like endorsing one, would you rather me endorse the individual or endorse the fact that we need to go out here and protect democracy?” At one point, he noted that “it feels like [Biden’s] base is pretty pissed off at him for a number of reasons” and that it could hurt his chances of getting reelected. “Help him out! Help him out!” Hostin shouted at him. Charlamagne laughed and asked: “Help him out by doing what?” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 22, 2024 11:36:58 a.m. Eastern (…) SUNNY HOSTIN: Let’s get real. Now, you have a massive platform reaching millions of listeners – and you and I have talked about it before – you endorsed Joe Biden back in 2020, but this time around you say you're not going to endorse anybody. Charlamagne, now is not the time in my opinion to sit this one out! CHARLAMAGNE THA GOD: I didn’t say that. I never said I was sitting it out. HOSTIN: What you going to do? CHARLAMAGNE: I'm definitely voting on November, but what I like to focus on issues not individuals, like, you know, when you have – HOSTIN: But why not endorse? CHARLAMAGNE: Huh? HOSITN: Why not endorse Biden? CHARLAMAGNE: Because if I'm sitting here telling my listeners that you have somebody out there who is a threat to democracy, you have somebody out is there who said they want to, you know, suspend the Constitution to overthrow the results of an election; and you saw this person try to lead an attempted coup of this country and I'm telling people this guy is a threat to democracy, have you ever read "Project 25." There's only two candidates out there. So, if I'm saying that about this individual, the choice is clear, right? And I – [Applause] And I've seen you do this on The View before. I saw y’all do this to Killer Mike when he was on The View and Killer Mike literally sat here and said, “Hey, you know, I supported Keisha Lance Bottoms, I supported Ralph Warnock, I supported Jon Ossoff in Georgia.” He said, “you should support the people that I've supported -- You should support the person who the people I supported are supporting.” That's y'all opportunity to say, “Well, clearly, he's talking about President Biden.” Why do y'all need us to say this if we don't feel comfortable saying it? WHOOPI GOLDBERG: No. No. It's not that we need you to say it but other folks need to hear because, you know, one of the things -- I'm sorry, I just jumped you. I’m sorry. But one of the things that we've been talking about is the fact that getting facts out through the media has been very -- seems to be very difficult, because -- CHARLAMAGNE: I feel like I've just spewed some facts. GOLDBERG: Yes, but we need you to do it on your show. HOSTIN: Yes, but an endorsement from you will matter. CHARLAMAGNE: Well, the reality is I think both candidates are trash. So, because I'm -- but I am going to vote in November and I'm going to vote my best interest and I'm going to vote who I think can preserve democracy. So, if I think both are trash and don't feel like endorsing one, would you rather me endorse the individual or endorse the fact that we need to go out here and protect democracy? ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: By the way, I think it's incredibly powerful to use your platform just to draw the contrast. I actually tend to agree that I don't think an endorsement is somehow more powerful than reminding folks the other person tried to overturn our democracy. That breaks through. But I got to ask you, because you're kind of one of these, we call them double haters. I don't like to – use the phrase. CHARLAMAGNE: Double haters? FARAH GRIFFIN: Double haters. Like not thrilled with Biden or Trump. HOSTIN: I’ve never heard of that! [Crosstalk] CHARLAMAGNE: I thought that was just being called an American nowadays if you look at the polls. People don't seem to be too pleased with either one of them. FARAH GRIFFIN: I’m right there with you. You've called this a race between crooks, cowards, and the couch. CHARLAMAGNE: That’s right. FARAH GRIFFIN: And Democrats are losing the messaging game. CHARLAMAGNE: Well, let’s be clear about who I say are the crooks. I say Republicans are the crooks, I say Democrats are the cowards, and I say the couch is voter apathy. And I feel like, you know, right now it looks like voter apathy may win. But who’s fault is that? It that our fault or is it the candidates? FARAH GRIFFIN: Well, I'm curious at this juncture, six months out, who do you think wins? CHARLAMAGNE: Oh, I have no idea. I mean, that's like -- it's a toss-up at this point. I really don't know. I think the person who goes out there and probably energizes their base the best at this point. And, you know, when you look at somebody like President Biden, it feels like his base is pretty pissed off at him for a number of reasons. HOSTIN: Help him out! Help him out! CHARLAMAGNE: [Laughter] Help him out by doing what? (…)

NB Blog Feed

Hostin Blasts WNBA Star Caitlin Clark for Being ‘White’ and ‘Pretty’

