Debate raged in the United Kingdom’s Parliament Monday over whether or not President Donald Trump should be extended the warm welcome of a full state visit. As insults targeting Trump flew back and forth, CNN seemed to get a good laugh out it all. “Insults flying over Trump's invitation for a formal state visit to the UK,” hyped Erin Burnett during her show OutFront, “One Member of Parliament today likening it to quote, “pimping out the queen.’” All while the on-screen headline read “can God save the queen … from Trump?”
As liberals around the country continued to rage over President Donald Trump’s not-a-travel-ban ban Tuesday evening, reporter Mark Phillips took the time on CBS Evening News to remind everyone that the people of Europe don’t care for our president either. “Not just the crowds that have poured onto the streets of Europe are angry with Donald Trump,” he reported, “The disenchantment has now reached the highest levels of European politics.”
A BBC journalist on Friday confronted Donald Trump at a joint White House press conference with Britain’s Prime Minister and lectured the President about his “alarming briefs.” Another question at the press conference featured a reporter wondering how Trump and Theresa May could possibly get along.
In June, when UK voters decided to leave the European Union in the "Brexit" referendum, the U.S. press told the American people that the UK economy would suffer greatly as a result. Moody's economist and max Hillary Clinton contributor Mark Zandi predicted that it would be "going down the rabbit hole." At CBS News, Mellody Hobson said that "they're acting as if a recession is a foregone conclusion."
It's one thing to predict a disaster that doesn't happen. It's quite another to predict bad news and have things turn out pretty darned well, which is thus far what has occurred. You'd never know it from reading U.S.-based establishment press coverage, but the UK economy, as reported in the UK Times, "ended last year as the strongest of the world’s advanced economies with growth accelerating in the six months after the Brexit vote."
Recent terrorist attacks in Ankara, Turkey, and Berlin, Germany, add to a growing list of incidents that are becoming increasingly difficult to remember. Does one begin the list with the plane hijackings in the '60s and '70s, or the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, or the USS Cole attack in 2000, or the second World Trade Center attack in 2001, or Ft. Hood, San Bernardino, Orlando, Paris or Nice? And that's not all of them, nor will it be the end of them, if we don't have a better response.
The British Broadcasting Corporation announced on Monday that former MSNBC host Martin Bashir has been hired to serve as the network's new religious affairs correspondent. The news release referred to Bashir as an “award-winning journalist” who has conducted “high-profile interviews" as well as “making ground-breaking, landmark documentaries.”
Of course, there was no mention of the incident during November of 2013, when he made a disgraceful rant regarding former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, whom he called “America’s resident dunce” and claimed she has a “deceased mind.” He then went so far as to suggest that someone should defecate in her mouth and urinate in her eyes.
Post-Brexit, the liberal media lashed out with myriad hysterical predictions of economic meltdown and threw around bitter accusations of xenophobia, with the New York Times leading the charge. Well, those dire predictions of crisis have not exactly panned out, but the Times is back trying to pump some life into the libel, by labeling any violent crime against any immigrant in England as Brexit-related. In Friday’s New York Times, Dan Bilefsky wrote: “Fatal Beating of Polish Man Fuels Debate Over Xenophobia in Britain.” The text box read: “Fears that the ‘Brexit’ vote has unleashed a wave of violence.” More like fear among sore losers in the press, who still can't grasp how they could have lost an election where everyone they knew voted the morally correct way.
Citizens of the United Kingdom voting in favor of departure from the European Union was an unmitigated disaster of epic scale, Rachel Maddow hyperventilated right after the vote in late June.
By late August, Maddow was looking back at the referendum as a road bump you've probably already forgotten and not quite the "global crisis" she initially claimed.
After 52 percent of voters in Great Britain cast their ballots in favor of leaving the European Union on June 23, financial commentators around the world, particularly in the U.S., predicted ugly economic tidings for the UK.
People who swallowed the gloom and doom whole must have been especially surprised early Friday morning when Bloomberg News published a piece headlined "Pro-Leave Economists Can Smell Vindication." Keeping hope for bad news alive, the caption underneath the piece's accompanying video reads, "Brexit Effect Missing So Far From U.K. Economic Data." Sorry, guys, it isn't just that bad news is missing. It's that the news out of the UK has been very good — "unexpectedly," of course.
Appearing as a panel member on Monday's New Day on CNN, during a discussion of the possibility that GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump's proposed immigration restrictions to prevent Muslim terrorists from entering the country could effect immigration from European countries, CNN political analyst David Gregory tried to undermine the idea by bringing up anti-Semitic State Department officials from the 1940s who lobbied against allowing German Jews to immigrate into the U.S., resulting in more Holocaust victims who otherwise could have been saved. It was not mentioned that, in the same NBC Meet the Press interview that was cited for the CNN discussion, Trump promised to help set up safe havens for Syrian refugees rather than just abandon them to Muslim extremists.
For over two weeks now, the press has insisted, based on almost no evidence, that many UK citizens who voted to leave the European Union weren't all that informed, didn't appreciate the implications of their vote, and now regret their decision. Two examples signify the press's desperation to cling to this meme. The first is their contention that post-referendum UK-based Internet search requests for basic information on the EU are coming entirely or mostly from "Leave" voters. There is no good reason to believe that. The second is their treatment of the obviously bogus, heavily-pranked, easily-beaten petition for a second EU referendum as if it's something real, when it obviously is not. These efforts are so over the top that they may strike some readers as psychologically troubled "Remain" supporters having a tough time adjusting to reality. Well, it turns out that this is a far from minor problem among "Remain" supporters.