In what is not really a surprise, Politico is looking at the trade deal with China through the lens of impeachment. According to Anita Kumar on Wednesday, the trade deal, which she labeled as "modest," is merely a distraction from impeachment. In fact, that is exactly what the title of her article says, "Trump hypes modest China deal, distracting from impeachment."
Well, that’s one way to show you’re unable to provide legal analysis without a political bias. Our friends at Grabien flagged down an interesting moment on Wednesday morning as MSNBC contributor and former Watergate prosecutor Jill Wine-Banks argued that if President Trump refuses to comply with a possible subpoena by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Americans should “rise up against” the government because then we’d be living “in an authoritarian dictatorship.”
On Thursday, MSNBC’s Brian Williams finally mentioned the words “Russia,” “uranium” and “Clinton” in the same segment BUT it was only to dismiss President Donald Trump’s criticism of the media’s failure to cover this week’s new revelations in the growing scandal.
In the hours following President Trump’s speech to the United Nations Tuesday, the media frantically wondered if Trump wasn’t inviting nuclear war by condemning North Korea. Some networks like NBC, even sympathized with the American-hating regime of Iran while condemning our own president. MSNBC was no different, with anchor Brian Williams panicking on The Eleventh Hour September 20, that by Trump calling America “sovereign” he was sending a “dog whistle” to the UN that we didn’t need them anymore.
On Morning Joe today, a panel discussed the news that Hillary Clinton will turn over thumb drives to federal investigators as well as the discovery of emails on Clinton’s private account that were labeled top secret. McClatchy’s Anita Kumar, who broke the story regarding the classified nature of the emails, tried to spin for Hillary by making the case that she was not personally being investigated: “There are several investigations into her conduct – not into her – but into her use of personal e-mail and a personal server.”
Fifty-six percent of Virginians approve of Republican Bob McDonnell's job as governor and 49 percent believe the Old Dominion is on the right track. That contrasts with a 47 percent average approval rating for President Obama and an average of 32.7 percent of Americans who believe the country is on the "right track."
Yet the Washington Post chose to spin the polling numbers as a negative, noticing a downward trend from previous numbers and attributing the shift to "a contentious legislative session that drew large protests and national ridicule to the state Capitol."
Using the Trayvon Martin tragedy as their hook, liberal lobby groups have set their sights on the conservative-leaning American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and its corporate donors, blaming the Sanford, Fla., shooting on the Sunshine State's Stand Your Ground law. ALEC supports conservative legislative efforts at the state level such as Stand Your Ground, as well as pro-business legislative priorities of interest to many food and drink companies.
But in reporting on recent victories by liberal groups in pushing companies like PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, and McDonalds to drop their support of ALEC, the Washington Post's Tom Hamburger failed to clue readers into the liberal allegiances of "advocacy groups" attacking ALEC and its corporate donors.
When the Virginia General Assembly was debating a new voter ID law, the Washington Post did its level best to paint the measure as a vote suppressing measure that was akin to "Jim Crow" laws. The Post's editorial board also weighed in by charging that making the voter ID laws stricter was evidence of "institutional racism" in state government.
But now that the debate is over and the bill is likely to be signed by Gov. Bob McDonnell (R), the Post's Richmond correspondents Laura Vozzella and Anita Kumar today admitted that, well, the legislation is fairly lax compared with stricter legislation that absolutely requires photo IDs in other states:
Much of the media's liberal bias is furthered by presenting political controversies such that they pit a non-ideological group versus an ideological one, most often of course the ideological group being conservative in nature.
Take the Washington Post's Virginia legislature correspondent Anita Kumar, who informed readers in an 11-paragraph item on page B2 of today's paper that a "Women's PAC [will] take on antiabortion lawmakers" (emphasis mine):
In a Metro section front-page article today, the Washington Post's Anita Kumar labeled as "contentious" a bill that the Virginia Senate scuttled that "would have repealed a requirement that schoolgirls be immunized against a virus linked to cervical cancer before entering the sixth grade."
Yes, this is the same Washington Post that is slamming as intrusive and medically unnecessary a pre-abortion ultrasound mandate.
In a 37-paragraph front-page article today, Washington Post correspondents Laura Vozzella and Anita Kumar detailed how, as the "invasiveness" of an ultrasound requirement in an abortion regulation bill "emerged" that "enthusiasm waned."
Vozzella and Kumar examined how pro-choice activists ginned up protests via social media and how liberal-leaning comedians on Saturday Night Live and Comedy Central mocked the legislation. Yet not once in the entire story did Kumar and Vozzella note that abortionists in the Old Dominion who are affiliated with Planned Parenthood already do ultrasounds prior to conducting abortions. Despite discussing the ongoing controversy on MSNBC yesterday, Kumar also failed to mention the fact for that network's audience.
Filling in on the 11 a.m. hour of MSNBC Live coverage this morning, Luke Russert talked to Washington Post reporter Anita Kumar and Virginia Del. Charniele Herring (D) about Gov. Bob McDonnell's "abrupt switch" to oppose requiring "invasive" transvaginal ultrasounds prior to an abortion. McDonnell is backing a bill that would make transvaginal ultrasounds optional but abdominal ultrasounds mandatory.
At not point in the interview did either Russert or Kumar note that Planned Parenthood abortionists already perform ultrasounds before abortions. What's more, Russert prompted Herring to agree with him that requiring abdominal ultrasounds could in some way be a "sex crime"