Author Topic: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues  (Read 760901 times)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2650 on: December 19, 2019, 07:17:01 PM »
I take a hard line on this.

Perfectly reasonable for President Trump to let the Ukes know not to fear to look into Biden.

Excellent angle. 

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: December 20, 2019, 08:16:37 PM by Crafty_Dog »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
Media, Ministry of Truth, SHARYL ATTKISSON 107 Media Mistakes in the Trump Era
« Reply #2652 on: December 24, 2019, 06:34:47 AM »
A lot of mistakes in a relatively short period of time, all in one direction, against the President:
SHARYL ATTKISSON
107 Media Mistakes in the Trump Era: The Definitive List:
https://sharylattkisson.com/2019/01/50-media-mistakes-in-the-trump-era-the-definitive-list/

1. Aug. 2016-Nov. 2016:
The New York Post published modeling photos of Trump’s wife Melania and reported they were taken in 1995. Various news outlets relied on that date to imply that Melania—an immigrant—had violated her visa status. But the media got the date wrong. Politico was among the news agencies that later issued a photo date correction.
 
2. Oct. 1, 2016:
The New York Times and other media widely suggested or implied that Trump had not paid income taxes for 18 years. Later, tax return pages leaked to MSNBC ultimately showed that Trump actually paid a higher rate than Democrats Bernie Sanders and President Obama.
 
3. Oct. 18, 2016:
In a Washington Post piece not labelled opinion or analysis, Stuart Rothenberg reported that Trump’s path to an electoral college victory was “nonexistent.”
 
4. Nov. 4, 2016:
USA Today misstated Melania Trump’s “arrival date from Slovenia” amid a flurry of reporting that questioned her immigration status from the mid-1990s.
 
5. Nov. 9, 2016:
Early on election night, the Detroit Free Press called the state of Michigan for Hillary Clinton. Trump actually won Michigan.
 
Nancy Sinatra via Twitter
6. Jan. 20, 2017:
CNN claimed Nancy Sinatra was “not happy” at her father’s song being used at Trump’s inauguration. Sinatra responded, “That’s not true. I never said that. Why do you lie, CNN?…Actually I’m wishing him the best.”
 
 
7. Jan. 20, 2017:
Zeke Miller of TIME reported that President Trump had removed the bust statue of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. from the Oval Office. The news went viral. It was false.
8. Jan. 26, 2017:
Josh Rogin of the Washington Post reported that the State Department’s “entire senior administrative team” had resigned in protest of Trump. A number of media outlets ranging from politically left to right, including liberal-leaning Vox, stated that claim was misleading or wrong.
 
9. Jan. 28, 2017
CNBC’s John Harwood reported the Justice Department “had no input” on Trump’s immigration executive order. After a colleague contradicted Harwood’s report, he amended it to reflect that Justice Department lawyers reportedly had reviewed Trump’s order.
 
10. Jan. 31, 2017:
CNN’s Jeff Zeleny reported the White House set up Twitter accounts for two judges to try to keep Trump’s selection for Supreme Court secret. Zeleny later corrected his report to state that the Twitter accounts had not been set up by the White House.
 
11. Feb. 2, 2017:
TMZ reported Trump changed the name of “Black History Month” to “African American History Month,” implying the change was untoward or racist. In fact, Presidents Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton had all previously called Black History month “African American History” month.
 
12. Feb. 2, 2017:
AP reported that Trump had threatened the president of Mexico with invasion to get rid of “bad hombres.” Numerous publications followed suit. The White House said it wasn’t true and the Washington Post removed the AP info that “could not be independently confirmed.”
 
13. Feb. 4, 2017:
Josh Rogin of the Washington Post reported on “Inside the White House-Cabinet Battle Over Trump’s Immigration Order,” only to have the article updated repeatedly to note that one of the reported meetings had not actually occurred, that a conference call had not happened as described, and that actions attributed to Trump were actually taken by his chief of staff.

14. Feb. 14, 2017:
The New York Times’ Michael S. Schmidt, Mark Mazzetti and Matt Apuzzo reported about supposed contacts between Trump campaign staff and “senior Russian intelligence officials.” Comey later testified “In the main, [the article] was not true.”
 
15. Feb. 22, 2017:
ProPublica’s Raymond Bonner reported CIA official Gina Haspel—Trump’s later pick for CIA Director—was in charge of a secret CIA prison where Islamic extremist terrorist Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times in one month, and that she mocked the prisoner’s suffering. More than a year later, ProPublica retracted the claim, stating that “Neither of these assertions is correct…Haspel did not take charge of the base until after the interrogation of Zubaydah ended.”

16. April 5, 2017:
An article bylined by the New York Times’ graphic editors Karen Yourish and Troy Griggs referred to Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, as Trump’s wife.
 
17. May 10, 2017:
Multiple outlets including Politico, the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, AP, Reuters and the Wall Street Journal reported the same leaked information: that Trump fired FBI Director James Comey shortly after Comey requested additional resources to investigate Russian interference in the election.
 
The New York Times’ Matthew Rosenberg and Matt Apuzzo, and CNN’s Sara Murray reported the information in sentences and paragraphs that omitted attribution, as if it were an established fact. The Washington Post’s Philip Rucker, Ashley Parker, Sari Horwitz and Robert Costa wrote news articles in the style of opinion pieces and from an omniscient viewpoint as if they were somehow in the mind of Trump. For example, they reported, “Every time FBI Director James B. Comey appeared in public, an ever-watchful President Trump grew increasingly agitated that the topic was the one that he was most desperate to avoid: Russia.” (Other reporters —Reuters’ Dustin Volz and Susan Cornwell— did properly attribute the claim.)
 
The Justice Department, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe said the media reports were untrue and McCabe added that the FBI’s Russia investigation was “adequately resourced.”
 
18. May 27, 2017:
The BBC’s James Landale, The Guardian and others reported that Trump wasn’t bothering to listen to the translation during a speech in Italian by Italy’s Prime Minister. They drew that conclusion without asking the White House and based on a video that showed other political leaders wearing large headphones. The Guardian even claimed Trump was fake listening (smiling and nodding). After the reports circulated, the White House stated that, as always, Trump was indeed wearing an earpiece in his right ear.
 
19. June 4, 2017:
NBC News reported in a Tweet that Russian President Vladimir Putin told TV host Megan Kelly that he had compromising information about Trump. Actually, Putin said the opposite: that he did not have compromising information on Trump.
 
20. June 6, 2017:
CNN’s Gloria Borger, Eric Lichtblau, Jake Tapper and Brian Rokus; and ABC’s Justin Fishel and Jonathan Karl reported that Comey was going to refute Donald Trump’s claim that Comey told Trump three times he was not under investigation. Instead, Comey did the opposite and confirmed Trump’s claim.
 
21. June 7, 2017:
In a fact-check story, AP reported erroneously that Trump misread the potential cost to a family with insurance under the Affordable Care Act who wanted care from their existing doctor. 
 
22. June 8, 2017:
The New York Times’ Jonathan Weisman reported that Comey testified Trump Attorney General Jeff Sessions told Comey not to call the Russia probe “an investigation” but “a matter.” Weisman was mistaken about the attorney general and the probe. Actually, it was Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch (not Sessions) who told Comey to refer to the Hillary Clinton classified email probe (not the Russia probe) as “a matter” instead of “an investigation.”
 
23. June 22, 2017:
CNN’s Thomas Frank reported that Congress was investigating a “Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials.” The report was later retracted. Frank and two other CNN employees resigned in the fallout.
 
24. December 2, 2017:
ABC News’ Brian Ross reported that former Trump official Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn was going to testify that candidate Trump had directed him to contact “the Russians.” Even though such contact would not be in of itself a violation of law, the news was treated as an explosive indictment of Trump in the Russia collusion narrative, and the stock market fell on the news. ABC later corrected the report to reflect that Trump had already been elected when he reportedly asked Flynn to contact the Russians about working together to fight ISIS and other issues. Ross was suspended.
 
25. July 6, 2017:
Newsweek’s Chris Riotta and others reported that Poland’s First Lady had refused to shake Trump’s hand. Newsweek’s later “update” reflected that the First Lady had shaken Trump’s hand after all, as clearly seen on the full video.
 
26. July 6, 2017:
The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman, CNN and numerous outlets had long reported, as if fact, the Hillary Clinton claim that a total of 17 American intelligence agencies concluded that Russia orchestrated election year attacks to help get Trump elected. Only three or four agencies, not 17, had officially done so.
 
27. Aug. 31, 2017:
NBC News’ Ken Dilanian and Carol Lee reported that a Trump official’s notes about a meeting with a Russian lawyer included the word “donation,” as if there were discussions about suspicious campaign contributions. NBC later corrected the report to reflect that the word “donation” didn’t appear, but still claimed the word “donor” did. Later, Politico reported that the word “donor” wasn’t in the notes, either.

28. Sept. 5, 2017:
CNN’s Chris Cillizza and other news outlets declared Trump “lied” when he stated that Trump Tower had been wiretapped, although there’s no way any reporter independently knew the truth of the matter—only that what intel officials claimed. It later turned out there were numerous wiretaps involving Trump Tower, including a meeting of Trump officials with a foreign dignitary. At least two Trump associates who had offices in or frequented Trump Tower were also reportedly wiretapped.
 
29. Sept. 7, 2017:
The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman reported Democrat leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi called President Trump about an immigration issue. Trump actually made the call to Pelosi.
 
30. Nov. 6, 2017:
CNN’s Daniel Shane edited excerpts from a Trump event to make it seem as though Trump didn’t realize Japan builds cars in the U.S. However, Trump’s entire statement made clear that he does.
 
31. Nov. 6, 2017:
CNN edited a video that made it appear as though Trump impatiently dumped a box of fish food into the water while feeding fish at Japan’s palace. The New York Daily News, the Guardian and others wrote stories implying Trump was gauche and impetuous. The full video showed that Trump had simply followed the lead of Japan’s Prime Minister.
 
32. Nov. 29, 2017:
Newsweek’s Chris Riotta claimed Ivanka Trump “plagiarized” one of her own speeches. In fact, plagiarizing one’s own work is impossible since plagiarism is when a writer steals someone else’s work and passes it off as his own.
 
33. Dec. 4, 2017:
The New York Times’ Michael S. Schmidt and Sharon LaFraniere and other outlets reported that Trump Deputy National Security Adviser K.T. McFarland supposedly contradicted herself or lied about another official’s contacts with Russians. The story was heavily, repeatedly amended. CNN, MSNBC, CBS News, New York Daily News and Daily Beast picked up the story about McFarland’s “lies.”

34. Dec. 4, 2017:
ABC News’ Trish Turner and Jack Date reported that former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort had recently worked with a Russia intelligence-connected “official.” But the Russian wasn’t an “official.”
 
