Since late January of 2012, the Washington Examiner’s Paul Bedard has once a week featured a “Mainstream Media Scream” selection in his “Washington Secrets” column. For each pick, usually posted online on Monday, I provide an explanation and recommend a “scream” rating (scale of one to five).
This post contains the “Liberal Media Screams” starting in January 2023.
> For 2021 and 2022, for all of 2020. For all of 2019. For all of 2018. (Re-named “Liberal Media Scream” as of June 11, 2018.) “Mainstream Media Screams” for:
> July-December 2017 posts; January through June 2017; July to December 2016; for January to June 2016; for July to December 2015; for January to June 2015. (2012-2014 are featured on MRC.org: For 2014; for June 17, 2013 through the end of 2013. And for January 31, 2012 through June 11, 2013.)
Check Bedard’s “Washington Secrets” blog for the latest choice and his other Washington insider posts. Each week, this page will be updated with Bedard’s latest example of the worst bias of the week.
(For more of the worst liberal media bias, browse the Media Research Center's Notable Quotables with compilations of the latest outrageous, sometimes humorous, quotes in the liberal media.)
■ New on November 18: Liberal Media Scream: ABC’s Raddatz shows why it’s time to boycott networks
See the posting on the Washington Examiner's site where you can watch the video and read Baker's assessment. A week later, Bedard's article will be posted here.
■ November 12: Liberal Media Scream: How dare Trump make demands on Senate, CNN whines
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features CNN struggling to find new ways to attack President-elect Donald Trump.
This time, it’s Trump’s pressure on the Senate to OK his Cabinet picks, which are coming fast and furious, without the normal confirmation steps.
At CNN, they said it’s just Trump “again bucking norms.”
From Sunday’s CNN:
ALAYNA TREENE: [President-elect Donald Trump] said, quote: “Republican senators seeking the coveted leadership position in the United States Senate must agree to recess appointments in the Senate, without which, we will not be able to get people confirmed in a timely manner.”
The post goes on to describe other things. But I want to explain why this is so important. Essentially, Donald Trump is calling for the shattering of norms. Now what this means, a recess appointment, I know this sounds like we’re getting in the weeds a bit with the Hill lingo. But recesses are normally avoided in Congress. Normally, when they actually go on break, they do something called a pro forma session. Part of that is because if you go to a recess, you actually have to have a vote in the House and the Senate, and Democrats, in this case, giving Republicans control of the Senate come next year, would be able to filibuster.
But essentially, to get down to it, to really boil down to what this would mean, is that Donald Trump is trying to find a way and use whoever the next Senate leader — Republican leader — is to try and avoid the confirmation process for his top Cabinet officials. And I remind you, a lot of times when different presidential candidates or people are looking to make these hires and to appoint different people to these different Cabinet roles, a key thing that is always at the top of their minds is whether or not this person can get confirmed in the Senate, if they have a controversial background, if they are more conservative, in this case, if they were Democrats, they’d be maybe too liberal. But really, the Senate is kind of the last line of defense of who the president could put into office with him.
And so this would be a huge change. And I will also argue that really this process that Congress has now about avoiding recess appointments in their entirety started back with George W. Bush and has continued since then under the different presidents with Obama and Trump and now Biden. And so, this again would be a huge break from the norms that we currently have. Fred.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD: And again, bucking norms.
Jorge Bonilla, a news analyst at NewsBusters, explained our weekly pick: “The Biden administration shattered many norms, whether it was the weaponization of state and federal governments against President-elect Donald Trump, the suppression of President Joe Biden’s physical and mental decline, or the government’s cooking of all sorts of data. Any one of these incidents occurring under a Trump administration would’ve garnered wall-to-wall ‘shattered norms’ coverage. On the contrary, the Biden parade of horribles drew nary a peep. Now, the media go nuts about norms the second a just-reelected Trump talks about staffing his administration via recess appointments.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE screams.