If beauty is only skin deep, that explains the ugly heart of the staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host of ABC’s The View, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners). During Wednesday’s show, she lashed out at WNBA star Caitlin Clark “because she's white, because she's attractive,” and because she’s not a lesbian. Hostin, who sits on the board of advocates for the WNBA’s Players Association, seemed to resent that Clark was poised to bring a bunch of new fans and sponsorship opportunities to the league that WNBA star Brittney Griner couldn’t and chalked it up to her skin color because of it: At all. And the WNBA started in 1996. First games played in 1997. It's 2024, and we're just really now talking about it and so if Caitlin Clark is the vehicle that will bring this sport that I have loved so much and so long to little 5-year-old girls playing in Harlem, I say yes, bravo. I have no problem with that. [Applause] With that being said, I do think that there is a thing called pretty privilege. There is a thing called white privilege. There is a thing called tall privilege. And we have to acknowledge that, and so part of it is about race because if you think about the Brittney Griners of the world, you know.     I don’t know Sunny, maybe people don’t like her because of her anti-American comments. Just a thought. The chronically bitter View host doubled down and deduced that Clark was able to do all this because she was white, pretty, and straight. “But I do think that she is more relatable to more people because she's white, because she's attractive, and unfortunately, there still is that stigma against the LGBTQ+ community,” she declared. Hostin suggested that one of the reasons people didn’t like the WNBA was because “70 percent of the WNBA is black,” which was a ridiculous claim because it’s a similar statistic for the NBA. “And we have to do something about that stigma in this country. I think that people have a problem with basketball-playing women that are lesbians. Who cares?! They are great athletes!” she screeched. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 23, 2024 11:06:35 AM (…) SUNNY HOSTIN: You know I've been a basketball fan since I can remember. I played basketball with my dad in Harlem when I was 5 years old. So, I remember loving the game, and the game not necessarily loving women back. Right? WHOOPI GOLDBERG: At all. HOSTIN: At all. And the WNBA started in 1996. First games played in 1997. It's 2024, and we're just really now talking about it and so if Caitlin Clark is the vehicle that will bring this sport that I have loved so much and so long to little 5-year-old girls playing in Harlem, I say yes, bravo. I have no problem with that. [Applause] With that being said, I do think that there is a thing called pretty privilege. There is a thing called white privilege. There is a thing called tall privilege. And we have to acknowledge that, and so part of it is about race because if you think about the Brittney Griners of the world, you know. Why did she have to go to play in Russia? GOLDBERG: Because they wouldn't pay her! HOSTIN: Because they wouldn't pay her. GOLDBERG: Because they wouldn’t pay. Not because she was black, but because they didn't believe in the WNBA. HOSTIN: Well this is part of my point. So now, Caitlin Clark is bringing this money, these sponsorships— GOLDBERG: We hope. HOSTIN: We hope, into the league and other players will benefit from it. But I do think that she is more relatable to more people because she's white, because she's attractive, and unfortunately, there still is that stigma against the LGBTQ+ community. 70 percent of the WNBA is black; a third of the players are in the LGBTQ+ community. And we have to do something about that stigma in this country. I think that people have a problem with basketball-playing women that are lesbians. Who cares?! They are great athletes! (…)