35. Dec. 5, 2017:
Bloomberg’s Steven Arons and the Wall Street Journal’s Jenny Strasburg reported the blockbuster that Special Counsel Robert Mueller had subpoenaed Trump’s bank records. It wasn’t true.
 

 
36. Dec. 8, 2017:
CNN’s Manu Raju and Jeremy Herb reported that Donald Trump Jr. conspired with WikiLeaks in advance of the publication of damaging Democrat party and Clinton campaign emails. Many other publications followed suit. They had the date wrong: WikiLeaks and Trump Junior were in contact after the emails were published.
37. Jan. 3, 2018:
Talking Point Memo’s Sam Thielman reported that a Russian social media company provided documents to the Senate about communications with a Trump official. The story was later corrected to say the reporter actually had no idea how the Senate received the documents and had no evidence to suggest the Russian company was cooperating with the probe.
38. Jan. 12, 2018:
Mediaite’s Lawrence Bonk, CNN’s Sophie Tatum, the Guardian, BBC, US News and World Report, Reuters and Buzzfeed’s Adolfo Flores reported a “bombshell”— that President Trump had backed down from his famous demand for a wall along the entire Southern border. However, Trump said the very same thing in February 2016 on MSNBC, on Dec. 2, 2015, in the National Journal, in October 2015 during the CNBC Republican Primary debate, and on Aug. 20, 2015, on FOX Business’ Mornings with Maria.
 
39. Jan. 15, 2018:
AP’s Laurie Kellman and Jonathan Drew reported that a new report showed trust in the media had fallen during the Trump presidency. But the report that AP cited was actually over a year old and was conducted while Obama was president.
 
40. Feb. 2, 2018:
AP’s Eric Tucker, Mary Clare Jalonick and Chad Day reported that ex-British spy Christopher Steele’s opposition research against Trump was initially funded by a conservative publication: the Washington Free Beacon. AP corrected its story because Steele only came on the project after Democrats began funding it.
 
41. March 8, 2018:
The New York Times’ Jan Rosen reported on a hypothetical family whose tax bill would rise nearly $4,000 under Trump’s tax plan. It turns out the calculations were off: the couple’s taxes would go actually go down $43; not up $4,000.
42. March 13, 2018:
The New York Times’ Adam Goldman, NBC’s Noreen O’Donnell and AP’s Deb Riechmann reported that Trump’s pick for CIA Director, Gina Haspel, had waterboarded a particular Islamic extremist terrorist dozens of time at a secret prison; and that she had mocked his suffering. In fact, Haspel wasn’t assigned to the prison until after the detainee left. ProPublica originally reported the incorrect details in Feb. 2017.
43. March 15, 2018:
AP’s Michael Biesecker, Jake Pearson and Jeff Horwitz reported that a Trump advisory board official had been a Miss America contestant and had killed a black rhino. She actually was a Mrs. America contestant and had shot a nonlethal tranquilizer dart at a white rhino.
 
Watch Sharyl Attkisson’s TEDx Talk: Is Fake News Real?
44. April 1, 2018:
AP’s Nicholas Riccardi reported that the Trump administration had ended a program to admit foreign entrepreneurs. It wasn’t true.
45. April 30, 2018:
AP reported that the NRA had banned guns during Trump and Pence speeches at the NRA’s annual meeting. AP later corrected the information because the ban had been put in place by Secret Service.
46. May 3, 2018:
NBC’s Tom Winter reported that the government had wiretapped Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen. NBC later corrected the story after three senior U.S. officials said there was no wiretap.
 
47. May 7, 2018:
CNBC’s Kevin Breuninger reported that Trump’s personal lawyer, Cohen, paid $1 million in fines related to unauthorized cars in his taxi business, had been barred from managing taxi medallions, had transferred $60 million offshore to avoid paying debts, and is awaiting trial on charges of failing to pay millions in taxes. A later correction stated that none of that was true.
 
48. May 16, 2018:
The New York Times’ Julie Hirschfeld Davis, AP, CNN’s Oliver Darcy and others excerpted a Trump comment as if he had referred to immigrants or illegal immigrants generally as “animals.” Most outlets corrected their reports later to note that Trump had specifically referred to members of the murderous criminal gang MS-13.
49. May 28, 2018
The New York Times’ Magazine editor-in-chief Jake Silverstein and CNN’s Hadas Gold shared a story with photos of immigrant children in cages as if they were new photos taken under the Trump administration. The article and photos were actually taken in 2014 under the Obama administration.
 
50. May 29, 2018
The New York Times’ Julie Davis reported the estimated size of a Trump rally to be 1,000 people. There were actually 5,500 people or more in attendance.
 
51. June 1, 2018
In a story about Trump tariffs, AP reported the dollar value of Virginia’s farm and forestry exports to Canada and Mexico was $800. It’s $800 million.
 
52. June 21, 2018
Time magazine and others used a photo of a crying Honduran child to illustrate a supposed Trump administration policy separating illegal immigrant parents and children. The child’s father later reported that agents had never separated her from her mother; the mother had taken her to the US without his knowledge and separated herself from her other children, whom she left behind.
 

53. June 22, 2018
MSNBC personality mistakenly stated that Trump had “banned” the Red Cross from visiting children separated from illegal immigrant parents.
 
54. June 28, 2018
After a newsroom shooting, a newspaper reporter falsely tweeted that the shooter “dropped his [Trump Make America Great Again] hat on newsroom floor before opening fire.”
 
55. July 10, 2018
NBC reporter Leigh Ann Caldwell reported that outgoing Supreme Court Justice Kennedy only retired after months of negotiations with Trump that concluded with Trump agreeing to replace Kennedy with Judge Kavanaugh.

Support Sharyl Attkisson’s fight against government overreach in Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI for the government computer intrusions. For more info visit: https://www.gofundme.com/sharyl-attkisson-4th-am-litigation

56. July 16, 2018
Washington Post reporter implied Trump doesn’t understand NATO countries. In fact, Trump met with the Finnish President at the NATO summit. Further, Finland is a NATO partner, just not a member.

57. Sept. 14, 2018
The New York Times issues a major correction (below) to an original “unfair” article about U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley.

58. Tues. Sept. 18, 2018
The New York Times falsely reported that a man, Mark Judge, testified he remembered an incident more than 30 year ago in which Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is accused of assault. Judge actually said the opposite: he does not remember such an incident, and that the allegations are “absolutely nuts.” The Times corrected its article in an editors’ note.

59. Sept. 23, 2018
Multiple news outlets report that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosentein has resigned or been fired. Neither turns out to be true. Axios and others eventually “update” and “clarify” their erroneous reports.

60. Oct. 14, 2018
NBC News falsely reports that President Trump praised Confederate General Robert E. Lee. Actually, Trump had praised the Union General Ulysses S. Grant.


61. Nov. 14, 2018
CNN’s Jeff Zeleny reports that President Trump has decided to fire a deputy national security adviser upon the First Lady’s demand. The Wall Street Journal reports the adviser has been “escorted out” of the White House. Later, it’s reported that neither case was true. “This did not happen. She is still here at the WH,” a senior official told the press. The adviser was reassigned to another job.

62. Dec. 24, 2018
It’s discovered that nearly everything written by a Der Spiegel reporter, who had been honored by CNN, about a supposedly racist Trump stronghold town was fabricated–like much of his other work.

Consider supporting the landmark Attkisson v. DOJ/FBI computer intrusion lawsuit: Attkisson 4th Amendment Litigation Fund
63. Dec. 26, 2018
NBC reports that Trump was the first President since 2002 not to visit the troops at Christmastime. But he (and First Lady Melania) did. NBC added a note to its story but left the false headline in place.

64. Jan. 1, 2019
CBS News claimed, in June of 2018, that Trump spokesman Sarah Huckabee Sanders would retire by the end of the year. She didn’t. As of May 2019, she was still on the job and there had been no correction or editor’s note. The same CBS story also quoted sources as saying the departure of White House assistant Raj Shah was also imminent. It wasn’t. Shah continued to serve seven more months.

65. Jan. 9, 2019
The New York Times issues a correction to a report that falsely stated former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort asked for campaign polling to be given to a Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska, who has ties to Russia President Putin. Instead, the Times now claims, Manafort actually asked his associate Rick Gates to give polling data to Ukrainian oligarchs –not Deripaska.

While working at Politico, one of the New York Times reporters, Ken Vogel, got caught sending drafts of stories to democratic officials. Another co-author, Maggie Haberman, was considered a “friendly” by Clinton campaign officials who turned to her when she worked at Politico.

“We have had her tee up stories for us before and have never been disappointed. We can do the most shaping by going to Maggie,” wrote Clinton officials in emails.

66. Jan. 11, 2019
Fox TV affiliate in Seattle, Washington airs fake, doctored video of President Trump that altered his face and made it appear as though he had stuck his tongue in and out while giving an Oval Office address.

67. Jan. 18, 2019
The Buzzfeed exclusive with anonymous sources implicating Trump in potentially criminal behavior (that Democrats and pundits said would be the nail in Trump’s impeachment coffin) is refuted in a rare rebuke from Special Counsel Mueller’s office. Buzzfeed stands by its reporting.

Fight improper government surveillance. Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI over the government computer intrusions of Attkisson’s work while she was a CBS News investigative correspondent. Visit the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund. Click here.

68. Jan. 22, 2019
The New York Times and Washington Post are among the publications that issue corrections after falsely reporting that an anti-Trump activist had served in the Vietnam War.

Additionally, multiple news employees, including a CNN employee, apologize for mischaracterizing as the aggressors Trump-supporting teenagers at a pro-life rally.

69. Jan. 26, 2019
The UK Telegraph apologizes for all the facts it got wrong in a Jan. 19 article criticizing the First Lady.

Fight government overreach and double-standard justice by supporting the Attkisson Fourth Amendment Litigation Fund for Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI for the government computer intrusions. Click here.

70. Feb. 18, 2019
While some media outlets responsibly reported and properly attributed allegations in the racist attack alleged by actor Jussie Smollett, others did not. Some unskeptically furthered the narrative that Smollett, who is black, was attacked by Trump-supporting racists who put a noose around Smollett’s neck, shouted racial slurs, told him it’s “MAGA” (Make America Great Again) country, and poured bleach on him. While details are still emerging as of this date, Chicago police have stated that Smollett is no longer considered a victim of the crimes he alleged. The New York Times receives special mention here for adding a biased non sequitur in its early reporting that treated skepticism of Smollett’s story as if it were unfounded, and fit in a dig at President Trump’s son.

But the lack of progress in the investigation has fueled speculation about whether the report was exaggerated. The president’s son Donald Trump Jr., who is known to disseminate conspiracy theories on his Twitter feed, retweeted an article this week about Smollett declining to turn over his cellphone to the police.