■ November 4: Liberal Media Scream: Gaslighting Politico calls Obama, Harris, and Biden ‘centrists’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the claim by Politico that Democratic leaders considered the most liberal in history are “centrists.”
In gaslighting voters, the outlet’s White House correspondent Eugene Daniels said President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama, and Vice President Kamala Harris aren’t liberals. Ditto for the Democratic Party and the party’s “base” of black voters, he added.
“What it reminds us is that the Democratic Party continues to be a more centrist party, right? When you look at Obama, who, despite what people thought, kind of operated as a centrist, Biden, centrist, Kamala Harris, a centrist,” Daniels said on PBS.
Daniels from Friday’s Washington Week with the Atlantic:
“What it reminds us is that the Democratic Party continues to be a more centrist party, right? When you look at Obama, who, despite what people thought, kind of operated as a centrist, Biden, centrist, Kamala Harris, a centrist. The base of the Democratic Party continues to be black voters. They are still more centrist and more pragmatic as opposed to ideological. And so the takeover of the Democratic Party, as the Republican Party has found out, it hasn’t happened on the Democratic Party, the same with the Left.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “The party of letting high school boys play on girls sports teams and running an open border is ‘centrist’? Daniels needs to bring a little more skepticism to his journalism. Just because a politician spins themselves as ‘centrist’ does not make them one. Kamala Harris has a long record of far-left policy views that haven’t disappeared just because she is not touting them in this year’s campaign.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE Screams.
■ October 28: Liberal Media Scream: CBS’s Brennan frets Cheney’s safety if Trump wins
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the Face the Nation host raising concerns that a Trump election will lead to violence against former Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney for endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris in her yearlong campaign to stop former President Donald Trump’s comeback.
Though it’s Trump who has been the target of two assassination attempts, CBS’s Margaret Brennan asked Cheney on her show on Sunday, “Given how outspoken you have been, are you concerned about your personal security if Donald Trump wins this election, as he well may do?”
Fed the softball pitch, Cheney hit it hard: “Trump has ushered violence into our politics in a way that we haven’t seen before.”
It was just the latest example of the anti-Trump bias network TV has wallowed in this election year. Earlier on Monday, the Media Research Center, which helps with this weekly feature, issued a report that showed a historic level of bias by CBS, ABC, and NBC.
From Sunday’s Face the Nation on CBS:
MARGARET BRENNAN: Given how outspoken you have been, are you concerned about your personal security if Donald Trump wins this election, as he well may do?
LIZ CHENEY: Look, first of all, I am very confident that Vice President Harris is going to win this election. It’s what we’re seeing all across the country, the kind of absolutely unprecedented coalition that’s coming together to support her, you know, we’re going to run through the tape, and nobody is overconfident here, but I do believe she’s going to be the next president of the United States.
And I think that Donald Trump has ushered violence into our politics in a way that we haven’t seen before. And any violence is unacceptable. Certainly, the assassination attempt on the former president was completely unacceptable and obviously should never have happened. But when you have a situation where, you know, Donald Trump suggests that people who disagree with him ought to be put before military tribunals, that the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff should be hanged for treason, and his running mate doubles down on it, that tells you that you’re dealing with a man who doesn’t have any conscience, and the people who worked most closely with him know that. So, I’m confident that he’s going to be defeated next week.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “The reality of political violence in this year’s campaign came from the Left and opponents of Trump, not from him. Brennan seemed to have her own political agenda to try to generate an answer which would demonstrate another reason to vote for Harris: that a Trump win would physically endanger his critics. But not even Cheney, a Trump-hater, would go that far to presume Trump’s supporters are a bunch of violent fanatics who must be feared.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE screams.
■ October 21: Liberal Media Scream: ‘Swamp’ journalists admit cluelessness on Trump and MAGA
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features three of Washington’s prominent political correspondents finally admitting just how clueless they are about former President Donald Trump, whom at least half the nation sees as one of the easiest politicians to understand — and like.
