Jeffrey Lord is a contributing writer for NewsBusters
Jeffrey Lord is a Contributing Writer for NewsBusters.
Lord is a former White House political director in the Reagan White House and aide to HUD Secretary Jack Kemp. After graduating from Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster, Pennsylvania he went on to work for the Pennsylvania State Senate Majority Leader, then going on to serve on Capitol Hill as a press secretary and legislative director for Congressman Bud Shuster (R-Pa.) and Executive Assistant to US Senator John Heinz (R-Pa.). He was the chief of staff for Reagan-Bush ’84 co-chair Drew Lewis as well as to Mr. Lewis in his role as chairman of Warner-Amex Cable (now Time Warner) in New York City.
Now a writer and commentator, he is a Contributing Editor of The American Spectator, and has appeared on Fox News, CNN, CNBC, the Fox Business Channel and Newsmax TV. His work has been discussed on The Rush Limbaugh Show, and he has also appeared on the Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and Laura Ingraham talk radio shows in addition to talk radio programs across the country. His articles have been published in The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Times, National Review, The Weekly Standard, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, The Harrisburg Patriot-News and other publications. He is the author of The Borking Rebellion:The Untold True Story of How a Bipartisan Group of Pennsylvania Women Attorneys Took on the Entire US Senate Judicial Confirmation Process - and Won. Lord, a native of Northampton, Massachusetts, now lives in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania.
Latest from Jeffrey Lord
The voice was instantly recognizable, even though its owner identified himself. ‘'The record shows he has a strange idea of what justice is” intoned American icon and movie star Gregory Peck. The “he” in question was Judge Robert Bork, and Peck was lending his voice to something new in American history: a television commercial attacking a nominee for the United States Supreme Court.
So. What do we have here? First, Facebook censors a posting of a segment from the Declaration of Independence as “hate speech.” Next, actor James Woods loses his agent because of his conservative and pro-Trump views. Then last but not least, when it comes clear that the liberals of Martha’s Vineyards are turning socially on their old friend and neighbor Alan Dershowitz, the Morning Joe crowd snarks it up and says he “has to suffer the consequences” for his views.
Sometimes - Okay, increasingly more and more times ad infinitum - the liberal media becomes an amazing caricature of its own left wing idiocy. Let’s start with that craziness that used to be known in journalism as The Facts. In this case the facts about the shooting this past week at the Capital Gazette in Annapolis, Maryland.
The Washington Post headline was blunt: “‘A blowtorch to the tinder’: Stoking racial tensions is a feature of Trump’s presidency.” Among other things it said this: “President Trump this week likened Hispanic immigrants to vermin. He warned that they would ‘pour into and infest our country.'"
It would be hard to make this up. On two very different subjects, the liberal media has emerged from the last couple of weeks with not just egg on its face. In fact, it seems like they took an entire carton of Grade A Large and smashed them one by one over themselves. Can you say "cult"?
Sean Hannity (full disclosure, I write columns at his website) was in the middle of his Thursday night live television show on Fox when there was, as they say, breaking news - from The New York Times. The news? The Times had just posted a story saying the Justice Department had seized the phone records of a New York Times reporter.
Harvey Weinstein is indicted. Roseanne Barr is fired. Now let’s take a look at the liberal media and how they reported these two stories. A few samples for your consideration, starting with Harvey stories:
So finally, someone stands up to remind the media that when it comes to the FBI and CIA spying on a political opponent of a president - America has in fact been here before. Admittedly, it helps to have been around at the time of the Johnson-Goldwater election in 1964.
Who knew? This week’s adventure with Fake News had President Trump riffing out of the blue as follows, reported here by The New York Times. Cue the fake news outrage. The correct story, which took hours to catch up, was that the President had never slurred immigrants or illegal immigrants. His remarks were a response to a comment from the Fresno, California Sheriff who had just said: “There could be an MS-13 gang member, I know about, if they don’t reach a threshold, I cannot tell ICE about them.”
According to a new Media Research Center study, 90 percent of the President’s coverage in 2018 has been negative. However, that hasn’t stopped journalists about whining about the President limiting press freedom. What happened when Barack Obama actually did that? Nothing.
Note well these three items from the week’s news. 1. The Guardian and the Los Angeles Times investigate the private real estate holdings of Fox and talk radio host Sean Hannity. 2. New York magazine reporter Olivia Nuzzi was writing a piece on ex-Trump White House aide Hope Hicks
Now that the demand for Laura Ingraham’s show be strangled in its crib has failed? Now that yet another attempt to whack Sean Hannity off the air has gone with the wind? Now comes the Case of Joy Reid. Suddenly, the liberal “get the host” guns have gone silent.
The liberal media was outraged. Just plain outraged! Not to mention gleeful. A lawyer for CNN and The New York Times played a role in getting a federal judge to insist that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen release the name of a third “client.” The name, it turned out, was Sean Hannity. Cue the liberal media circus.
It says everything one needs to know about both James Comey and the liberal media. Even The Washington Post admits to the obvious game about the fired FBI Director’s imminent book tour. Headline from The Post: "Ready for the media’s Comey swoonfest? Nothing can stop it now."
The liberal media uproar over Sinclair Broadcasting was as predictable as snow in a blizzard. First comes the news that one Justin Simmons has quit his job as a producer at a Nebraska Sinclair outlet. The CNN headline was this: "Sinclair producer in Nebraska resigns to protest 'obvious bias’"
Well that didn’t take long. My prediction was made in this space on October 28, 2017. The headline: "Laura Ingraham: New Fox Star, New Left-Wing Target." In which I said the following of the Fox announcement that Laura Ingraham- she the radio talker, ex-Reagan staffer, Justice Clarence Thomas Supreme Court clerk and all-around conservative superstar - would be hosting a new Fox opinion show at 10 pm weekdays. I wrote:
It is always amazing to see a supposedly “objective” media outlet in headlong pursuit of a leftist agenda item. This time? Time magazine has outdone itself in the media bias category, with CNN right behind them.
The Washington Post is aghast. Here's the headline: "The Daily 202: Trump may hire multiple cable news personalities as part of shake-up." The story by James Hohmann says this in part: "THE BIG IDEA: Donald Trump’s reality television presidency may be getting more star power for season two."
God bless Jake Tapper. The other day, NewsBusters reported: "CNN’s Jake Tapper Breaks Through Media Blackout, Covers Louis Farrakhan Controversy." Tapper noted that “despite the anti-Semitism and homophobia inherent in that clip, several leaders of the Women’s March were — are supporters of Farrakhan and have not condemned him” plus “[m]embers of the Congressional Black Caucus.”
It is remarkable to see the headlines about presidential aides Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump in the liberal media. The son-in-law and daughter of President Trump are now getting routinely hammered in The Washington Post, The New York Times, on CNN and even in The Wall Street Journal editorial pages, the latter decidedly not in the “liberal media” category. But what is particularly noticeable is the reluctance to apply the same standards to presidential or other political relatives - if they are liberals.