NB Blog Feed

Networks Rally to Run New Alito Conspiracy Theory Up the Flagpole

The liberal media seem determined to declare anything a “symbol” of January 6 if they could use it to smear a conservative U.S. Supreme Court justice and manipulate upcoming rulings involving former President Trump. That much was clear during the Thursday morning newscasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC when they rallied to try to run a new conspiracy theory about Justice Samuel Alito up the flagpole to force him to recuse himself. All three networks leaned heavily on a The New York Times report that Alito’s vacation home sported the Revolutionary War-era “An Appeal to Heaven” flag. But since two of the flags were seen during the riot at the Capitol, suddenly it was the “symbol” every “insurrectionist” was rallied behind. It was the second such “symbol” the media had declared to have discovered in as many weeks amid their effort to remove Alito. NBC Today co-anchor Savannah Guthrie gave away the game during her lead into the segment. “Also this morning, the calls are growing louder for Supreme Court Justice Alito to recuse himself from any cases related to January 6. This comes after another image has surfaced showing a second controversial flag on display at one of his properties,” she declared. Senior Washington correspondent Hallie Jackson boasted: “We are seeing a fresh chorus of criticism from Democrats this morning…” She quoted Senator Dick Durban (D-IL), who claimed said the flag was, “Yet another example of apparent ethical misconduct.” “The flag, rooted in the Revolutionary War, has more recently become a symbol of support for Christian nationalism and for Donald Trump,” she added, without evidence. Interestingly, the “insurrectionist” Appeal to Heaven flag could be seen on the desk of the Libertarian character Ron Swanson on the NBC comedy Parks and Recreation. Swanson was certainly not a "Christian nationalist."     Over on ABC’s Good Morning America, co-anchor and former Clinton lackey George Stephanopoulos suggested that the flags were really only ever aligned with the rioters: And there are new questions and criticism for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito after The New York Times published pictures of a flag associated with the January 6 insurrection flying outside his summer home. This comes after the revelation last week that another flag associated with January 6 had been flying at his primary home. ABC chief justice correspondent Pierre Thomas also took part in the conspiratorial highlighting of the flag among the rioters and downplayed its long history before January 6: Take a look at these images and you’ll see both flags clearly on display on January 6th as the mayhem unfolded. It's unclear who posted the pine tree flag and what kind, if any, statement was being made. The pine tree flag date back to the Revolutionary War and was flown on war ships commissioned under George Washington. But in recent years, the symbol has been associated with Christian nationalism. “This morning, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito faces new calls to remove himself from cases tied to the former president and the assault on the capitol,” proclaimed CBS Mornings co-anchor and Democratic Party donor Gayle King, also broadcasting their intent with covering the story. “The New York Times reports a second flag used by January 6th protestors was seen flying at Alito's vacation home.” January 6-obsessed correspondent Scott MacFarlane accidentally tipped their hand in showing how much of a non-story it was when he admitted that, “the Appeal to Heaven flag also hangs outside the office of Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson.” If an indisputable “symbol” of the “insurrection” was being flown by the Speaker of the House all this time, why was this the first time it was mentioned? And why didn’t the other networks mention it? It appears they’re taking swings without being educated on the matter. Do you know which flag was being flown at the Capitol in larger quantities than both the upside-down and Appeal to Heaven flags? Normal American flags. How long until the liberal media condemn them too? Too late. The transcripts are below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America May 23, 2024 7:09:17 a.m. Eastern GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: And there are new questions and criticism for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito after The New York Times published pictures of a flag associated with the January 6 insurrection flying outside his summer home. This comes after the revelation last week that another flag associated with January 6 had been flying at his primary home. Chief justice correspondent Pierre Thomas has details. Good morning, Pierre. PIERRE THOMAS: George, good morning. Everyone knows Justice Alito as a staunch conservative, but this morning more questions are being raised about whether he has political bias with two critical January 6 cases now before the U.S. Supreme Court. [Cuts to video] This morning, only days after it was revealed that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito flew a flag associated with January 6th rioters at his Northern Virginia home, he's facing new questions about another flag tied to supporters of President Trump. The New York Times publishing images of a pine tree flag outside of Alito’s New Jersey beach home last summer with the words “Appeal to Heaven.” Like the upside-down flag, which had become synonymous with the Stop the Steal movement and flown in Alito's home, the pine tree flag was carried by some pro-Trump supporters on January 6th as the Capitol was attacked. Take a look at these images and you’ll see both flags clearly on display on January 6th as the mayhem unfolded. It's unclear who posted the pine tree flag and what kind, if any, statement was being made. The pine tree flag date back to the Revolutionary War and was flown on war ships commissioned under George Washington. But in recent years, the symbol has been associated with Christian nationalism. Supreme Court justices are supposed to avoid the appearance of political bias and Democrats have already argued Alito should recuse himself from the January 6th cases now before the high court, including one which will resolve whether President