We feature the puzzlement of Washington Post journalists Max Boot and Jonathan Capehart and the Atlantic’s Mark Leibovich as they mull Trump’s comeback.
“How can we have tens of millions of our fellow citizens think it’s OK to elect this delusional maniac as president of the United States? I, you know, I just don’t get it,” Boot told Capehart, who whined, “It is baffling to me as well.”
Mark Leibovich on MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Monday:
“I think the larger stain on our history that we’re living through right now is Trump obviously and what he has stood for and what he has gotten away with.”
“The idea that Donald Trump has operated within a permission structure of one of our two major parties to a point where there is just a consequence-free environment for him to operate in is one of the most appalling, I think, takeaways from this era. Obviously, one that portends very, very ominously in case he wins because there’s not going to be a check and balance from his own party. They’ll operate from a platform where he can do whatever he wants. But, essentially, I mean, these are people who I think will, hopefully, you know, live under a very, very damning verdict of history.”
Max Boot during Friday’s “First Look” show for Washington Post Live
“To me, what’s dismaying is not that Trump is denying reality, that he is depicting the rioters and insurrectionists of Jan. 6 as people engaged in a day of love. It’s not that Trump is denying the results of the 2020 election, as is his running mate, J.D. Vance. All of that we’ve come to expect by now.
“What is dismaying to me, Jonathan, is that despite all of this, Trump is very close to winning the presidency again. It’s basically a coin-flip election. We don’t know how it’s going to go, but simply the fact that it’s as close as it is right now is, to me, a terrible commentary on America and a very dismaying, very dismaying augury of our future, that so many Americans seem to be so OK with this. I mean, how is this? How can we have tens of millions of our fellow citizens think it’s OK to elect this delusional maniac as president of the United States? I, you know, I just don’t get it.”
Jonathan Capehart: “Yeah, it is baffling to me as well.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “What’s ‘dismaying,’ ‘appalling,’ and a ‘terrible commentary’ on the state of American journalism is that two veteran journalists with major media institutions have such disdain for half of their fellow citizens. It also portends a dangerous reaction from the media if Trump does indeed win. Instead of dispassionately reporting on how and why he won, they’ll be condemning as a ‘stain’ on the nation those who voted for him.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE Screams.
■ October 14: Liberal Media Scream: Vance and Johnson hit media TDS nitpickers
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the escalation of media whining and excuse-making for the problems Vice President Kamala Harris is encountering in her wobbly bid to become president.
We feature MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, who worried on Meet the Press about black and white men and businesses favoring former President Donald Trump, though she expressed no similar concerns about women favoring Harris in the gender gap.
In one segment, she advised Harris to do more interviews to win over more men, though the vice president’s recent media blitz has brought mostly negative reviews. And she said Harris needs to push back on businesses’ view of her as a lightweight.
“I think there’s misogynation in all of this, black and white men, big problem. But also, the business world, they don’t think she is serious,” Mitchell said.
Mitchell’s comments came during a discussion on NBC’s Meet the Press about how Harris needs to do more media interviews to let people know about her economic policies:
“They’ve got to double down on doing more interviews and serious interviews because what I’m hearing from Democratic and Republican businesspeople and a lot of men — and she’s got such a big problem with men. I think there’s an undercount of the Trump vote. I think there’s misogynation in all of this, black and white men, big problem. But also, the business world, they don’t think she is serious. They don’t think she’s a heavyweight. And a lot of this is gender, but she’s got to be more specific about her economic plans.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Of course, Andrea Mitchell attributes the worst of motives, misogyny, for why men favor Trump over Harris but expresses no concern for why women back Harris over Trump. Just like a partisan Democrat would see the world. Which is what the NBC News journalist is.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE Screams.
■ October 7: Liberal Media Scream: Andrea Mitchell whines men and business supporting Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the escalation of media whining and excuse-making for the problems Vice President Kamala Harris is encountering in her wobbly bid to become president.