71. Various dates: Other faked attacks reported by the news as if confirmed
A week before Trump was elected, Hopewell Missionary Baptist Church in Mississippi was torched and the words “Vote Trump” found painted on the outside. The mayor condemned the incident as a hate crime and stated it was “an attack on the black church and the black community.” However, police later arrested a black church member for the arson. They say the man staged the fire to look like an attack by Trump supporters. Even today, some of the corrected news reports retain headlines seeming to blame Trump.
The day after Trump was elected, an incident at Elon University in North Carolina made national news. Hispanic students found a “hateful note” written on a classroom whiteboard reading, “Bye Bye Latinos.” After the story made news, it was learned that the message was written by “a Latino student who was upset about the results of the election.”
Also the day after Trump was elected, a gay man — reportedly a filmmaker — claimed that homophobic Trump supporters smashed his face with a bottle outside a bar in Santa Monica, Calif. A bloody photo was posted on Twitter, and he was said to have been treated at a local hospital. Police investigated the media reports. They said no complaint was ever filed, there was no evidence of a crime, and a check of local hospitals showed no victim in such an incident.
The week after Trump’s election, a Muslim student at the University of Louisiana, Lafayette, claimed Trump supporters pulled off her head covering, and assaulted and robbed her. She later admitted fabricatingthe story.
A month after Trump’s election, a Muslim-American woman claimed Trump supporters tried to steal her headwear and harassed her on the New York City subway. She ultimately was arrested after confessing she made up the whole story.
72. Feb. 26, 2019
It’s as good a day as any to point out that The Washington Post and others reported last November that Trump was imminently about to fire DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. The Post confirmed this with five anonymous sources. The firing was said to be likely to happen the following week.

Nielsen remained on the job for five more months before resigning.

73. Feb. 27, 2019
Testimony by former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen seemed to put the final nail in the coffin of the “dossier” claim reported by many— that Cohen had visited Prague to meet with Russians to help collude on Trump’s behalf. Cohen told Congress he’s never been to Prague or the Czech Republic, for that matter. McClatchy even reported that Cohen’s cell phone had pinged off Prague towers. Where did this apparently false information come from? “Four people spoke with McClatchy on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of information shared by their foreign intelligence connections. Each obtained their information independently from foreign intelligence connections,” reported McClatchy.

74. March 1, 2019
The Washington Post deleted a tweet containing false reporting about a January 19 incident regarding a standoff between Trump-supporting pro-life Catholic high school students and a pro-choice Native American activist. The Post wrongly stated, without attribution, that the activist had fought in the Vietnam War. The activist also falsely stated that a high school student had blocked him and “wouldn’t allow him to retreat.” These events were later called into question, and the Washington Post is being sued in a multi-million dollar libel suit over its allegedly false reporting and misrepresentations. The Post also posted an “editor’s note” on this date stating that “a more complete assessment” of the incident contradicted or failed to confirm accounts as originally reported, including that a particular student was trying to instigate a conflict.

75. Various dates
Multiple reporters and media outlets have provided false information and/or quoted incorrect anonymous sources as to the timing of the release of Special Counsel Mueller’s report on Trump-Russia collusion. The Washington Post said it would be out in summer of 2018. Bloomberg said it would be shortly after the 2018 Midterm elections. In February 2019, CNN, The Washington Post and NBC reported the report was coming the last week of February. However, it was not announced at that time.

The release of the Mueller report in April 2019 belies countless news stories over more than two years. The report does not find collusion between Trump and Russia President Putin and also concludes there’s no evidence that any American conspired or coordinated with any Russian. The many who claimed there was hard evidence of collusion in hand proved to be wrong, yet there is no record of media apologies and corrections on these points.

76. May 29, 2019
The Wall Street Journal reports the Navy used a “tarp” to cover the name of the U.S.S. John S. McCain so that President Trump wouldn’t see it on his recent visit to Yokosuka, Japan. (The late Sen. John McCain frequently attacked Trump and cast a deciding vote contrary to McCain’s campaign promise to repeal Obamacare. Trump also attacked McCain and derided McCain’s performance as a soldier in Vietnam where McCain was held as a Prisoner of War.)

After the tarp news is reported, reporters quote McCain’s daughter attacking Trump as if he had given the orders to cover the name.

It is further reported that the U.S.S. John McCain was kept out of Trump’s view, and that sailors wearing hats with the ship’s name on it were turned away and/or given the day off so that Trump would not see the McCain name.

However, shortly after these news reports, key parts of the storyline began to fall apart.

The one grain of truth appeared to be that, in advance of Trump’s trip, a military official sent an email directing that the U.S.S. McCain be kept from Trump’s view. However, importantly, that direction was not followed. Further, Trump and White House aides indicated Trump played no role and was unaware of the direction.

Significantly, military officials stated that it was untrue that a tarp was placed over the ship’s name to block it from Trump’s view. They say it was the other way around: a tarp on the ship for maintenance was removed for Trump’s visit.

Further, U.S. officials said a paint barge in front of the U.S.S. John S. McCain was ordered to be moved for Trump’s visit and was gone by the time he arrived.

The tarpaulin was used as part of hull preservation work on the McCain and was removed on Saturday, two days before Trump delivered a Memorial Day address at U.S. Naval Base Yokosuka, where the McCain was stationed. All ships remained in normal configuration during [the President’s visit.

Cmdr. Nate Christensen, spokesman for U.S. Pacific Fleet, to NBC News
Though the main components of the Wall Street Journal story appeared to have been debunked, the New York Times’ Maggie Haberman oddly tweeted out a statement that the Times had confirmed the Wall Street Journal’s “excellent scoop.”

The main part of the story that the Times seemed to have confirmed was that unnamed White House officials were concerned about Trump seeing the McCain name and that sailors wearing ball caps that sported the ship’s insignia were turned away.

However, CBS News pointed out that “it is possible the reason they were turned away is that ball caps were not part of the dress code for the event.”

U.S. officials said about 800 sailors from more than 20 ships and Navy commands were present for the president’s visit and “all wore the same Navy hat that has no logo, rather than wearing individual ship or command hats.”

Support Attkisson v. DOJ and FBI

77. July 4, 2019
Several news outlets seemed to be victimized by a bad case of wishful thinking when they reported that President Trump’s Fourth of July celebration did not draw crowds. One analysis incorrectly claimed there were “small crowds.”

The Guardian featured a photo of an empty podium in Washington D.C. prior to the celebration and claimed the White House was “struggling” to draw crowds.

However, by any factual assessment, the crowds were, in fact, huge. That’s in spite of the bad weather.

78. January 2019
In January, New York Times, Vice and others reported on the “lost” immigrant children of the Trump administration. However, AP and other fact checks stated this was a misleading term. According to AP, the “lost” children were a matter of the government not being able to track them once placed with sponsors. In some cases this was because the sponsors– many in the U.S. illegally– would not respond to the government’s follow up phone calls.

It’s not highly unusual to fail to keep track of many minors who came unaccompanied to the border. During the last year of the Obama administration, HHS was able to locate 85 percent of the minors or their sponsors, according to an inspector general’s report. The Trump administration slightly exceeded that success rate in the last three months of 2017, even as it is accused of losing children.

79. July 13, 2019
In a story about a lawsuit alleging that candidate Trump forcibly kissed a campaign worker, CNN failed to mention that that lawsuit had been dismissed. It later corrected its story to include the information.

80. July 21, 2019
Many in the media uncritically report a Georgia State legislator’s racist and false claim that a “white” man at a grocery store told her to “go back where you came from.”

Media reports link the supposed hateful comment to President Trump because Trump recently said several Democrats in Congress should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”

However, the following day, the legislator acknowledges the man did not say she should “go back to your country” or “go back to where you came from,” as she originally claimed. She goes on to say she told him to “go back.” The man adds he is not white, but a Cuban and a Democrat.

I know I told him to ‘go back.’

Rep. Erica Thomas, Georgia, a day after her original accusations
After the legislator changes her story, the local news plays up the headline that the man “admits he swore,” rather than the far more important acknowledgement that her major claim was false. (See around 2:05 in the video near the end of the story.)

Even after the legislator retracted her original accusation, it remained widely published in national headlines and news reports.

81. July 21, 2019
An MSNBC contributor and law professor falsely tweets that Fox is not going to show upcoming Congressional testimony by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller on the Trump-Russia investigation. When the error is pointed out, the contributor says she was just kidding and deletes her tweet–but not before it has been “liked” and “retweeted” thousands of times.

82. Aug. 2019
Multiple news outlets including CNN and MSNBC falsely reported that an illegal immigrant had her nursing baby ripped from her arms. The mother was not lactating, CNN later acknowledged.

83. Aug. 28, 2019
MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell apologizes for and retracts anonymous, unverified claims stating that Trump had loans with Russian co-signers. At last view, it appeared that far more people had seen or remarked on the initial information than the apology.

The now-deleted original tweet by O’Donnell stated: “A source close to Deutsche Bank says Trump’s tax returns show he pays very little income tax and, more importantly, that his loans have Russian co-signers. If true, that explains every kind word Trump has ever said about Russia and Putin.”

Last night I made an error in judgment by reporting an item about the president’s finances that didn’t go through our rigorous verification and standards process. I shouldn’t have reported it and I was wrong to discuss it on the air. I will address the issue on my show tonight.

84. Aug. 28, 2019
Ken Dilinian of NBC News corrects a false report he and others disseminated claiming that starting October 29, “children born to U.S. service members outside of the U.S. will no longer be automatically considered citizens. Parents will have to apply for citizenship for their the [sic] children in those situations.”

Correction: Experts who have looked at new USCIS policy say it applies if a service member adopts a child overseas, but children born to service members on deployment would still automatically get citizenship. I deleted tweets with the incorrect info. https://t.co/xeu8I3zrkJ

— Ken Dilanian (@KenDilanianNBC) August 28, 2019
85. Sept. 7, 2019
CNN and nearly every major media outlet criticized President Trump for tweeting that Alabama would likely be impacted by Hurricane Dorian. They claimed that was never the case. However, Trump was correct that multiple official hurricane advisories had put Alabama in a projected impacted area.

Watch for yourself.

There is no record of any corrections to these incorrect news stories. In fact, there are multiple follow ups repeating the false claims that Alabama was never in a projected path, and doubling down on the claim that Trump was inaccurate.

Rather than admit an error, some news outlets skirted the issue, parsing probabilities, “would” vs. “could,” the National Weather Service vs. the National Hurricane Center, and whether tropical storm force winds really qualify as hurricane effects.


86. Sept. 10, 2019
Citing anonymous sources, CNN and the New York Times reported— and other media repeated– claims that the CIA had to remove a top U.S. spy from Russia in 2017 because of concern over President Trump’s handling of classified information.