Trump has immunity from prosecution. This week, Democrats pounced on Alito's upside-down flag controversy, raising questions about political bias. SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER: (D-NY): Look, I think what he did was really the wrong thing to do, and it casts some doubt on impartiality and I'm discussing with Senator Durbin where we should go from here. PIERRE: Alito has said the upside-down flag was placed at his home by his wife, who was in a dispute with a neighbor. [Cuts back to live] Justice Alito has yet to comment on the latest flag questions, though Supreme Court decisions on January 6th are expected in the coming days and weeks. Michael. MICHAEL STRAHAN: All right, Pierre. Thank you very much for that. CBS Mornings May 23, 2024 8:13:22 a.m. Eastern GAYLE KING: This morning, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito faces new calls to remove himself from cases tied to the former president and the assault on the capitol. The New York Times reports a second flag used by January 6th protestors was seen flying at Alito's vacation home. Scott McFarlane looks at the modern message of that Revolutionary War banner. [Cuts to video] SCOTT MACFARLANE: You can see the white and green Appeal to Heaven flag amid the rioters who surged into the Capitol January 6th. PROTESTORS: USA! USA! MACFARLANE: The siege helped make the flag a symbol of support for former President Trump and the conservative Christian nationalist movement. According to this New York Times report Wednesday, an Appeal to Heaven flag was photographed flying at the New Jersey vacation home of conservative Supreme Court Justice Sam Alito last summer. The report comes days after Alito acknowledged an upside-down U.S. flag, also associated with the January 6th attack and the Stop the Steal movement, flew outside his Virginia home days after the deadly Capitol riot. Alito argued he “had no involvement whatsoever in the flying of the flag” that was hung by his wife amid a dispute with neighbors. And recently, Alito argued free speech is under attack. [Cuts to speech] JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO: Troubled waters are slamming against some of our most fundamental principles. [Cuts to video] MACFARLANE: The controversy comes as the court is deciding if Trump should have immunity from prosecution, which led some Democrats to call for Justice Alito to recuse himself from those cases. [Cuts to Interview] SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-MAJ): What he did was the wrong thing to do and it casts some doubt on impartiality. [Cuts to Video] MACFARLANE: As the Appeal to Heaven flag also hangs outside the office of Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson. Johnson issued a statement in support writing he, “Has long appreciated the rich history of the flag as it was first used by General George Washington during the Revolutionary War. [Cuts to Live] Justice Alito has not responded to request for comment about this flag report. We do know that Senate Democrats want to vote on new Supreme Court ethics rules, but stands no chance of becoming law, Nate, without sufficient Republican support. NBC’s Today May 23, 2024 7:10:10 a.m. Eastern SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Also this morning, the calls are growing louder for Supreme Court Justice Alito to recuse himself from any cases related to January 6. This comes after another image has surfaced showing a second controversial flag on display at one of his properties. NBC's senior Washington correspondent Hallie Jackson has the story this morning. Hallie, good morning. HALLIE JACKSON: Hey Savanah, good morning. We are seeing a fresh chorus of criticism from Democrats this morning, and it comes as the Supreme Court is set to decide key cases this term related to the Capitol attack and election interference, including whether former President Trump is immune from prosecution for trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election. [Cuts to video] Another Supreme Court controversy this morning involving Justice Samuel Alito over a new report of a flag flying outside his New Jersey beach house. According to The New York Times the so-called “Appeal to Heaven” flag, a green pine tree on a white background. A symbol carried by some rioters outside the capitol on January 6th. You see it here and here. The Times citing three photographs it obtained from outside Alito's property from last summer, along with accounts from a half a dozen neighbors and passersby as well as this Google street view picture from last August. The flag, rooted in the Revolutionary War, has more recently become a symbol of support for Christian nationalism and for Donald Trump. But now, renewed calls from the Democratic Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee for Alito to recuse himself from cases related to the 2020 election. Calling the incident, “Yet another example of apparent ethical misconduct.” Other Democrats agree. SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-CT): At a very minimum, he has to recuse himself from these cases now coming before the court that will determine whether or not Trump is held accountable. SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE (D-RI): It really encapsulates all the problems we've had with this rogue Supreme Court and its refusal to accept any rule of law. JACKSON: It's the second time in less than a week Alito’s faced questions, after the Justice confirmed another provocative flag, an upside-down American flag, flew outside his Northern Virginia home in the days after January 6th. Telling The Times, "I had no involvement whatsoever in the flying of the flag” and that it was briefly placed by his wife in response to a neighbor's use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs. The upside-down flag, long considered a distress signal, but's been adopted by some Trump supporters backing the former President's election fraud lies. Some Republicans after that report dismissing calls for recusal. SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): I don't think he should be recused. I think it was a mistake, but leave it to them to explain it. [Cuts back to live] JACKSON: We should note here that Justice Alito did not respond to The Times’ request for comment and the Court did not respond to NBC News.