We feature MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, who worried on Meet the Press about black and white men and businesses favoring former President Donald Trump, though she expressed no similar concerns about women favoring Harris in the gender gap.
In one segment, she advised Harris to do more interviews to win over more men, though the vice president’s recent media blitz has brought mostly negative reviews. And she said Harris needs to push back on businesses’ view of her as a lightweight.
“I think there’s misogynation in all of this, black and white men, big problem. But also, the business world, they don’t think she is serious,” Mitchell said.
Mitchell’s comments came during a discussion on NBC’s Meet the Press about how Harris needs to do more media interviews to let people know about her economic policies:
“They’ve got to double down on doing more interviews and serious interviews because what I’m hearing from Democratic and Republican businesspeople and a lot of men — and she’s got such a big problem with men. I think there’s an undercount of the Trump vote. I think there’s misogynation in all of this, black and white men, big problem. But also, the business world, they don’t think she is serious. They don’t think she’s a heavyweight. And a lot of this is gender, but she’s got to be more specific about her economic plans.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Of course, Andrea Mitchell attributes the worst of motives, misogyny, for why men favor Trump over Harris but expresses no concern for why women back Harris over Trump. Just like a partisan Democrat would see the world. Which is what the NBC News journalist is.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE Screams
■ September 30: Liberal Media Scream: Latinos like Trump because they ‘want to be white’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features a key MSNBC Latina guest who smeared her fellow Latinos with a racist anti-Trump rant on Sunday.
On The Sunday Show with Jonathan Capehart, NPR’s Maria Hinojosa ripped Latinos for abandoning the Democratic Party.
Reacting to a new NBC News/Telemundo poll that found Vice President Kamala Harris losing support from Hispanic voters, Hinojosa said, “Latinos want to be white. They want to be with the cool kids.” The 63-year-old Hispanic journalist apparently isn’t up with what’s cool on social media.
From The Sunday Show With Jonathan Capehart on Sunday:
JONATHAN CAPEHART: So she has a 14-point lead, but it has been shrinking after each consecutive presidential election from 2016. Why is that? Why is the Democratic share of the Latino vote shrinking?
MARIA HINOJOSA: And what I said to you when we asked the question was, Latinos want to be white. They want to be with the cool kids. They want to be — I’m asking Latinos all the time, and they just say, ‘Well … he’s such a good businessman.’ It’s, like, no, he’s not. He had bankruptcies. But they don’t want to be identified with all of those other immigrants that Donald Trump speaks so badly of, including me, as a Mexican immigrant. So they’re, like, ‘We’d rather, let’s be with him.’
But those numbers? They could cost Kamala Harris the election. Everything that I’ve been saying that Latinos could push her over the top, these are the numbers that could also take her down.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Hinojosa reflects the very worst of identity politics. Vote only for liberal Democrats — or you are a race traitor. The fact a solid majority of Hispanics support Kamala Harris isn’t good enough for Hinojosa. Every Latino who dares stray from the party line must be shunned because such betrayal could cost the Democrat the election.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE Screams
■ September 23: Liberal Media Scream: PBS says Harris a ‘happy warrior’ ready to ‘slap’ Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the latest PBS effort to portray Vice President Kamala Harris as a joyful and happy warrior taking on evil in challenging former President Donald Trump for the presidency.
On PBS NewsHour, MSNBC and Washington Post lefty pundit Jonathan Capehart declared Harris as a part of the “culture” willing to fight Trump.
“She’s part of what’s driving this culture that I think you said will slap Donald Trump in the face. It’s slapping him in the face now,” Capehart said, adding, “She, in her entire career, has been the happy warrior about helping people and leaving aside the negativity. It just happens to hit at the right person at the right time.”
From Friday’s PBS NewsHour, picking up after anchor Geoff Bennett cited David Brooks’s column, “How a Cultural Shift Favors Harris.”
