It's pretty hysterical how the left wants to set the rules for civil discourse over presidential candidates' health and habits.To them, it's really bad to talk, and virtually evil to speculate, about Hillary Clinton's demonstrations of frailty and other possible illnesses seen during the campaign, which are certainly not limited to her "medical situation" at the 9/11 anniversary ceremony two weeks ago. They think that responsible adults shouldn't engage in that ... with Democrats. But let Donald Trump show up at the first of the three presidential debates with some sniffling, and Howard Dean — former 12-year Governor of Vermont, 2004 Democratic Party presidential candidate, and former chairman of the Democratic National Committee — couldn't resist speculating that the GOP nominee was "on coke."
Tom Blumer has written for several national online publications primarily on business, economics, politics and media bias. He has had his own blog, BizzyBlog.com, since 2005, and has been with NewsBusters since December 2005. Along the way, he's had a decades-long career in accounting, finance, training and development.
Never let it be said that the folks at the Associated Press aren't on top of the news, making sure that readers as well as subscribers who use AP copy in their radio and TV broadcasts learn the most important developments of the day.
That's sarcasm, folks. Friday evening, in a story primarily about the FBI's grant of immunity to longtime Hillary Clinton assistant Cheryl Mills, the AP's Michael Biesecker blandly informed readers — in Paragraph 22 of 25 — that, in regards to her illegal and improperly secured private server, "The new FBI documents (released Friday) also reveal that Clinton occasionally exchanged messages with President Barack Obama, who used a pseudonymous email address." That's it. Nothing unusual here. Now move along.
When will the highly left-politicized "fact checking" site known as Politifact evaluate a statement about the unemployment rate among young blacks as "Mostly True"? When Bernie Sanders says it.
When will Politifact take a very similar statement and determine that it's "Mostly False"? When Donald Trump says it — even though, if judged consistently by Sanders' strange definition of "real unemployment rate," Trump was closer to the mark than was the Vermont senator.
In a "Fact Check" published Wednesday afternoon, the Associated Press's Thomas Beaumont insisted that Donald Trump's September 16 statement that "Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy," namely that then-candidate Barack Obama was not born in the United States, "is as untrue as his original lie." Some readers who don't get past Paragraph 3 might even believe that Trump started it all. And this is a "fact check"?
Beaumont's bluster appears to be in response to center-right bloggers and pundits who correctly refuse to let Hillary Clinton campaign and her gatekeepers in the press get away with revising history and ignoring new corroborating facts. To believe Beaumont, one has to believe that longtime Clinton aide and confidant Sidney Blumenthal's rumor-shopping to various members of the press doesn't matter, because he "was not officially part of the (Hillary Clinton 2008) campaign staff." What rubbish. The facts show that he was much more important to Hillary Clinton than that.
On Wednesday, in response to news that violent people the press insists on describing as "protesters" in Charlotte were stopping traffic on Interstate 277, University of Tennessee law professor and Instapundit founding blogger Glenn Reynolds retweeted a related story with three words of advice: "Run them down." As a result, Twitter, which continues to allow the existence of and continued postings to hashtags like #killwhites and #killallwhitepeople, and has routinely done nothing about direct personal threats tweeted predominantly by leftists, suspended Reynolds' Twitter account.
The absurd headline at a September 20 story at the New York Times is a sight to behold: "How Bad Off Is Oil-Rich Venezuela? It’s Buying U.S. Oil."
As formulated, the headline is clearly meant to communicate something that is supposedly a surprising new development in that country, which, thanks to 17 years of Bolivarian socialist rule, has turned into a financially destitute humanitarian disaster area. But then, deep into the story, readers finally learn that "Early this year, the United States began shipping more than 50,000 barrels a day of the light crude that Venezuela needs to prepare its own oil for export, joining a handful of suppliers that have become vital to keeping the country’s oil industry afloat." In other words, this is only big news to Times readers because the Old Gray Lady didn't think it was worth reporting when it began happening.
The last thing teenaged kids need is their mother to shame them on the Internet — and as part of her making a living, no less.
But that's what's apparently been going on for some time with feminist writer Jody Allard and her two teenaged sons, currently 16 and 18. Her most recent callout came a week ago at the Washington Post, where she sharply criticized them — even though she weakly allowed that they "are good boys" — because they don't buy into her extreme outlook on "rape culture." This leads one to wonder where the genuine adults are at the Post. How could they let a mother expose her children's private thoughts to the whole wide world without saying, "Uh, we can't publish that"?