The CIA, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and the White House strongly refuted the story. Other media, including The New York Times and Washington Post, also contradicted CNN and reported the decision to remove the spy happened before CNN said it did and for different reasons.

[CNN’s] reporting is not only incorrect, it has the potential to put lives in danger.

Stephanie Grisham, White House press secretary
CNN’s narrative that the Central Intelligence Agency makes life-or-death decisions based on anything other than objective analysis and sound collection is simply false…Misguided speculation that the President’s handling of our nation’s most sensitive intelligence — which he has access to each and every day — drove an alleged exfiltration operation is inaccurate.

Brittany Bramell, CIA Director for Public Affairs
The reporting is materially inaccurate… as a former CIA director, I don’t talk about things like this very often — it is only the occasions that I think put people at risk, when the reporting is so egregious as to create enormous risks to the United States of America, that I even comment the way I just did.

Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State
At least some of the original stories remained posted a day later without correction, clarification or updating to include CIA’s refutation.

87. Sept. 16, 2019
The New York Times publishes an editor’s note about its recent story recounting a newly-reported accusation about an incident decades ago involving Trump-nominated Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

The editor’s note discloses for the first time that the Times never spoke to the alleged victim, and that the alleged victim had told friends she had no recollection of any such event. The Times reporters explained that that information had mistakenly been edited out of the story.

88. July 24, 2019
In testimony to Congress, special counsel Robert Mueller puts to final rest the widespread reporting in 2016 originating with Slate.com that claimed a Russian bank server had been illicitly communicating with Trump Tower. When asked about it by a member of Congress, Mueller replied that “my belief at this point is…not true.”

89. July 29, 2019
Vox.com’s Aaron Rupar tweeted that Trump suggested he was a “9/11 First Responder.” In fact, Trump stated the opposite: “I’m not considering myself a first responder.”

90. Sept. 25, 2019
The Washington Post, quoting anonymous sources, reported that President Trump’s Director of National Intelligence threatened to quit over an alleged whistleblower issue.

However, DNI Joseph Maguire issues a statement indicating the Post article was entirely false. “At no time have I considered resigning my position since assuming this role,” wrote Maguire in a statement.

91. Sept. 25, 2019
The Daily Beast and other media outlets reported that President Trump asked the President of Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, eight times in one phone call.

However, the released transcript notes reveal Trump mentioned Biden’s son (not by name) one time. However, many in the media claimed the “eight times” allegation was really true because they counted each phrase in which Trump referred to possible corruption or the need for some sort of investigation.

(There are other areas of possible mistaken reporting regarding the same phone call, but they are generally subject to interpretation.)

92. Sept. 29, 2019
CBS News’s 60 Minutes reports “the government whistleblower who set off the impeachment inquiry of President Trump is under federal protection because they fear for their safety.”

Shortly after that report, the attorney for the unnamed “whistleblower,” Mark Zaid, tweeted out a statement that read: “NEWS ALERT: 60 Minutes completely misinterpreted contents of our letter.” (Sixty Minutes says it stands by the Scott Pelley report.)

93. Sept. 30, 2019
When a black girl claims white boys at school held her down, cut off her hair and called her “nappy” and “ugly,” the story makes national news. Multiple news outlets improperly report some details as if they are established as true, without proper attribution. For example, NBC writes, “The attack happened Monday…” and “The second boy grabbed her arms, while the third cut off some of her dreadlocks.” A local NBC affiliate writes: “…she was at recess and about to go down a slide when one of the boys grabbed her and put a hand over her mouth. Another boy grabbed her arms. A third boy cut off some of her hair.” CBS writes, “The incident took place…” (as if an incident had been factually established rather than was an allegation).

Many news reports also connect the attack to President Trump’s Vice President, Mike Pence, by stating that the “attack” happened at “a Christian school in Virginia where Vice President Mike Pence’s wife works.”

However, it turns out there was no attack or “incident.” Three days after the initial reports, the child’s family reported the whole story was made up, and they apologized.

94. Oct. 13, 2019
ABC airs video purportedly showing a “slaughter” and “horrific report of atrocities” against Kurds by Turkey after President Trump withdrew U.S. troops. (The video is allegedly not combat video at all.)

CORRECTION: We’ve taken down video that aired on “World News Tonight" Sunday and “Good Morning America” this morning that appeared to be from the Syrian border immediately after questions were raised about its accuracy. ABC News regrets the error.

— World News Tonight (@ABCWorldNews) October 14, 2019
95. Oct. 16, 2019
Many major news outlets including Yahoo, USA Today, Roll Call, NBC, ABC and Fox quotes President Trump as saying Turkey’s invasion of Syria “is not our problem.” In a subsequent correction, NBC and others said, Trump actually said “it’s not our border.” However, hours after NBC’s correction, the initial allegedly false quote remains on Yahoo, USA Today, Fox, Roll Call, the Washington Times and other news sites.

96. Sun. Oct. 27, 2019
Multiple media claims state that President Trump was golfing during the U.S. raid in Syria that captured the head of the Islamic terrorist group ISIS, al-Baghdadi; and that a White House situation room photo had been “staged.” It turns out, according to later reports, that Trump had finished golfing and was at the White House during the operation. (Obama White House photographer Pete Souza had apparently originally tweeted out incorrect information on timing.)

97. Nov. 16, 2019
Rampant speculation ensues after a contributor to The Hill claims  President Trump visited Walter Reed National Medical Center due to chest discomfort. A White House statement from Trump’s physician issued two days later stated that was not the case.

“Despite some of the speculation, the President has not had any chest pain, nor was he evaluated or treated or any urgent or acute issues. Specifically, he did not undergo any specialized cardiac or neurologic evaluations,” the president’s physician stated.

98. Nov. 19, 2019
London’s Daily Mail posts a sensational headline during the impeachment hearings against President Trump. It claims that a key witness, Ambassador Kurt Volker, had “walked back” his testimony in a way that was detrimental to Trump. When Volker was asked, in real time at the hearing, if the Daily Mail headline was correct and he had, indeed, changed his testimony, Volker stated that no. The headline was wrong.

99. Nov. 19, 2019
Agence France Press publishes a sensational story saying that more than 100,000 children are being held in migration-related detention in the U.S. under President Trump. It turns out that was the number in 2015 under President Obama.

AFP is withdrawing this story.

The author of the report has clarified that his figures do not represent the number of children currently in migration-related US detention, but the total number of children in migration-related US detention in 2015.

We will delete the story. https://t.co/p30UjEWl7u

— AFP news agency (@AFP) November 19, 2019
100. Nov. 28, 2019
Newsweek falsely reports that President Trump is spending Thanksgiving golfing in Florida at his Mar-a-Lago Resort. He was actually in Afghanistan serving dinner to U.S. troops. It’s the second year in a row that national media makes the same mistake. (The reporter, Jessica Kwong, was reportedly later fired.)

Trump headed to Afghanistan to surprise U.S. troops on Thanksgiving https://t.co/f7Xeqz1ZGQ Deleting this tweet because it was written before knowing about the president’s surprise visit to Afghanistan-an honest mistake. Story has already been updated, as shown in the screenshot. pic.twitter.com/g9CfPaV2kQ

— Jessica Kwong (@JessicaGKwong) November 29, 2019
101. Nov. 24, 2019
It turns out the same Newsweek reporter, Kwong, reported an allegedly misleading story the week before about President Trump’s tipping implying he’d been cheap.

Newsweek later updated the story to remove the headline reference to a “thin stack of cash” and include that it was 100 dollar bills, and above and beyond what Trump had already tipped the servers.

102. Dec. 3, 2019
(Allegation) Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) files a $435 million defamation lawsuit against CNN over a Nov. 23 CNN story that claimed Nunes had flown to Vienna, Austria in December 2018 to meet with a former Ukrainian prosecutor in to dig up dirt on Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.

Nunes says at the time CNN claimed he was in Vienna, he was actually in Benghazi, Libya and Malta for meetings; and Nunes produced photographs he says proves that. Additionally, he says he has never met with the named former Ukrainian prosecutor in Vienna or anywhere else.

(If evidence ultimately shows CNN was correct and Nunes is incorrect, this post will be updated and removed from the count.)

103. Dec. 9, 2019
It would be difficult if not impossible from a practical standpoint to list the thousands of the media reports, from the New York Times to CNN, that have now been proven false by information documented in Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report on the FBI’s misbehavior in investigating the Trump campaign.

Here, they will all be grouped together as one media mistake, but include nearly every major national media outlet that falsely reported, as if fact, that the discredited Democrat-funded “dossier” — submitted by the FBI to get a wiretap to spy on Trump associate Carter Page — was only a “small part” of the wiretap application. Also, the reports that Page was a Russian spy and the conduit between Trump and Putin. Also, the many insistences that Trump was a “Putin stooge” and coordinating with Putin or Russia, when the FBI’s own evidence now shows they never found anything remotely close to that. In fact, they appeared to disprove it.

104. Jan. 31, 2018
(Out of chronological order because it just came to my attention.)

Media reports in Dec. 2017 claimed the Trump administration banned officials at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from using seven words.

In response, doctors posted photos of themselves with tape over their mouths.

It turns out documents showed there was “not a ban or prohibition on words but rather suggestions on how to improve the chances of getting funding.”

105. Dec. 25, 2019
(Allegation) An unusually unequivocal denial of a Wall Street Journal report come from the Trump administration. Trump officials say the anonymously-sourced report is “total false, untrue and baseless. It did not happen.”

If information comes to light that proves the Wall Street Journal source was accurate at the time, this post will be updated to reflect that.

106. Dec. 16, 2019
The news media widely misreport that the report by Dept. of Justice Inspector General Horowitz found “no political bias” in the Russia probe. As Horowitz made clear in his Congressional testimony, that is false.

Instead, Horowitz gave a limited, qualified opinion about a narrow part of the opening of the investigation, stating he could not find documentary or testimonial evidence that the serious political bias of various FBI officials impacted the original decision to open the probe into Trump campaign-related Americans.

Horowitz explicitly acknowledged that various FBI officials involved in the probe, including Peter Strzok and Lisa Page had political bias against Trump.

He also stated, in Congressional testimony, that Christopher Steele, the political opposition researcher hired by the Clinton campaign to provide the anti-Trump “dossier” to the FBI, had political bias.

And he stated that it’s possible political bias was behind other inexplicable and egregious errors the FBI made during the probe, which he did not say was free of bias. Those matters, Horowitz testified, have been referred to the criminal probe and to the FBI to handle.

107. Aug. 5, 2019
(Out of chronological order because it just came to my attention.)

MSNBC’s Nicole Wallace falsely claims that President Trump had talked about “exterminating Latinos.” She apologized the next day.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2019, 06:44:51 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 49762
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2654 on: December 26, 2019, 02:36:08 PM »
" .“NBC made a substantial $ payment to the family without going through contentious negotiaton,” he added. “Richard and his mother went through a painful time which I deeply regret. I hope we all learned a lesson, including the FBI which was my principal source.”