NB Blog Feed

MSNBC’s Ruhle: The Poors Should Shut Up, Wendy’s Has $3 Breakfast!

If your goal was to find some of the most tone-deaf analyses of how Americans were feeling about living under Bidenomics, look no further than MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle. After previously asserting that Americans’ “dirty little secret” was that they were weathering President Biden’s inflation just fine, she was back during Tuesday night’s The 11th Hour to tell the poors that they needed to shut up about not being able to afford basic necessities because Wendy’s was rolling out a $3 breakfast option. Ruhle started off fair enough by noting: “Consumers have been sounding off about price fatigue for a while now. And now, a new report from the Fed shows people are still struggling to cover day-to-day expenses even as inflation has slowed.” But she followed up by suggesting relief was in sight because – in addition to one store change lowering prices – some unhealthy fast food chains were coming out with cheap meals the poors could stuff in their mouths: But some big consumer brands are beginning to take action. Target says it is cutting prices on 5,000 essential items, things like milk, butter, pet food. Wendy's is now offering a $3 breakfast deal and rivals like McDonald's are offering lower-priced value meals. Maybe she was hoping the fatty food would muffle their whining.     She then brought on her “old friend,” President and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Austan Goolsbee and lamented to him that “we need an economic explainer” because “people are confused” and don’t understand “they are also doing quite well” financially. Goolsbee, a former economic advisor to President Obama, suggested “inflation slowed in 2023 actually, quite a lot…almost as much as it’s ever come down.” He falsely claimed, “we didn’t have a recession while that was happening, which was quite unusual.” He admitted that “prices are still higher than they were before” and noted he can still hear “people complaining about that.” Near the end of the interview, Ruhle wanted him to examine “the psyche of the American consumer” and diagnose what their deal was. According to Goolsbee, they were harshing his mellow with their bad “vibes”: RUHLE: Before we go, the psyche of the American consumer. Right? Lots of things that were not considered luxuries before, now are because things have gotten expensive. However, we have more purchasing power today than we did in 2019. What's going on with the American consumer psyche? GOOLSBEE: Like, the vibes! There’s never been a bigger difference between the vibes and the actual numbers than we’re facing right now. And I don't think we totally understand that. “And I don't think we totally understand that. Maybe it is rooted a little bit in, if you ask people how is your personal situation and they say pretty good. How is the national economy?” he gawked. Goolsbee did have a brush with sanity as he stated the obvious that inflation was “very unpopular.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: MSNBC’s The 11th Hour May 21, 2024 11:50:11 p.m. Eastern STEPHANIE RUHLE: Consumers have been sounding off about price-fatigue for a while now. And now, a new report from the Fed shows people are still struggling to cover day-to-day expenses even as inflation has slowed. But some big consumer brands are beginning to take action. Target says it is cutting prices on 5,000 essential items, things like milk, butter, pet food. Wendy's is now offering a $3 breakfast deal and rivals like McDonald's are offering lower-priced value meals. Here to discuss, an old friend of mine, Austan Goolsbee, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. We need an economic explainer. People are confused, they're exhausted, but they are also doing quite well. So, I want to start with prices. They’ve been an issue for everyone. What is your take when you hear about big consumer brands actually cutting prices? AUSTAN GOOLSBEE (president/CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago): Good! But, you've had inflation that got way too high in the U.S. and in other countries around the world. Incomes didn’t keep up with that. Now, inflation slowed in 2023 actually, quite a lot. Inflation came down almost as much as it’s ever come down and we didn’t have a recession while that was happening, which was quite unusual. But prices are still higher than they were before and so you see people complaining about that. (…) 11:54:33 p.m. Eastern RUHLE: Before we go, the psyche of the American consumer. Right? Lots of things that were not considered luxuries before, now are because things have gotten expensive. However, we have more purchasing power today than we did in 2019. What's going on with the American consumer psyche? GOOLSBEE: Like, the vibes! There’s never been a bigger difference between the vibes and the actual numbers than we’re facing right now. And I don't think we totally understand that. Maybe it is rooted a little bit in, if you ask people how is your personal situation and they say pretty good. How is the national economy? They don't like it at all. I think a lot of that comes from inflation being very unpopular and there is a bit of lag behind conditions. But like I say, it has these cross currents going. There are some things that are very strong in the economy. There are some things that are very aggravating in the economy, and that melts into a little bit of this vibe situation where people are more upset than you would think they would be when the unemployment rate is low and the economy is growing. (…)

