On Wednesday, Barack Obama conducted his final press conference as president and journalists demanded accountability... from his Republican successor. While just one question was asked about Obama’s decision to pardon Chelsea Manning, there were five queries worrying about what Donald Trump will do when he’s in charge.
In a January 5 column at the Oregonian, Douglas Perry promoted a study which claims to support the leftist meme that Donald Trump won the presidential election based on racial bigotry and sexism. It seems likely that the study to which Perry referred will become a frequent reference point for the left, so its fatal flaws need to be addressed. That's especially true because Vox.com founder Ezra Klein hysterically contends that the the study's evidence is so compelling, and that "The numbers here are impossible to read any other way."
On Christmas evening, appearing in print on Sunday, December 26, Jeremy Peters at the New York Times pretended that the term "fake news" has only gained common currency very recently during the social media era. He also effectively contended that the establishment press holds ownership rights over the term, claiming that "conservative cable and radio personalities, top Republicans and even Mr. (Donald) Trump himself ... have appropriated" it.
Peters, who graduated from the University of Michigan in 2002 and arguably knows better, could not be more wrong. Center-right media critics, pundits and personalities have used the term "fake news" to describe establishment press reporting for at least a decade, usually with total justification. It's the press which is "appropriating" the "fake news" term in the name of marginalizing and silencing non-"mainstream" news sources.
The day after Election Day, Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner met with President Barack Obama. The primary takeaway from that interview, published in late November, was, as Tim Graham at NewsBusters noted, how Obama partly blamed Hillary Clinton's election loss to Donald Trump on “Fox News in every bar and restaurant in big chunks of the country.” Additionally, Wenner, in what seemed at the time to be a crybaby throwaway line, suggested that "the news business and the newspaper industry, which is being destroyed by Facebook, needs a subsidy so we can maintain a free press." Unfortunately, New York Times President and CEO Mark Thompson shares both Wenner's lament and his suggested remedy. Thursday, establishment press pressure on Facebook brought about potentially ugly results.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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."
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.