By Sam Dorman | December 1, 2016 | 4:51 PM EST

More than a month before Donald Trump takes office, he saved 1,000 manufacturing jobs. But the very anti-Trump New York Times gratuitously downplayed that news. According to the Dec. 1, Wall Street Journal, Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence struck a deal with Carrier Corporation that stopped the company from moving 1,000 manufacturing jobs from Indiana to Mexico. 

 

By Tom Blumer | December 1, 2016 | 11:56 AM EST

At Wednesday's White House press briefing, Obama administration Press Secretary Josh Earnest, in a fit of completely unsupported arrogance, claimed that 805,000 jobs have been created "while President Obama was in office," and that "President Obama has set a high standard" in that regard.

The lazy stenographers posing as journalists present at the briefing, along with other reporters covering Carrier Corp.'s decision not to move its Indianapolis manufacturing jobs to Mexico, have failed to recognize what anyone whose job it has been to follow the economy during the Obama administration should know, namely that the economy, through October 2016, has fewer manufacturing jobs now than it did when President Obama took office in January 2009.

By Tom Blumer | November 29, 2016 | 11:25 PM EST

Well now. The press has been raking President-Elect Donald Trump over the coals for proposing "consequences" for burning the American flag.

It's especially rich to see leftists like Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post invoke the name of the otherwise completely despised late Antonin Scalia, who was considered the tie-breaking Supreme Court Justice in the 1989 case when the Court ruled that flag-burning is "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment. Many in the press apparently believe that no one except Donald Trump has been dumb enough to support punishments for flag-burning since then, and ... oh, wait. Someone has — and she's a Democrat, and she just ran for President and lost.

By Tom Blumer | October 19, 2016 | 4:44 PM EDT

The federal government's fiscal year ended on September 30. As has been the administration's habit for years with news that might draw negative attention, the Treasury Department conveniently released its year-end Monthly Budget Review Friday afternoon to minimize the discussion of its grim news.

By Julia A. Seymour | October 12, 2016 | 3:45 PM EDT

While many activists fighting the Dakota Access oil pipeline have been exposed and even arrested for trespassing on the property, Climate Direct Action turned to criminal eco-terrorism in “solidarity” on Oct. 11.

Climate change activists disrupted crude oil flowing through multiple pipelines by tampering with pipelines in four states simultaneously, according to Reuters. Enbridge Inc. pipelines in Minnesota had to be temporarily shut down as well as Spectra Energy’s Express Pipeline in Montana.

By Tom Blumer | October 8, 2016 | 10:16 AM EDT

This is a volatile election year, to say the least. The two major-party candidates are far less than perfect, routinely commit gaffes (or perceived gaffes), and have been hurt by a variety of negative disclosures and actions. Two other challengers have gained a degree of attention and apparent support not seen since Ross Perot's presidential runs in the 1990s. Meanwhile, mistrust of the establishment press is at or near an all-time high, and several journalists have publicly decided that the idea of even trying (or pretending) to report in a fair and balanced manner is not appropriate this year.

By Tom Blumer | September 30, 2016 | 10:17 PM EDT

On Thursday, Federal Reserve Chairman Janet Yellen suggested in a videoconference call, as translated into plain English by the Wall Street Journal, that "there could be benefits to allowing the central bank to buy stocks as a way to boost the economy in a downturn."

By Tom Blumer | September 18, 2016 | 2:06 PM EDT

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.

By P.J. Gladnick | September 16, 2016 | 10:29 PM EDT

Don't be so modest, Bob. You have an amazing power. Any presidential candidate who you either work for directly or declare to have won before Election Day is doomed to fail. That power that you are so reluctant to brag about is known far and wide within political circles as the "Shrum Curse." We saw the latest demonstration by Bob Shrum of that power on With All Due Respect on September 2 as chronicled by your humble correspondent who anticipated its effects in this Newsbusters article, WADR: Will Shrum Curse Doom Hillary's Campaign?

By Sam Dorman | September 12, 2016 | 10:36 AM EDT

When it came to covering voters’ most important issue, networks fumbled again in August. Instead, the networks spent more time tackling a football player who protested the national anthem.

By Randy Hall | August 11, 2016 | 7:02 PM EDT

As Barack Obama prepares to leave the White House in January, the press is noting the president's accomplishments over the past seven years and seven months.

According to the fawning mainstream media, one of the heights the 55-year-old Democrat has reached is not boosting the country's economy nor successes in foreign policy, but instead that Obama has played more than 300 rounds of golf since taking office in January of 2009.

By Tom Blumer | August 9, 2016 | 10:54 PM EDT

Last month, yours truly, with the help of commenters (and in a supplemental post found here), shredded the idea proposed in a column at Slate.com that journalists should eliminate the words "terrorist" and, by extension, "terrorism," to describe genuine acts of terrorism committed by terrorists (unless those words are uttered in quoted remarks by interview subjects). Sadly, in the course of covering the topic, I learned that that the Newspeak practitioners pretending to be journalists at Reuters have already done this in association "with specific events."

Now Philip Mudd, who "comments on counterterrorism and security policy for CNN" and is a former “deputy director of the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center,” wants to travel part of the way down that road. Mudd wants to effectively eliminate the T-words when describing "seemingly random attacks with debatable motivations," while continuing their use for "politically motivated Islamist revolutionaries" such as "Osama bin Laden."