NB Blog Feed

Maher Embarrasses Hostin With the FACTS of Hamas’s Hatred for Jews

Comedian Bill Maher completely embarrassed the staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host of ABC’s The View, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) on Tuesday with the facts of Hamas’s anti-Semitism while they spared over the Israel-Hamas War. Hostin repeatedly questioned if Maher cared about civilian lives, to which he left the audience stunned when he said the solution was to “stop attacking Israel.” Venting his frustrations with many on the progressive left, Maher lamented: “It's just astounding to me that they can't tell the good guys from the bad guys. I mean, just morally.”     He told them to “just live in [pre-war] Gaza for a day” and that Hamas would not tolerate their liberal values. “Trust me, you would go running and screaming and begging to live in Tel Aviv, a place that has your values,” he implored them. Maher called out people like Hostin who ridiculously claimed Israel was an “apartheid” state by noting the “gender apartheid” in Gaza “and a lot of majority Muslim countries around the world.” He even got support from co-hosts Joy Behar and Alyssa Farah Griffin on that point. Hostin then chimed in to spew the debunked statistic that most of the people killed in the war were innocent women and children. She tried to grill Maher with that false stat and the actions of hypocritical international organizations who target Israel, and Maher told her off: HOSTIN: Are you at all concerned about the innocent civilians that have been collectively punished and murdered, largely children and women? MAHER: Of course. HOSTIN: And are you at all concerned about the fact that the International Criminal Court just today issued a subpoena for Bibi Netanyahu. MAHER: Well, that's ridiculous, but it's a war. HOSTIN: Why? MAHER: Because it's a war and they were attacked and they're defending themselves. “So, Hamas needs to be destroyed because they are a terrorist organization who say openly that they want to commit genocide on the Jewish people, on the state of Israel. That's what ‘from the river to the sea’ means,” he explained to her. The history lesson continued with the comedian recalling that Hamas had “started five wars since they were given that land back. They could have chosen to turn that place into any place they wanted to and they took a lot of money that they took from the international community and they spent it on bombs and guns and building tunnels.” Hostin was embarrassed and backed into a corner, so she defaulted to asking again if her guest was “concerned for the innocent lives?” Of course, the implication was that his impassioned defense of Israel meant he wasn’t. “Of course, everybody is,” he exclaimed. “But that's what happens in a war. Here's a way to stop that: Stop attacking Israel!” With Maher staring down Hostin, there was a moment of silence as the cast and the audience sat stunned before the latter erupted in applause. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 21, 2024 11:38:56 a.m. Eastern (…) SUNNY HOSTIN: Well, I had a different question but it struck me that in the first segment you used the term “woke” and you said that woke is what was sort of ruining everything and I know that you're -- BILL MAHER: No, I didn't say ruining everything. I said that's why Trump could get re-elected. HOSTIN: Trump could get re-elected. So – The term woke has been, in my view, co-opted by the right and weaponized and bastardized. And so, I was surprised to hear you use the term, because historically as you know – cause I think you’re quite brilliant – that woke is a word used by the black community to note that we must be aware of social injustices. MAHER: But words migrate. HOSTIN: Why is that a bad thing? MAHER: It's not a bad thing and originally that was actually a great thing. Alert to injustice. Who is not for that? But words do migrate. Now, I'll use any term you want. HOSTIN: Okay. MAHER: Because maybe that is a word that’s triggering so let's not use that word. I don’t now, want to call it the super-far-left? But don't tell me the left. HOSTIN: Or maybe the super-far-right. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN (to Hostin): Well, he's talking about the left. JOY BEHAR (to Hostin): But they’re not woke. MAHER: But we talked about that. I think we agree about the danger of the super-far-right and, you know, I can't say it enough. I think they're the bigger threat. But don't tell me that the left hasn't changed? I mean, I'm old enough to remember when it was the conservatives who hated the Jews. BEHAR: Yeah. MAHER: Okay? That was a joke, but – [Laughter] FARAH GRIFFIN: Too dark. Too dark. MAHER: Maybe it is but it's true. I mean, you know, if I had any doubt that I was right about the change that's happened to the left, watching people protest for a terrorist organization like Hamas, that straightened me up pretty quick. (…) 11:41:05 a.m. Eastern MAHER: It's just astounding to me that they can't tell the good guys from the bad guys. I mean, just morally. I mean, let me tell you, if you're for Hamas, just live in Gaza for a day. And I'm not talking about while the war is on. I mean before the war. Trust me, you would go running and screaming and begging to live in Tel Aviv, a place that has your values. I mean, women have no -- I mean, this is a show watched by a lot of women. Women have no rights in this place, and a lot of majority Muslim countries around the world. I mean, there's no equal rights as far as speech, dress, opportunities for education. BEHAR: Nothing. MAHER: Reproductive rights, freedom from sexual violence, freedom from sexual harassment. FARAH GRIFFIN: The LGBTQ community. MAHER: You -- that too. But you throw around the term “apartheid,” there is a gender apartheid in a lot of the world where women are second-class citizens, at best. HOSTIN: Are you at all concerned about the innocent civilians that have been collectively punished and murdered, largely children and women? MAHER: Of course. HOSTIN: And are you at all concerned about the fact that the International Criminal Court just today issued a subpoena for Bibi Netanyahu. MAHER: Well, that's ridiculous, but it's a war. HOSTIN: Why? MAHER: Because it's a war and they were attacked and they're defending themselves. Now, this is a war. Do you think Hamas needs to be destroyed? This is the question. HOSTIN: Yes. MAHER: You do. HOSTIN: Yes. FARAH GRIFFIN: So, how could they do that with a ceasefire? MAHER: All right. So, Hamas needs to be destroyed because they are a terrorist organization who say openly that they want to commit genocide on the Jewish people, on the state of Israel. That's what “from the river to the sea” means. Okay? And they say it very openly. They say we've did this attack. They’ve attacked Israel five times. They’ve started five wars since they were given that land back. They could have chosen to turn that place into any place they wanted to and they took a lot of money that they took from the international community and they spent it on bombs and guns and building tunnels. So, if they need to be destroyed, how do we do that? It's a war. I don't know how to do that and you don't know how to do that. I assume – HOSTIN: But are you concerned for the innocent lives? MAHER: Of course, everybody is. But that's what happens in a war. Here's a way to stop that: Stop attacking Israel! [Silence then applause] BEHAR: And stop calling for the annihilation of Israel and all the Jews. They're calling for the annihilation of the Jews. And so, you can't really defend that on the other side very easily. MAHER: No, you can’t. (…)