Two weeks ago, National Football League Commissioner Roger Goodell said, as the Associated Press paraphrased it, that he "disagrees with Colin Kaepernick’s choice to kneel during the national anthem, but recognizes the quarterback’s right to protest." Sunday night, Goodell seemed to go all-in with the players, telling AP (again, accurately paraphrased) that he "is encouraged by the direction players are taking with demonstrations related to the national anthem."
The Commissioner might want to reconsider. For the second straight week, the NFL's year-over-year ratings were down considerably, and, according to a poll discussed on Fox Sports, the antics of players from several teams during the national anthem represent a significant factor in that decline.
Investigative reporters at the Associated Press have occasionally come up with meaningful nuggets putting Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's conduct and record in a bad light. Examples include several scoops in the email/private-server scandal and its research finding that "More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money" (or had money given by their corporate entities) to the Clinton Foundation.
The same cannot be said about its beat reporters covering the presidential race, who, with most of the rest of the establishment press, completely deserve the sharp criticism contained in a Monday Investors Business Daily editorial. IBD observed that "the ferocity of the media campaign against (Donald Trump)" while giving Mrs. Clinton serial passes "should give everyone pause." In a Sunday afternoon story, the AP's Laurie Kellman offered up a perfect example.
In early August, a CNN reporter tweeted an email he purportedly received from a donor to Republican Party nominee Donald Trump's presidential campaign alleging that there was no way that a donor could cancel a recurring contribution. That got the attention of several establishment press outlets and the left-biased "fact checkers" who thought they smelled smoke, but ultimately found no fire.
Several days ago, the New York Observer followed up on a documented complaint by a Minnesota woman first reported at a local TV station in early June. Claiming communications with "multiple sources," reporter Liz Corkin asserted that the Clinton campaign is "purposefully and repeatedly overcharging" small-dollar contributors "after they make what’s supposed to be a one-time small donation through her official campaign website." Establishment press interest this time? None — except to have one of the so-called "fact checkers" dismiss Corkin's contentions as "unproven."
As has so often been the case in the wake of terrorist attacks, the press is de-prioritizing what actually occurred during the St. Cloud, Minnesota mall stabbing spree in favor of a "watch out for the backlash" narrative. This is what occurred at the Associated Press late Monday afternoon, where the headline at the dispatch by Kyle Potter and Amy Forliti reads: "SOMALI COMMUNITY BRACES FOR MINNESOTA MALL ATTACK BACKLASH." It's as if the awful "backlash" will definitely happen, even though in so many other analogous instances it hasn't.
It's been ten days since Hillary Clinton made her "basket of deplorables" remark, claiming that "half" of Donald Trump's supporters, i.e., essentially one-fourth of all Americans, is one or more of the following: "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic," and a catch-all in case she missed anything, "You name it."
Since then, the most revealing aspect of the fallout from those remarks, other than the fact the Mrs. Clinton couldn't bring herself to simply say, "I was wrong, and I am sorry," instead issuing an all too typical non-apology apology — is how many leftist commentators have come out and insisted that she was right in the first place, and that she therefore need not and should not apologize. Some pundits believe that she should have hit all Trump supporters with the "deplorables" tag. One of the more visible members of the "it really is half" club is columnist and Fox News contributor Juan Williams.
During the Obama years, the press has been perpetually on the prowl looking to expose anyone on the center-right perceived as insulting President Obama. One example: A non-elected Orange County, California Republican official committed the thought crime of forwarding — not creating, forwarding — an internal e-mail she received from a friend depicting Obama in very unflattering terms. This was a national story at CNN, the Associated Press, and other national outlets. The woman involved apologized, as she should have. Now let's see if the press demonstrates any interest in elected Virginia Democrat Mark Levine's outrageous description of Donald Trump supporters as "mentally deficient" in a Fox News Saturday afternoon discussion.
Utah-based Hispanic activist Tony Yapias has drawn a fairly high level of national attention during the past six years.