Well obviously NBC or the FBI did not learn any lessons.

but the rest of his  points are  appreciated.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2655 on: December 27, 2019, 06:44:40 AM »
Richard Jewell died in 2007. I didn't catch the part where the media apologize to his face.

Unfortunately, fake news is real. How long does 'Russian spy' Carter page have to live in order to get his good name back?  Decades after Richard Jewell, they had no shame spreading the tales of Christopher Steele, that never passed the smell test.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 49762
    • View Profile
POTP on Maddow and the Dossier
« Reply #2656 on: December 27, 2019, 12:54:26 PM »
This is the sort of reflection the media should be doing:  how did they fall for such an obvious bag of bulllshit, and why did they get it all so wrong?





Rachel Maddow rooted for the Steele dossier to be true. Then it fell apart.


Erik Wemple
Media critic
Dec. 26, 2019 at 8:43 a.m. PST

Fifth in a series on the media’s handling of the Steele dossier. See Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4.

In March 2017, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow invited Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) onto her show to talk Russia.
She noted that in a House hearing, Schiff had cited the 35-page dossier of memorandums compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. Ever since that document had burst into national politics — and surfaced on the BuzzFeed website in January 2017 — Maddow had closely monitored its reception.

Each time she addressed the dossier, she was careful to alert viewers that it was unverified. But she had espied some developments that appeared to support the dossier’s nitty-gritty. So she asked Schiff: “When you cited … that dossier, should we stop describing that as an uncorroborated dossier? Has some of the information of that been corroborated?”

Schiff sidestepped the question.

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz did not. Over a nearly two-year investigation released on Dec. 9, Horowitz and a team of investigators reviewed at least a million records, interviewed more than 100 individuals and otherwise probed the actions of the FBI and the Justice Department in the Russia investigation. In so doing, they reached an answer to Maddow’s question.


Claims in the 35-page dossier fell into three pails, according to the report: “The FBI concluded, among other things, that although consistent with known efforts by Russia to interfere in the 2016 U.S. elections, much of the material in the Steele election reports, including allegations about Donald Trump and members of the Trump campaign relied upon in the Carter Page FISA applications, could not be corroborated; that certain allegations were inaccurate or inconsistent with information gathered by the Crossfire Hurricane team; and that the limited information that was corroborated related to time, location and title information, much of which was publicly available.”


The Horowitz team didn’t attempt an independent fact-check of the dossier, opting instead to report what the FBI had concluded about the document. Unflattering revelations pop up at every turn in the 400-page-plus report. It reveals that the CIA considered it a hodgepodge of “internet rumor”; that the FBI considered one of its central allegations — that former Trump attorney Michael Cohen had traveled to Prague for a collusive meeting with Russians — “not true”; that Steele’s sources weren’t quite a crack international spy team. After the 2016 election, for instance, Steele directed his primary source to seek corroboration of the claims. “According to [an FBI official], during an interview in May 2017, the Primary Sub-source said the corroboration was ‘zero,’” reads the report.
The ubiquity of Horowitz’s debunking passages suggests that he wanted the public to come away with the impression that the dossier was a flabby, hasty, precipitous, conclusory charade of a document. Viewers of certain MSNBC fare were surely blindsided by the news, if they ever even heard it.

Name a host on cable news who has dug more deeply into Trump-Russia than MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. She’s read hundreds, maybe thousands, of court filings; she’s read the plume of literature on Russia-Trump; and she’s out with a new book on the bane of petro-states: “Blowout: Corrupted Democracy, Rogue State Russia, and the Richest, Most Destructive Industry on Earth.”


As part of her Russianist phase, Maddow became a clearinghouse for news increments regarding the dossier. Just days after BuzzFeed published the dossier in its entirety, she reported on the frustration of congressional Democrats with then-FBI Director James B. Comey, who was declining to divulge whether his people had opened an investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the 2016 Trump presidential campaign.

Director Comey refused to answer my question about whether the FBI has investigated Trump campaign contacts with Russia
— Ron Wyden (@RonWyden) January 10, 2017

Sorting through the silence from the FBI and the unverified claims in the dossier, Maddow riffed on her Jan. 13, 2017, program: “I mean, had the FBI looked into what was in that dossier and found that it was all patently false, they could tell us that now, right?” said Maddow. “I mean, the dossier has now been publicly released. If the FBI looked into it and they found it was all trash, there’s no reason they can’t tell us that now. They’re not telling us that now. They’re not saying that. They’re not saying anything.”

That line of analysis has gained some important context via the Horowitz report. The FBI did, in fact, find “potentially serious problems” with Steele’s reporting as early as January 2017. A source review in March 2017 “did not make any findings that would have altered that judgment.”

It was dossier season, in any case, for Maddow.

In March 2017, the host glommed onto recent reporting by CNN and the New Yorker to the effect that U.S. authorities had confirmed that “some of the conversations described in the dossier took place between the same individuals on the same days and from the same locations as detailed in the dossier,” according to CNN. The New Yorker wrote that U.S. intelligence had confirmed “some of its less explosive claims, relating to conversations with foreign nationals.” The “baseline” claim of the dossier — that the Trump campaign and Russia participated in a towering election conspiracy — hadn’t yet borne out, conceded Maddow. “But even if that is as yet in itself uncorroborated and undocumented,” she said, “all the supporting details are checking out, even the really outrageous ones. A lot of them are starting to bear out under scrutiny. It seems like a new one each passing day.”

So it went. Here’s a timeline:


On May 3, 2017, Maddow cited a CNN report that “parts of this dossier passed muster even in federal court when the dossier was used in part to justify a secret FISA court warrant for U.S. surveillance on a Trump campaign adviser.” Thanks to Horowitz, we now know that officials misused the dossier in this process, failing to disclose to the FISA court dossier-debunking information. Never place blind faith in the FBI!

“The Republican claim today was that the dossier has been increasingly discredited. That’s not true in terms of the public record about the dossier. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. As time goes on, more and more pieces do get independently corroborated,” Maddow said.

On Aug. 23, 2017, Maddow said: “[Even] though the White House and people from the Trump campaign and the Trump administration keep denouncing it as like this dodgy dossier, reporters routinely talk about it as unverified and uncorroborated. You know what? That’s less and less true all the time.” The comment followed a Senate Judiciary Committee interview with Glenn Simpson, co-founder of Fusion GPS, the research firm that engaged Steele to compile the dossier.


On Oct. 5, 2017, Maddow said that Steele had “a lot” of the dossier “dead to rights.”

On Dec. 8, 2017, Maddow aired a special report on the dossier. “Above all else, we know this about the now famous dossier: Christopher Steele had this story before the rest of America did. And he got it from Russian sources,” said the host, who used the term “deep cover sources” to describe Steele’s network. According to the Horowitz report, the “Primary Sub-source” for the dossier told the FBI that the information he/she passed along amounted to “word of mouth and hearsay.”

On April 16, 2018, Maddow cited the McClatchy story by Greg Gordon and Peter Stone that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III had evidence that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen had traveled to Prague in 2016. The scoop would appear to have supported a key claim in the dossier that Cohen made the trip to meet with Russians for collusive purposes. According to the Horowitz report, the FBI determined that the claim about Cohen’s travels was “not true.”


On Oct. 17, 2018, Maddow played a clip of then-Fox News correspondent Catherine Herridge posing questions to Joshua Levy, counsel to Fusion GPS and its co-founders. Pressed on whether the dossier had been substantiated, Levy responded, in part: “The central thesis to the first memo Mr. Steele wrote said that the Russians were helping President Trump win the presidency and give him information to win the presidency. The U.S. intelligence community has since found that that was the case.”

The release of the Mueller report in April provided a kick in the derriere for backers of the dossier. As Glenn Kessler pointed out in The Post, the central allegation of the dossier — an “extensive conspiracy between campaign team and Kremlin, sanctioned at highest levels and involving Russian diplomatic staff based in the US” as well as an "Agreed exchange of information established in both directions” — found no corroboration from Mueller’s investigation, even though the special counsel’s team was charged with probing just this matter.

Several days after the Mueller report emerged, Maddow addressed not the dissonance between Mueller and the dossier, but a point of possible corroboration. In perhaps its most famous allegation, the dossier claimed that Trump had rented a suite at the Ritz Carlton in Moscow and “employed” prostitutes to perform a perverted ritual for him. It suggested that there were tapes of the show, the better to amass kompromat against Trump.


A footnote in the Mueller report, noted Maddow, bore a possible connection to this part of the dossier. It turned out that Russian businessman Giorgi Rtskhiladze had sent a text message to Cohen on Oct. 30, 2016, saying, “Stopped flow of tapes from Russia but not sure if there’s anything else. Just so you know…” Those tapes were “compromising,” Rtskhiladze told the special counsel. However, he also said “he was told the tapes were fake, but he did not communicate that to Cohen.”

Seizing on the revelations, Maddow commented: “[According] to Mueller, Cohen then told Trump about that before the election. So that means Trump knew that somewhere in the former Soviet Union, a business buddy of his had taken action to make sure tapes, supposedly from Trump’s trip to Russia, those tapes weren’t getting out. Don’t worry, all taken care of. I took care of that for you, right?” she said.

With that, the dossier ceased performing its role as a central character on “The Rachel Maddow Show.” On the day Horowitz released his punishing report — with all its assertions about the dossier’s dubiety — Maddow chose not to focus on the integrity of the document that she’d once claimed was accumulating credibility on a nearly daily basis. She said this: “The inspector general debunks that there was any anti-Trump political bias motivating these decisions. They debunked the idea that the Christopher Steele dossier of opposition research against Trump was the basis for opening the FBI’s Russia investigation. It absolutely was not, and ‘Oh, by the way, no, there was no spying on the Trump campaign.’”

All legitimate points. Conspiracists including Fox News host Sean Hannity had indeed argued that the dossier triggered Crossfire Hurricane. But as the New York Times first reported in late 2017, the precipitating circumstance was intelligence from Australia indicating that a Trump campaign adviser had claimed Russia had damaging information on Hillary Clinton.

Since that Dec. 9 mention, the dossier has gone in hiding from “The Rachel Maddow Show.” Perhaps a full inventory of the dossier has yielded to coverage of President Trump’s impeachment — clearly a humongous story.

The case for Maddow is that her dossier coverage stemmed from public documents, congressional proceedings and published reports from outlets with solid investigative histories. She included warnings about the unverified assertions and didn’t use the dossier as a source for wild claims. There is something fishy, furthermore, about that Mueller footnote regarding the “tapes.” In their recent book on the dossier, “Crime in Progress,” the Fusion GPS co-founders wrote that Steele believes the document is 70-percent accurate.