NB Blog Feed

Behar Admits She Self-Censors Criticism of Biden Lest It Elect Trump

The cast of ABC’s The View has made it clear for a while now that they’re in the tank for President Biden. But while they denounced even the Democrats who challenged him, co-host Joy Behar admitted to guest comedian Bill Maher on Tuesday that she self-censors her criticism of Biden because she was afraid she could help elect former President Trump by pointing out the truth. Behar was in a bit of disbelief that Maher would dare to call out “the crazy stuff on the left” and admits she was afraid to do so: BEHAR: I'm nervous about saying anything against Biden because I feel – not that I have so much power and you have some more than I do obviously, but -- MAHER: oh, I don't know about that. BEHAR: Are you afraid that you might influence the people who are on the fence? Maher argued that if you don’t call it like you see it, “you lose all credibility.” “My bond with my audience has always been I don't pull a punch. My bond with my audience is you're not going to like everything I say but you know I'm saying what I really think is true,” he said. He went on to lament that “Biden just presents as old. It's not really fair.” Recalling a recent speech Biden gave, he described the President as “cadaver-like.” “But his brain is good. He’s still great,” Behar clownishly pushed back.     Earlier in the show, before Maher was on the set, Behar proclaimed that people who wore MAGA hats should “put a swastika on the hat.” Maher decried the idea because it involved hating half the country and he didn’t want to do that: Look, I'm not going to defend Donald Trump ever but I would never say that we should put the swastika on the cap because I think you can hate Donald Trump. You can't hate everybody who likes him. It's half the country. I don't want to live in that country. I don't want to live in the country where I hate half the country. And I don’t hate half the country. “How dare you disagree with me in public,” Behar quipped. Coming to Behar’s defense later in the show, Maher said: “Joy is a wonderful human being and she should not be afraid that people are going to attack her because she said the thing about the swastika on the cap. She does not think that all -- as you said to me in the break, you do not think that all the people who are for Trump are Nazis.” Behar said that she didn’t think all of Trump’s supporters were Nazis, but she wanted “them to pay attention to words like ‘vermin’ and ‘poisoning the blood.’ And the Third Reich. That’s all. That's really what I'm asking.” “You can hate Trump. You can't hate everybody who likes him. It is half the country,” Maher reiterated. “I have some in my family. I don't think they're Nazis,” Behar added. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 21, 2024 11:09:43 a.m. Eastern (…) JOY BEHAR: By the way out there, that hat that you keep wearing – that red hat that says Make America Great Again, that tells people that you go along with this so might as well put a swastika on the hat. (…) 11:27:26 a.m. Eastern BEHAR: I'm nervous about saying anything against Biden because I feel, not that I have so much power and you have some more than I do obviously, but -- BILL MAHER: oh, I don't know about that. BEHAR: Are you afraid that you might influence the people who are on the fence? MAHER: I think you lose all credibility. I do. My bond with my audience has always been I don't pull a punch. My bond with my audience is you're not going to like everything I say but you know I'm saying what I really think is true. BEHAR: Right. MAHER: And that's – [Applause] Okay. And, look, Biden just presents as old. It's not really fair. BEHAR: No. MAHER: Because he's almost the same age -- Trump is almost the same age as him but Trump doesn't present that way. You look at somebody right away, you can kind of just sum them up. We are not young, but we don't present as old? Biden does. I saw him yesterday making that speech. I mean, I'm sorry, he's cadaver-like. BEHAR: But his brain is good. He’s still great. (…) 11:30:00 a.m. Eastern MAHER: Look, I'm not going to defend Donald Trump ever but I would never say that we should put the swastika on the cap because I think you can hate Donald Trump. You can't hate everybody who likes him. It's half the country. I don't want to live in that country. I don't want to live in the country where I hate half the country. And I don’t hate half the country. BEHAR: How dare you disagree with me in public. [Applause] [Laughter] (…) 11:43:46 a.m. Eastern MAHER: Joy is a wonderful human being and she should not be afraid that people are going to attack her because she said the thing about the swastika on the cap. She does not think that all -- as you said to me in the break, you do not think that all the people who are for Trump are Nazis. BEHAR: No, I don't. I don’t. I just want them to pay attention to words like “vermin” and “poisoning the blood.” MAHER: Of course. BEHAR: And the third Reich. That’s all. That's really what I'm asking. MAHER: They see Trump as a comedian. They see him as a clown who says crazy things. BEHAR: They saw Hitler like that. MAHER: Right, okay, but – You can hate Trump. You can't hate everybody who likes him. It is half the country. BEHAR: I have some in my family. I don't think they're Nazis. (…)

