The New York Times is trying its best to find dirt on President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, filing an odd public information request with his wife’s employer. And in 2005 they tried to access sealed private records involving then-Bush-nominee John Roberts. Even the paper's commenters weren't convinced of the paper's fairness and balance, wondering where that investigative zeal was when it came to Democratic Supreme Court nominees..
President Trump won’t officially announce his latest nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court until this evening, but it’s already easy to predict the liberal media’s spin. As with all recent Republican nominees, reporters will repeatedly label them as “conservative,” which will nicely reinforce the Democrats’ strategy to paint them as outside “the mainstream.” But when Democratic Presidents announce their Supreme Court nominees, those same reporters can’t find the words to call those choices “liberal.”
Whomever Barack Obama selects to fill the vacancy left by the death of Antonin Scalia expect the liberal media to worry the selection isn’t progressive enough. As might be expected, journalists criticize the Supreme Court appointments made by Republican presidents as “hardline” and “very conservative.” But even the nominees elevated by recent Democratic presidents have been challenged as not liberal enough for the media’s taste.
New York Times Supreme Court correspondent Adam Liptak filed a liberal pleasing analysis Tuesday, fervently insisting Chief Justice John Roberts is a staunch conservative, despite what ridiculous right-wingers may think. His reported opinion piece, based on voting analysis by law professors, strained to show Roberts as a loyal conservative Justice, but the evidence is hardly as cut and dried as Liptak's charged tone would suggest. Liptak has always trended left, as when he faulted the "terse" old U.S. Constitution as outdated for failing to guarantee entitlements like health care.
Imagine if the presidents Bush had refrained from appointing David Souter and John Roberts to the Supreme Court, GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz said before the Eagles Forum conference in St. Louis over the weekend. If the Bushes went with "rock-ribbed conservatives" instead, Cruz suggested, the high court would have rejected Obamacare and same-sex marriage.
Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd took exception to Cruz's claim with a "fact check" that was lacking in a sorely needed element -- Todd citing where Cruz was wrong.
New York Times former Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse held a dubious celebration of Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. in her nytimes.com column, while attacking the Court’s "steady regression on race and its deregulatory hijacking of the First Amendment" and Justice Clarence Thomas's "full-steam-back-to-the-18th-century" approach to constitutional interpretation.
Richard Wolf of USA Today can’t use the word “left” to describe recent Supreme Court rulings, only “right.” It came in a story headlined “Supreme Court poised to tilt further to the right.”
When the Court tacks left, it’s a “blockbuster” term of “landmark" decisions. Wolf began: “After two blockbuster terms in which it saved President Obama's health care law and advanced the cause of same-sex marriage, the Supreme Court appears poised to tack to the right in its upcoming term on a range of social issues, from abortion and contraception to race and prayer.”
Readers are advised to remove all food, fluids, and flammables from proximity to their computers before proceeding. You've been warned.
NBC News justice correspondent Pete Williams on this weekend's syndicated Chris Matthews Show actually said that when it comes to nominating judges, "A Democratic president is more likely to appoint somebody near the middle who is less ideological" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
Now that the Supreme Court has ruled ObamaCare constitutional, MSNBC has redoubled its efforts at promoting the president's signature legislative accomplishment to its audience. On Friday’s 2 p.m. Eastern NewsNation program, guest-host Thomas Roberts brought on a cancer survivor to fawn over Obama.
Natoma Canfield, who thankfully is cancer-free, was prompted by Roberts from every angle to praise Obama and go on at length about how much credit she gives to Obama for saving her life. Thomas then followed this up by telling his audience how Canfield is "one of the millions of Americans who have already benefitted from this law."
The New York Times's Web site on Tuesday reported, "Former City Council Leader Avoids Prison for Tax Evasion." Andrew J. Stein didn't pay taxes on $1 million in income in 2008. His punishment: Three years' probation and 500 hours of community service.
Possibly Stein's cause was helped by Geraldo Rivera asking the judge for leniency. Or maybe the judge was impressed by Stein's cooperation; the story notes that he "also agreed to pay taxes for the years 2003 to 2008." Whatta guy!
The New York Times did omit at least one salient fact: Stein is a Democrat.
On Monday, TVNewser reported that John Roberts, who anchored CNN's American Morning from April 2007 until the end of 2010, will be joining Fox News as a national correspondent. Roberts, who joined CNN in 2006 after a 14-year career at CBS, had a reputation for liberal bias at both networks, particularly in his harsh labeling for Republicans/conservatives and his fawning over liberals.
Here are some examples of Roberts's most egregious bias compiled from the Media Research Center's archives, focusing primarily on his career on American Morning:
Cheerleading for Liberals
"Yeah, it is going to be a transformational primary here on the Democratic side of things. Do you get a sense that people are recognizing this idea of the grandeur of history involved here?"
-Roberts gushing over the "historic" nature of the race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination, February 1, 2008 edition of American Morning.
"I want to just stipulate at the beginning of this interview, we are declaring a Reverend Wright-free zone today. So, no questions about Reverend Wright. Our viewers want us to move on, so this morning we're going to move on. Is that okay with you?"
-Opening statement from May 5, 2008 interview of then-presidential candidate Barack Obama.
National Public Radio’s firing of Juan Williams tells you all you need to know about the radical, and thoroughly intolerant, Left. Juan Williams is a liberal, but still, he isn’t liberal enough. The idea that he would acknowledge a mere thought of discomfort at the idea of people in “Muslim garb” on airplanes in a post-9/11 world became a firing offense. It didn’t matter that he prefaced it with all the perfunctory and politically correct disclaimers about not being a bigot and we shouldn’t blame all Muslims for terrorism.
Today’s Left is void of any principles whatsoever. They can be as astonishingly offensive and insulting as they want toward Christians, and no one gets punished. The indefatigable Catholic League provides the documentation.