On Friday's New Day on CNN, as former Umpqua Community College president Joe Olson appeared as a guest to discuss yesterday's mass shooting, after noting that last year the college, under Olson's administration, decided not to allow on-campus security guards to have guns, CNN co-host Michaela Pereira asked whether people there are "regretting" that decision now. Pereira:

On Thursday's The Situation Room, after live coverage of President Barack Obama's speech on the day's shootings at Umpqua Community College in Oregon, CNN was true to form in promoting more gun control as CNN Law Enforcement Analyst Tom Fuentes urged President Obama to "lead" in proposing gun legislation and not just be the "mourner-in-chief."

Notably, moments earlier, when Fuentes described the students sitting in their class rooms as "sitting ducks" for the gunman to attack, anchor Wolf Blitzer noted that "there's no guns supposedly allowed on this campus," but this relevant observation did not develop into anyone suggesting that gun laws in the state be relaxed so professors and students could have a chance of defending themselves.

Tuesday afternoon, Alan Fram laughably headlined his coverage of Planned Parenthood head Cecile Richards' appearance before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee at the Associated Press as follows: "FACING CONGRESS, PLANNED PARENTHOOD CHIEF REBUTS VIDEOS."

She did no such thing. Most notably, Fram quoted Richards making the following statement to the committee: "The outrageous accusations leveled against Planned Parenthood, based on heavily doctored videos, are offensive and categorically untrue." Not merely "heavily edited," but "doctored," which according to the dictionary in this context means "to tamper with; falsify." Unfortunately for Richards and her group's supporters, in a report released yesterday, forensic experts have concluded that the Center for Medical Progress videos she criticized are "authentic" (bolds are mine throughout this post):

If the establishment press was treating Hillary Clinton's private server/email and other controversies as the genuine scandals and the national security nightmares that they really are, we'd be getting daily or near-daily updates on the latest developments.

It really isn't too much to ask. After all, outlets like the Associated Press frequently capsulized the latest Watergate developments during 1973 and 1974. It is fortunate, since the AP and others traditional hard-news outlets won't do their jobs, that an Investor's Business Daily editorial presented a readily understandable Hillary scandal summary on Wednesday.

Jason Horowitz, one of the New York Times more colorful reporters, gave Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker a gleeful finger upon his departure from the Republican presidential race, suggesting Walker has advanced his career on racist appeals in "Dismal Finish Is a Fitting Result, Old Foes Say." Horowitz wrote on Tuesday: "Old political adversaries of Mr. Walker greeted his dour denouement as a fitting result for a politician who they say began and furthered his career here with a divisive style, a penchant for turning out conservative supporters rather than working with opponents, and tacit racial appeals in one of the nation’s most segregated cities. But the irony is that Mr. Walker was eclipsed by candidates who have ignited the Republican base with more overtly nativist and, their critics argue, racist appeals." Those "racist appeals"? Actually tough-on-crime proposals targeted at victims of crime in Milwaukee.