The case against Maddow is far stronger. When small bits of news arose in favor of the dossier, the franchise MSNBC host pumped air into them. At least some of her many fans surely came away from her broadcasts thinking the dossier was a serious piece of investigative research, not the flimflam, quick-twitch game of telephone outlined in the Horowitz report. She seemed to be rooting for the document.

And when large bits of news arose against the dossier, Maddow found other topics more compelling.

She was there for the bunkings, absent for the debunkings — a pattern of misleading and dishonest asymmetry.
In an October edition of the podcast “Skullduggery,” Michael Isikoff of Yahoo News pressed Maddow on her show’s approach to Russia. Here’s a key exchange:

Isikoff: Do you accept that there are times that you overstated what the evidence was and you made claims and suggestions that Trump was totally in Vladimir Putin’s pocket and they had something on him and that he was perhaps a Russian asset and we can’t really conclude that?

Maddow: What have I claimed that’s been disproven?

Isikoff: Well, you’ve given a lot of credence to the Steele dossier.

Maddow: I have?

Isikoff: Well, you’ve talked about it quite a bit, I mean, you’ve suggested it.

Maddow: I feel like you’re arguing about impressions of me, rather than actually basing this on something you’ve seen or heard me do.

After some back and forth about particulars of the Mueller report and the dossier with Isikoff, Maddow ripped:

“You’re trying to litigate the Steele dossier through me as if I am the embodiment of the Steele dossier, which I think is creepy, and I think it’s unwarranted. And it’s not like I’ve been making the case for the accuracy of the Steele dossier and that’s been the basis of my Russia reporting. That’s just not true.”

Asked to comment on how she approached the dossier, Maddow declined to provide an on-the-record response to the Erik Wemple Blog

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
Wow Isikoff
« Reply #2657 on: December 27, 2019, 02:03:46 PM »
standing up to Mad Cow.  (sort of)

and he is no Republican by any stretch of any imagination

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17452
    • View Profile
Re: POTP on Maddow and the Dossier
« Reply #2658 on: December 27, 2019, 05:33:44 PM »
They didn't fall for anything. They helped build it.


This is the sort of reflection the media should be doing:  how did they fall for such an obvious bag of bulllshit, and why did they get it all so wrong?





Rachel Maddow rooted for the Steele dossier to be true. Then it fell apart.


Erik Wemple
Media critic
Dec. 26, 2019 at 8:43 a.m. PST

Fifth in a series on the media’s handling of the Steele dossier. See Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4.

In March 2017, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow invited Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) onto her show to talk Russia.
She noted that in a House hearing, Schiff had cited the 35-page dossier of memorandums compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. Ever since that document had burst into national politics — and surfaced on the BuzzFeed website in January 2017 — Maddow had closely monitored its reception.

Each time she addressed the dossier, she was careful to alert viewers that it was unverified. But she had espied some developments that appeared to support the dossier’s nitty-gritty. So she asked Schiff: “When you cited … that dossier, should we stop describing that as an uncorroborated dossier? Has some of the information of that been corroborated?”

Schiff sidestepped the question.

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz did not. Over a nearly two-year investigation released on Dec. 9, Horowitz and a team of investigators reviewed at least a million records, interviewed more than 100 individuals and otherwise probed the actions of the FBI and the Justice Department in the Russia investigation. In so doing, they reached an answer to Maddow’s question.


Claims in the 35-page dossier fell into three pails, according to the report: “The FBI concluded, among other things, that although consistent with known efforts by Russia to interfere in the 2016 U.S. elections, much of the material in the Steele election reports, including allegations about Donald Trump and members of the Trump campaign relied upon in the Carter Page FISA applications, could not be corroborated; that certain allegations were inaccurate or inconsistent with information gathered by the Crossfire Hurricane team; and that the limited information that was corroborated related to time, location and title information, much of which was publicly available.”


The Horowitz team didn’t attempt an independent fact-check of the dossier, opting instead to report what the FBI had concluded about the document. Unflattering revelations pop up at every turn in the 400-page-plus report. It reveals that the CIA considered it a hodgepodge of “internet rumor”; that the FBI considered one of its central allegations — that former Trump attorney Michael Cohen had traveled to Prague for a collusive meeting with Russians — “not true”; that Steele’s sources weren’t quite a crack international spy team. After the 2016 election, for instance, Steele directed his primary source to seek corroboration of the claims. “According to [an FBI official], during an interview in May 2017, the Primary Sub-source said the corroboration was ‘zero,’” reads the report.
The ubiquity of Horowitz’s debunking passages suggests that he wanted the public to come away with the impression that the dossier was a flabby, hasty, precipitous, conclusory charade of a document. Viewers of certain MSNBC fare were surely blindsided by the news, if they ever even heard it.

Name a host on cable news who has dug more deeply into Trump-Russia than MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. She’s read hundreds, maybe thousands, of court filings; she’s read the plume of literature on Russia-Trump; and she’s out with a new book on the bane of petro-states: “Blowout: Corrupted Democracy, Rogue State Russia, and the Richest, Most Destructive Industry on Earth.”


As part of her Russianist phase, Maddow became a clearinghouse for news increments regarding the dossier. Just days after BuzzFeed published the dossier in its entirety, she reported on the frustration of congressional Democrats with then-FBI Director James B. Comey, who was declining to divulge whether his people had opened an investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the 2016 Trump presidential campaign.

Director Comey refused to answer my question about whether the FBI has investigated Trump campaign contacts with Russia
— Ron Wyden (@RonWyden) January 10, 2017

Sorting through the silence from the FBI and the unverified claims in the dossier, Maddow riffed on her Jan. 13, 2017, program: “I mean, had the FBI looked into what was in that dossier and found that it was all patently false, they could tell us that now, right?” said Maddow. “I mean, the dossier has now been publicly released. If the FBI looked into it and they found it was all trash, there’s no reason they can’t tell us that now. They’re not telling us that now. They’re not saying that. They’re not saying anything.”

That line of analysis has gained some important context via the Horowitz report. The FBI did, in fact, find “potentially serious problems” with Steele’s reporting as early as January 2017. A source review in March 2017 “did not make any findings that would have altered that judgment.”

It was dossier season, in any case, for Maddow.

In March 2017, the host glommed onto recent reporting by CNN and the New Yorker to the effect that U.S. authorities had confirmed that “some of the conversations described in the dossier took place between the same individuals on the same days and from the same locations as detailed in the dossier,” according to CNN. The New Yorker wrote that U.S. intelligence had confirmed “some of its less explosive claims, relating to conversations with foreign nationals.” The “baseline” claim of the dossier — that the Trump campaign and Russia participated in a towering election conspiracy — hadn’t yet borne out, conceded Maddow. “But even if that is as yet in itself uncorroborated and undocumented,” she said, “all the supporting details are checking out, even the really outrageous ones. A lot of them are starting to bear out under scrutiny. It seems like a new one each passing day.”

So it went. Here’s a timeline:


On May 3, 2017, Maddow cited a CNN report that “parts of this dossier passed muster even in federal court when the dossier was used in part to justify a secret FISA court warrant for U.S. surveillance on a Trump campaign adviser.” Thanks to Horowitz, we now know that officials misused the dossier in this process, failing to disclose to the FISA court dossier-debunking information. Never place blind faith in the FBI!

“The Republican claim today was that the dossier has been increasingly discredited. That’s not true in terms of the public record about the dossier. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. As time goes on, more and more pieces do get independently corroborated,” Maddow said.

On Aug. 23, 2017, Maddow said: “[Even] though the White House and people from the Trump campaign and the Trump administration keep denouncing it as like this dodgy dossier, reporters routinely talk about it as unverified and uncorroborated. You know what? That’s less and less true all the time.” The comment followed a Senate Judiciary Committee interview with Glenn Simpson, co-founder of Fusion GPS, the research firm that engaged Steele to compile the dossier.


On Oct. 5, 2017, Maddow said that Steele had “a lot” of the dossier “dead to rights.”

On Dec. 8, 2017, Maddow aired a special report on the dossier. “Above all else, we know this about the now famous dossier: Christopher Steele had this story before the rest of America did. And he got it from Russian sources,” said the host, who used the term “deep cover sources” to describe Steele’s network. According to the Horowitz report, the “Primary Sub-source” for the dossier told the FBI that the information he/she passed along amounted to “word of mouth and hearsay.”

On April 16, 2018, Maddow cited the McClatchy story by Greg Gordon and Peter Stone that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III had evidence that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen had traveled to Prague in 2016. The scoop would appear to have supported a key claim in the dossier that Cohen made the trip to meet with Russians for collusive purposes. According to the Horowitz report, the FBI determined that the claim about Cohen’s travels was “not true.”


On Oct. 17, 2018, Maddow played a clip of then-Fox News correspondent Catherine Herridge posing questions to Joshua Levy, counsel to Fusion GPS and its co-founders. Pressed on whether the dossier had been substantiated, Levy responded, in part: “The central thesis to the first memo Mr. Steele wrote said that the Russians were helping President Trump win the presidency and give him information to win the presidency. The U.S. intelligence community has since found that that was the case.”

The release of the Mueller report in April provided a kick in the derriere for backers of the dossier. As Glenn Kessler pointed out in The Post, the central allegation of the dossier — an “extensive conspiracy between campaign team and Kremlin, sanctioned at highest levels and involving Russian diplomatic staff based in the US” as well as an "Agreed exchange of information established in both directions” — found no corroboration from Mueller’s investigation, even though the special counsel’s team was charged with probing just this matter.

Several days after the Mueller report emerged, Maddow addressed not the dissonance between Mueller and the dossier, but a point of possible corroboration. In perhaps its most famous allegation, the dossier claimed that Trump had rented a suite at the Ritz Carlton in Moscow and “employed” prostitutes to perform a perverted ritual for him. It suggested that there were tapes of the show, the better to amass kompromat against Trump.


A footnote in the Mueller report, noted Maddow, bore a possible connection to this part of the dossier. It turned out that Russian businessman Giorgi Rtskhiladze had sent a text message to Cohen on Oct. 30, 2016, saying, “Stopped flow of tapes from Russia but not sure if there’s anything else. Just so you know…” Those tapes were “compromising,” Rtskhiladze told the special counsel. However, he also said “he was told the tapes were fake, but he did not communicate that to Cohen.”

Seizing on the revelations, Maddow commented: “[According] to Mueller, Cohen then told Trump about that before the election. So that means Trump knew that somewhere in the former Soviet Union, a business buddy of his had taken action to make sure tapes, supposedly from Trump’s trip to Russia, those tapes weren’t getting out. Don’t worry, all taken care of. I took care of that for you, right?” she said.