NB Blog Feed

ABC Ditches ‘Hardline’ Label After Confirmed Death of Iranian President

Over the weekend, the world was spared the rule of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi (a.k.a. The Butcher of Tehran) after the helicopter he was riding in became a smear on a mountainside in northern Iran. But after accurately calling him a “hardliner” during Sunday’s World News Tonight coverage of the search for the crash site, ABC’s Good Morning America ditched the label after his death was confirmed Monday morning. Foreign correspondent Lama Hasan delivered the report for World News Tonight. Nearing the end of the pre-recorded portion, Hasan noted: “Elected in 2021, President Raisi, a hardliner, is the second-most powerful figure in Iran. Seen as the top contender for replacing Ayatollah Khamenei.” While she did accurately use a negative label to describe Raisi, Hasan omitted the darker nature of his presidency. “Now, Raisi is an extremely divisive president. He was elected in the lowest turnout in the country's history. He’s a conservative hardliner who’s overseen a violent crackdown on dissent,” correspondent Ian Lee said for CBS Weekend News. Over on NBC Nightly News, correspondent Keir Simmons recalled that anchor Lester Holt pressed Raisi last year on the Americans held hostage by Iran. “[Iran’s] leadership has seen a brutal crackdown during mass protests after the death of a 22-year-old Iranian woman,” he noted.     But even that simple mention of “hardliner” was apparently too much information to share for Good Morning America since correspondent Britt Clennett dropped its use during her Monday report. “President Raisi took office in 2021, the country’s second-most powerful figure was considered a top contender for one day replacing Ayatollah Khamenei,” she stated. The only other political context she added around Raisi’s demise was that “The crash comes as turmoil grips the Middle East with the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas, the militant group backed by Iran.” Simmons kept the pressure on during NBC’s Today. “Ebrahim Raisi ran a government at launched missiles and drones at Israel just last month, and in 2022, brutally crushed protests over the death of a young woman Mahsa Amini,” he recounted. Even CBS senior correspondent Holly Williams had criticism of The Butcher of Tehran. “President Raisi took office in 2021 after an election that excluded more moderate candidates,” she said. “In 2022, his government carried out a deadly crackdown on mass protests by women, many tearing off their compulsory Islamic head coverings as they demanded greater freedom.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America May 20, 2024 7:06:28 a.m. Eastern MICHAEL STRAHAN:  And we are going to turn now to the breaking news overnight. Iranian President Raisi was declared dead, as well as the foreign minister, after their helicopter crashed Sunday. Foreign correspondent Britt Clennett has the story for us, at this crucial time in the region. Good morning, Britt. BRITT CLENNETT: Good morning, Michael. In a region where tensions are already running high, the news that Iran's President Ebrahim Raisi was killed in a helicopter crash along with the foreign minister. [Cuts to video] This morning, Iranian officials confirming the death of President Ebrahim Raisi, Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian, and several others after their helicopter crashed in Iran's mountainous northwest, forced to make a hard landing in heavy fog. Iranian Red Crescent rescue teams seen in new video from Iranian state media carrying bodies from the crash site. Drone footage released by the IRC shows the crash site on a steep wooded hillside. Iranian state TV broadcasting from what appears to be the charred wreckage. A massive search operation to locate the helicopter lasted more than 12 hours. Hampered by poor weather. Raisi seen in the helicopter with other top officials coming from the border with Azerbaijan, where he just opened a new dam he just opened. Images show the helicopter leaving the site. COL. STEPHEN GANYARD (UMSC, Ret.): We don't know if it was some sort of a mechanical issue. But whenever we see mountains, bad weather, low visibility, the first cause that we look to is probably weather-induced mishaps. CLENNETT: President Raisi took office in 2021, the country’s second-most powerful figure was considered a top contender for one-day replacing Ayatollah Khamenei. The crash comes as turmoil grips the Middle East with the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas, the militant group backed by Iran. [Cuts back to live] And Iran's supreme leader, he has expressed his condolences. He's appointed the first vice president to serve as the country's acting president until elections are held in the next 50 days. George? GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Okay, Britt. Thanks.