Most recently, Yapias's name came up in coverage of a clash between "protesters" and supporters of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump in Salt Lake City in March. A search on his full name at the New York Times returns eight in-house items between 2010 and 2014. He has been variously described as "director of an immigration advocacy group," "a longtime Latino leader in Utah," and as "an activist with political interests." A week ago, Mr. Yapias picked up another tag: accused rapist. I haven't been able to locate any nationally distributed establishment media coverage of Yapias's arrest.
In an extended Friday writeup which appeared on Page A9 in its print edition, Matt Flegenheimer at the New York Times appeared to be preparing the paper's left-wing audience for what was supposedly unthinkable just a month ago: The possibility that Hillary Clinton might lose the presidential election.
The theme, as would be expected, was how Mrs. Clinton could "actually blow this." Since liberals never lose because their ideas and positions are unpopular (that's sarcasm, folks), Flegenheimer absurdly pointed at the campaign's mishandling of Mrs. Clinton's pneumonia last week as the primary cause of the potential failure. To do this, he only made a glancing reference to Mrs. Clinton's email/private-server scandal (without using the "S-word," of course), and completely ignored her "deplorables" insult directed at "half" of rival Donald Trump's supporters and the myriad controversies associated with the Clinton Foundation.
Friday night, yours truly detailed the latest evidence demonstrating that the Hillary Clinton campaign and a close confidant of Mrs. Clinton herself were involved in early 2008 in spreading the “birther” rumors, i.e., that then-Illinois Senator Barack Obama was not born in the U.S. Despite this news and other longstanding items, the Associated Press and others still insist that there is "no evidence" that Mrs. Clinton was connected with the rumors' initiation.
Concerning the Clinton confidant, former McClatchy Washington Bureau chief James Asher tweeted early Friday morning that Sidney Blumenthal “spread the Obama birther rumor to me in 2008, asking us to investigate.” What he didn’t say is that Blumenthal’s urgings actually caused McClatchy to investigate the matter, even sending reporter(s) to Kenya, where Blumenthal had “told me (Asher) in person Obama (was) born."
The press continues to ignore reality by insisting that it's a settled matter that Hillary Clinton and conpany were never involved in fomenting and promoting the Barack Obama "birther" rumors. Even today, with damning new evidence that a campaign apparatchik started such an effort, and that a confidant whose relationship with the Clintons goes back to Bill Clinton's presidency pitched the story to a former journalist at the McClatchy news service, reporters Jill Colvin and Jonathan Lemire at the Associated Press insisted, as if it's an undisputed fact, that "there is no evidence" that "the 'birther movement' was started by Hillary Clinton."
One of the great mysteries surrounding the controversy over San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick's decision to sit (or kneel) through the National Anthem at the beginning of his team's games (while wearing socks during practices depicting police as pigs) has been the National Football League's nonchalant response.
Perhaps the league thought that the matter would blow over in a week or two if it indulged Kaepernick, which it certainly did with its "it's his right" response, accompanied by no visible reminder that his actions and the actions of other players have the potential to damage the league's standing, reputation and popularity. The league also must have thought that Kaepernick's protest wouldn't be imitated by other players. This was a major miscalculation, and it's showing signs of hurting the league where it really counts — in the pocketbook.
Neal Gabler, who for decades has claimed that the press is consistently biased — against the left! — typed up a 1,000-word screed which appeared at Reuters Tuesday afternoon decrying what he described as "sub-news," and how it has been irresponsibly "driving the (Hillary) Clinton health rumors."
Gabler describes "sub-news" as "a pipeline of effluvium that flows beneath the mainstream news and occasionally leeches into it, causing 'information pollution.'" A particularly pernicious addition to that pipeline and the related pollution was indeed published on Monday, perhaps after Gabler submitted his column to Reuters. This conspiracy theory claims that "Hillary Clinton may have been poisoned" — by Vladimir Putin and/or Donald Trump. That's about as "out there" as you can you get. Oh, wait a minute. That conspiracy theory appeared courtesy of the tinfoil hat crew at the Washington Post, in an item by sportsblogger and sportstweeter Cindy Boren.
That the press has become quite unnerved over the tight presidential race is apparent in the Associated Press's coverage of Republican nominee Donald Trump's Monday campaign rally in Asheville, North Carolina.
John Hinderaker at Powerline alertly noted that reporters for both Breitbart and AP prepared dispatches on the event, enabling a quite telling comparison of the two efforts. The headline at his post says it all about how they compare: "Reality Versus the Associated Press."