With that, the dossier ceased performing its role as a central character on “The Rachel Maddow Show.” On the day Horowitz released his punishing report — with all its assertions about the dossier’s dubiety — Maddow chose not to focus on the integrity of the document that she’d once claimed was accumulating credibility on a nearly daily basis. She said this: “The inspector general debunks that there was any anti-Trump political bias motivating these decisions. They debunked the idea that the Christopher Steele dossier of opposition research against Trump was the basis for opening the FBI’s Russia investigation. It absolutely was not, and ‘Oh, by the way, no, there was no spying on the Trump campaign.’”

All legitimate points. Conspiracists including Fox News host Sean Hannity had indeed argued that the dossier triggered Crossfire Hurricane. But as the New York Times first reported in late 2017, the precipitating circumstance was intelligence from Australia indicating that a Trump campaign adviser had claimed Russia had damaging information on Hillary Clinton.

Since that Dec. 9 mention, the dossier has gone in hiding from “The Rachel Maddow Show.” Perhaps a full inventory of the dossier has yielded to coverage of President Trump’s impeachment — clearly a humongous story.

The case for Maddow is that her dossier coverage stemmed from public documents, congressional proceedings and published reports from outlets with solid investigative histories. She included warnings about the unverified assertions and didn’t use the dossier as a source for wild claims. There is something fishy, furthermore, about that Mueller footnote regarding the “tapes.” In their recent book on the dossier, “Crime in Progress,” the Fusion GPS co-founders wrote that Steele believes the document is 70-percent accurate.

The case against Maddow is far stronger. When small bits of news arose in favor of the dossier, the franchise MSNBC host pumped air into them. At least some of her many fans surely came away from her broadcasts thinking the dossier was a serious piece of investigative research, not the flimflam, quick-twitch game of telephone outlined in the Horowitz report. She seemed to be rooting for the document.

And when large bits of news arose against the dossier, Maddow found other topics more compelling.

She was there for the bunkings, absent for the debunkings — a pattern of misleading and dishonest asymmetry.
In an October edition of the podcast “Skullduggery,” Michael Isikoff of Yahoo News pressed Maddow on her show’s approach to Russia. Here’s a key exchange:

Isikoff: Do you accept that there are times that you overstated what the evidence was and you made claims and suggestions that Trump was totally in Vladimir Putin’s pocket and they had something on him and that he was perhaps a Russian asset and we can’t really conclude that?

Maddow: What have I claimed that’s been disproven?

Isikoff: Well, you’ve given a lot of credence to the Steele dossier.

Maddow: I have?

Isikoff: Well, you’ve talked about it quite a bit, I mean, you’ve suggested it.

Maddow: I feel like you’re arguing about impressions of me, rather than actually basing this on something you’ve seen or heard me do.

After some back and forth about particulars of the Mueller report and the dossier with Isikoff, Maddow ripped:

“You’re trying to litigate the Steele dossier through me as if I am the embodiment of the Steele dossier, which I think is creepy, and I think it’s unwarranted. And it’s not like I’ve been making the case for the accuracy of the Steele dossier and that’s been the basis of my Russia reporting. That’s just not true.”

Asked to comment on how she approached the dossier, Maddow declined to provide an on-the-record response to the Erik Wemple Blog

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 49762
    • View Profile
POTH blows off historians on the 1619 Project
« Reply #2659 on: December 29, 2019, 06:49:47 AM »

1:
https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/22/historians-rip-nyt-request-correction-1619-project/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=11357

2:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-1619-project-gets-schooled-11576540494?mod=djemMER_h

Note the mention of Pete Buttgig

The ‘1619 Project’ Gets Schooled
The New York Times tries to rewrite U.S. history, but its falsehoods are exposed by surprising sources.
By Elliot Kaufman
Dec. 16, 2019 6:54 pm ET


‘So wrong in so many ways” is how Gordon Wood, the Pulitzer Prize-winning historian of the American Revolution, characterized the New York Times’s “1619 Project.” James McPherson, dean of Civil War historians and another Pulitzer winner, said the Times presented an “unbalanced, one-sided account” that “left most of the history out.” Even more surprising than the criticism from these generally liberal historians was where the interviews appeared: on the World Socialist Web Site, run by the Trotskyist Socialist Equality Party.

The “1619 Project” was launched in August with a 100-page spread in the Times’s Sunday magazine. It intends to “reframe the country’s history” by crossing out 1776 as America’s founding date and substituting 1619, the year 20 or so African slaves were brought to Jamestown, Va. The project has been celebrated up and down the liberal establishment, praised by Sen. Kamala Harris and Mayor Pete Buttigieg.

A September essay for the World Socialist Web Site called the project a “racialist falsification” of history. That didn’t get much attention, but in November the interviews with the historians went viral. “I wish my books would have this kind of reaction,” Mr. Wood says in an email. “It still strikes me as amazing why the NY Times would put its authority behind a project that has such weak scholarly support.” He adds that fellow historians have privately expressed their agreement. Mr. McPherson coolly describes the project’s “implicit position that there have never been any good white people, thereby ignoring white radicals and even liberals who have supported racial equality.”

The project’s creator, Nikole Hannah-Jones, is proud that it “decenters whiteness” and disdains its critics as “old, white male historians.” She tweeted of Mr. McPherson: “Who considers him preeminent? I don’t.” Her own qualifications are an undergraduate degree in history and African-American studies and a master’s in journalism. She says the project goes beyond Mr. McPherson’s expertise, the Civil War. “For the most part,” she writes in its lead essay, “black Americans fought back alone” against racism. No wonder she’d rather not talk about the Civil War.

To the Trotskyists, Ms. Hannah-Jones writes: “You all have truly revealed yourselves for the anti-black folks you really are.” She calls them “white men claiming to be socialists.” Perhaps they’re guilty of being white men, but they’re definitely socialists. Their faction, called the Workers League until 1995, was “one of the most strident and rigid Marxist groups in America” during the Cold War, says Harvey Klehr, a leading historian of American communism.

“Ours is not a patriotic, flag-waving kind of perspective,” says Thomas Mackaman, the World Socialist Web Site’s interviewer and a history professor at King’s College in Wilkes-Barre, Pa. He simply recognizes that the arrival of 20 slaves in 1619 wasn’t a “world-altering event.” Slavery had existed across the world for millennia, and there were already slaves elsewhere in what would become the U.S. before 1619.

But “even if you want to make slavery the central story of American history,” he says, the Times gets it backward. The American Revolution didn’t found a “slavocracy,” as Ms. Hannah-Jones puts it. Instead, in Mr. Mackaman’s telling, it “brought slavery in for questioning in a way that had never been done before” by “raising universal human equality as a fundamental principle.” Nor was protecting slavery “one of the primary reasons” the colonists declared independence, as Ms. Hannah-Jones claims. It’s no coincidence the abolitionists rapidly won votes to end slavery in five of the original 13 states, along with Vermont and the new states of the Midwest.

Ms. Hannah-Jones insists “anti-black racism runs in the very DNA of this country.” Mr. Mackaman calls that claim “anti-historical.” Proving it requires her to belittle the most progressive declaration of modern history: “that all men are created equal.” Ms. Hannah-Jones calls this a “lie” and claims its drafters didn’t even believe it. The abolitionists disagreed. So did Martin Luther King Jr: He saw it as a “promissory note.”

Mr. Mackaman also protests Ms. Hannah-Jones’s “cherry-picking” of quotes to present Lincoln as a “garden-variety racist.” He attributes the misleading picture to her “totally racialist interpretation.” If whites and blacks are supposed to be “diametrically opposed to each other,” he says, “then you have to disregard all the history that runs contrary to that—and there’s an awful lot.”

Other “1619 Project” essays are similarly tendentious. Sociologist Matthew Desmond marshals substantially discredited research to tar the whole of American capitalism as a legacy of slavery. Legal activist Bryan Stevenson presents the war on drugs and broken-windows policing as successors to lynching, the Black Codes and other white “strategies of racial control.” Times columnist Jamelle Bouie claims Republican opposition to raising the debt ceiling in 2011 was of a piece with Southern defenses of slavery and Jim Crow.

Joseph Kishore, the Socialist Equality Party’s national secretary, says the “1619 Project” is aimed at legitimizing the politics of the Democratic Party and at “dividing workers” by race. “The interests of a black worker on the line in an auto plant and a white worker,” he says, “are fundamentally the same, and a million miles from the interests of an Oprah Winfrey or a Hillary Clinton.” He rejects the “pseudo-left politics” of identity, which “fight out conflicts within the top 10% or so over access to positions of power and privilege” through diversity programs, then “denounce white workers for being supposedly privileged even as they suffer from a decline in life expectancy and horrific social conditions.” Nobody is better at deflating the pretensions of progressives than the Left Opposition.

To be sure, the Trotskyists have wild ideas of their own: The World Socialist Web Site’s September essay claims “the event that had the greatest impact on the social condition of African-Americans” was the Russian Revolution. But the Times’s equally extreme ideas are being feted by the intelligentsia and turned into lesson plans for schoolteachers. “A re-education is necessary,” the “1619 Project” webpage warns. Even communists now tell the Times to cool it.

Mr. Kaufman is an assistant editorial features editor at the Journal.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17452
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17452
    • View Profile
Credentialed and proven professional journalists
« Reply #2661 on: January 04, 2020, 09:14:03 AM »


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 49762
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
from huff post
« Reply #2664 on: January 08, 2020, 08:51:32 AM »

increase scrutiny might throw 10 of thousands of people off disability
who "amy still qualify

What BS

the disability ranks are loaded with people who could work just fine
maybe as many as half:


https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/trump-disability-benefits-190610077.html

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 49762
    • View Profile


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 49762
    • View Profile
WSJ on Erik Wemple of WaPo's 11 part series on media and the Steele dossier
« Reply #2667 on: January 12, 2020, 06:38:26 PM »


Erik Wemple, the Washington Post’s media critic, has produced an 11-part series (so far) on the press’s handling of the Steele dossier in the wake of its debunking by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

The 10th installment consists of a simple “inventory” of TV talking heads and reporters insisting that large parts of the dossier had been “corroborated.” Notice that the statements Mr. Wemple has collected are mere declarations, the speakers offering little evidence or specificity about which parts had been corroborated. This is not journalism. This is availability bias, the social-science term for a readiness to embrace and repeat claims that are popular in one’s milieu.

What to Expect in a Senate Impeachment Trial


SUBSCRIBE
He finds exactly one example of reporters claiming to have validated a Steele allegation through actual reporting—McClatchy’s famous story, which it continues to “stand by,” that Trump attorney Michael Cohen visited Prague during the 2016 campaign. Read closely, though, and McClatchy only claims to have cited its anonymous sources accurately. No statement is offered that Mr. Cohen was actually in Prague.

I addressed another partial example myself here in February 2018—a Politico story that found a Steele allegation about Carter Page more believable because a Steele source seemed to know in advance about a Rosneft transaction that would not take place until late in 2016. As I showed, the whole world knew about the pending sale and had for years. This was an example of what Mr. Horowitz would later call a sprinkling of “publicly available” information in Steele that created a patina of credibility for the unwary.

Whether this was honest or dishonest dimwittedness by Politico, it is emblematic of a pattern that increasingly prevails in newsrooms—seeing only evidence that supports the desired story line.

The following should not need to be said: A claim is not credible just by virtue of its being made. A bunch of unsupported claims do not become more credible because they come in a bunch. A media pathology is the “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” fallacy—i.e., one Christopher Steele allegation may be untrue, but, golly, they can’t all be untrue when there are so many.

Nor does a claim gain credibility when relayed by a “credible” source if that source doesn’t actually vouch for the claim. A meta version of this idiocy can be found in a new book by Mr. Steele’s PR handler, Glenn Simpson. Mr. Simpson insists that, although Mr. Steele doesn’t vouch for the truth of anything in his dossier, he’s prepared to vouch that none of its allegations originate in Russian disinformation.

In other words: He can’t tell you if his sources are lying but he can tell you their motives for lying.

This is just stupid—or a testament to how stupid Messrs. Steele and Simpson think their audience is.

One of Mr. Wemple’s installments concerns Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, who consistently hyped any mote that seemed to support the dossier while ignoring any beam of contrary information.

Let’s talk about stupidity. Human beings are intensely social animals. Our cognition is shaped partly by a powerful need to gain approval and maintain status. Many of the cognitive biases identified by scientists are actually shortcuts to cognitive outcomes that secure and protect our social standing; their adaptive value does not lie, as you might expect, in helping us make accurate assessments.

Now add the giant commercial incentives acting on Ms. Maddow to deliver the story her audience wants. It took no courage to be a media opponent of Donald Trump. It took courage to be an opponent of Mr. Trump and simultaneously an opponent of the Russia witch hunt (as a few were).

I’ve suggested that we could junk the U.S. journalism curriculum and replace it with Daniel Kahneman’s “Thinking, Fast and Slow.” In its pages you will find the concept of availability bias mentioned above. You will also find a concordance to my original June 2017 “Anatomy of a Witch Hunt” column, which made extended reference to the indispensable work of Timur Kuran and Cass Sunstein on availability cascades.

In half a generation, journalism would be transformed from today’s hit-or-miss business in which readers must work hard to sort out the reliable claims from the vapid grandstanding and fallacious reasoning. Meanwhile, those who take umbrage at the phrase “fake news” ought to spend some time examining the professional pathologies that make it so frequently apt.

Finally, kudos to Mr. Wemple. Coming unbidden to mind while reading his Washington Post series is an image of Conan wading into battle, his ax swinging, the heads of his enemies flying in all directions. Alas, a further satisfaction probably won’t be coming anytime soon: our media admitting that the Russian meddling that they blab about did not have one-millionth the impact on our politics that their promotion of the false Steele dossier did.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
Re: Taibbi on CNN
« Reply #2669 on: January 16, 2020, 05:12:37 PM »
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/january-democratic-debate-2020-cnn-bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-938365/

Wow.  He's right on all of that.  "[You] never said it? “That is correct,” Sanders said. Phillip turned to Warren and deadpanned: “Senator Warren, what did you think when Senator Sanders told you a woman could not win the election?”

CNN has really pissed off the Left. 

They burned their bridge with all Republicans, burned the middle with all the fake stuff.  Now they've burned The Bern.  Are you really still 'mainstream' if you've lost the right, left and center?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
Jake Tapper
« Reply #2670 on: January 17, 2020, 02:27:00 PM »
 :-o;   [he may lose his job from the station who needs to have Monica Lewinsky famous for the most high profile blow job in history  giving her wisdom on the hiring of Starr and Dershowitz]

but back to Tapper :

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2020/01/17/cnns-jake-tapper-lev-parnas-has-a-serious-credibility-problem/#

Exactly !  We know Madcow didn't get him on her show with a blowjob, so who bribed him?
Someone did somehow .  100% certainty.




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
CNN dirtballs
« Reply #2671 on: January 20, 2020, 02:21:57 PM »
« Last Edit: January 20, 2020, 02:28:59 PM by ccp »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
Re: Media: PJ Media UP 312% year-over-year
« Reply #2672 on: January 23, 2020, 04:52:04 PM »
PJ Media UP 312% year-over-year

We should partner with them.
---------------------------------
TheRighting
In December,
@PJMedia_com 
 posted a whopping 312% year-over-year rise in unique visitors, more than any other #conservative website. & it wasn't just #ImpeachmentHearings that drove its gains. Read our exclusive chart:


https://twitter.com/TheRighting/status/1220040412968161286

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 49762
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2673 on: January 23, 2020, 08:29:12 PM »
I hereby delegate you to make the approach :-)

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
Re: Rush Limbaugh has advanced lung cancer
« Reply #2676 on: February 04, 2020, 08:06:26 AM »
https://pjmedia.com/trending/disgusting-vile-leftists-rejoice-over-rush-limbaughs-lung-cancer-diagnosis/

This is HORRIBLE news!

My term is a little out-dated but I call him the Hank Aaron of political commentary, meaning all time home run leader [before steroids spoiled that honor].

Greatest of all time.  Irreplaceable.  He gave voice to what so many people were already thinking.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Sell short on CIGar stocks.  This is going to be VERY bad publicity for them.]

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
Rush
« Reply #2677 on: February 04, 2020, 09:03:22 AM »
talent on loan from God

"Greatest of all time.  Irreplaceable"

yes


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 49762
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2678 on: February 04, 2020, 10:40:33 AM »
Announcement done with great class.

 :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

BTW, apparently Dick Morris is going under due to cancer as well.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2679 on: February 04, 2020, 11:21:48 AM »
"Announcement done with great class."

   - Yes.  He told it like it is. 

It was the number one trending story in the world yesterday, Mark Steyn said.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17452
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2680 on: February 04, 2020, 04:55:27 PM »
"Announcement done with great class."

   - Yes.  He told it like it is. 

It was the number one trending story in the world yesterday, Mark Steyn said.

I would like to see Mark Steyn take over.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
Rush to get MOF; to be announced at SOTU
« Reply #2681 on: February 04, 2020, 05:03:49 PM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 49762
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2682 on: February 04, 2020, 07:42:58 PM »
Mark Steyn could be a very interesting choice.  He shines on Tucker C's show.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
closest predecessor to Rush
« Reply #2683 on: February 05, 2020, 06:10:48 AM »
Bob Grant :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Grant_(radio_host)

saw him speak in NJ just prior to moving to Fla in 1990

he was the closest thing to listening and thinking - "thank God, there are others out there who think Conservattive and patriotically"

No one would ever know when force fed MSM spin 24 /7

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2684 on: February 05, 2020, 07:41:52 AM »
Mark Steyn could be a very interesting choice.  He shines on Tucker C's show.

Mark Steyn is great.  Very, very sharp, insightful and funny.  Extremely well informed with an amazing memory for detail. 

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
The Truth about Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2685 on: February 11, 2020, 06:34:22 AM »
Ironically, the media's softball treatment of the Dems has weakened them and the media's harsh treatment of Republicans has strengthened them to the point where it's no longer a fair fight.

Today we head into the first primary of the quadrennium and people are just now discovering the weaknesses of these weak candidates in a historically weak field.

Joe Biden, a buffoon?  Who knew?  They've been playing montages of his nonsense on conservative media for decades.

Bloomberg reduced crime in NYC by profiling perps in the hood by RACE and ordering the frisk of people who look like them?  Who saw that coming?

Bernie was pulling for the Soviets worldwide in the Cold War.  Butti fired the first black police chief in his town.

Next they'll tell us sweet Amy is a total bitch behind the scenes, put innocent blacks in prison for life without a witness, and Liz Warren's breakthrough academic research was a fraud (exposed on the forum).  Say it's not all so.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
VDH : on the Babe Ruth of talk radio
« Reply #2686 on: February 12, 2020, 06:25:40 AM »
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/02/rush-limbaugh-radio-genius-changed-political-landscape/

Like Babe Ruth who is credited with saving baseball after the White Sox World Series scandal in 1919

Rush saved radio; VDH:

"Even stranger still, his ascendance coincided with the presumed nadir of radio itself. It was supposedly a has-been, one-dimensional medium, long overshadowed by television. Even in the late 1980s, radio was about to be sentenced as obsolete in the ascendant cyber age of what would become Internet blogs, podcasts, streaming, and smartphone television.

Stranger still, Limbaugh has prospered through two generations and picked up millions of listeners"

We have so few people who care about us in the media
I always worried about his health. I feel he is like a family member or good friend

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
Re: VDH : on the Babe Ruth of talk radio
« Reply #2687 on: February 13, 2020, 07:09:40 AM »
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/02/rush-limbaugh-radio-genius-changed-political-landscape/

Like Babe Ruth who is credited with saving baseball after the White Sox World Series scandal in 1919

Rush saved radio; VDH:

"Even stranger still, his ascendance coincided with the presumed nadir of radio itself. It was supposedly a has-been, one-dimensional medium, long overshadowed by television. Even in the late 1980s, radio was about to be sentenced as obsolete in the ascendant cyber age of what would become Internet blogs, podcasts, streaming, and smartphone television.

Stranger still, Limbaugh has prospered through two generations and picked up millions of listeners"

We have so few people who care about us in the media
I always worried about his health. I feel he is like a family member or good friend

Same for me.  Great column, brought a tear to my eye.  On his first day of nationwide broadcast, I remember where I was, clicking through some stations, expecting nothing, and stopped and thought, WHO IS THIS?  Someone who agrees with me?!

Everyone thought television made radio obsolete but radio frees you to carry on with a lot of activities.  Television grounds you.  VDH listens with headphones in his tractor when he's not teaching at Stanford? 

Most of radio is noise.  It takes pretty amazing content to make up for all the repeated commercials, news, traffic.  But when you are tuned in, you learn of breaking news in almost real time.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 12043
    • View Profile
David Limbaugh on Rush
« Reply #2688 on: February 14, 2020, 09:31:35 AM »
One aspect not mentioned yet, Rush was at "the tip of the spear", as brother David puts it, in the ideological fight.  That he never backed down to all the attacks, he inspired a whole lot of others to stand strong. 

https://townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/2020/02/14/rush-limbaugh-a-loving-brother-and-a-friend-to-countless-americans-n2561308


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 10160
    • View Profile
Yang joins CNN
« Reply #2690 on: February 19, 2020, 04:21:58 PM »