GEOFF BENNETT: Jonathan, that word joy, Kamala Harris, Vice President Harris, when she sat down with the three reporters from the National Association of Black Journalists today [actually on Tuesday], one of them asked her about how she views attacks on her joyful warrior approach. And she defended it. And she said people will try to sometimes use your best asset against you. What do you make of that and this notion that she’s benefitting from a cultural wave?
JONATHAN CAPEHART: I don’t think she’s benefitting from a cultural — yes, she is, and I read your column, David. It’s not so much that she’s riding — she’s — like see this wave coming and she’s riding. No, she is part of the culture. And that’s why I think when she became the top of the ticket, everyone marveled at how quickly the light switch flipped. That can — and it happened so organically in a very dramatic fashion.
That, to me, says you can’t manufacture that. And she was able to do that because she is the culture. She is part of the culture. She’s part of what’s driving this culture that I think you said will slap Donald Trump in the face. It’s slapping him in the face now, which is why I think he’s so discombobulated.
He doesn’t know how to deal with her. I think it’s why the polls are — the momentum is moving in her direction. And to your point about happy warrior, and David is right, this is the way the vice president has always been, which sort of reinforces what you’re saying. It’s not that she has met up with the culture. She, in her entire career, has been the happy warrior about helping people and leaving aside the negativity.
It just happens to hit at the right person, at the right time.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “What a joke. Harris ‘is the culture’ and has been the embodiment of ‘the happy warrior about helping people’ for her ‘entire career’? She changes her culture and accent with every crowd she addresses. It must be nice to be a liberal Democrat, where supposed journalists not only endorse the glowingly upbeat imagery you want but celebrate it without any critical thinking over whether it is phony and then promote it as a genuine compelling life story.”
Rating: Five out of FIVE screams
■ September 15: No Liberal Media Scream this week
■ September 9: Liberal Media Scream: Team Harris calls US ‘incredibly backwards’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features a key Team Harris supporter decrying America as “incredibly backwards” for electing only men as president.
Trump traitor Alyssa Farah Griffin, the “conservative” on The View, was discussing the debate between her ex-boss, former President Donald Trump, and Vice President Kamala Harris on CNN’s State of the Union when she blasted America.
“We’re incredibly backwards as a country that we’ve never had a female president,” she said.
The comment clashed with one of the key themes of the Harris campaign: criticizing Trump for claiming that America is in a shambles and spinning backward under the leadership of Harris and President Joe Biden.
From Sunday’s State of the Union:
ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: And the reality is, you shouldn’t underestimate Donald Trump. He has now done more presidential race — debates, I should say — than anyone in history, and he’s somebody who came up on television. He’s a communicator. He’s somebody who is used to speaking to a mass audience. If he can stay focused and he stays to the core issues: economy, border, it’s a good night for him. But we’ve also seen the world in which he shouts out the Proud Boys, or he talks about Hannibal Lecter, or he gets into name calling. That could go against him. To Kamala Harris, she needs to look presidential. We’re incredibly backwards as a country that we’ve never had a female president. So, for a lot of people seeing somebody up there who’s a woman who might be our first female president, she needs to seem commanding. She cannot get too in the weeds on policy. She needs to talk about it but can’t get sidetracked. Big picture. How will you demonstrably make people’s lives better? How will you turn the economy around? If she can do that and not get rattled by Donald Trump, it’ll be a good night for her.
Jorge Bonilla, a news analyst with the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “One can very easily imagine Griffin uttering this same nonsensical hot take on ABC’s The View, with great care so as not to get yelled at by Sunny Hostin and before whatever box-wine-fueled nonsense sputtered by Ana Navarro. Given when a major party first nominated a woman to the top of the ballot, Griffin is calling America ‘backwards’ for committing the sin of electing Donald Trump to the presidency — a presidency that she served. This Trump-deranged nonsense is what passes for ‘analysis’ at CNN.”
Rating: Four out of Five SCREAMS.
■ September 2: No Liberal Media Scream this week
■ August 26: Liberal Media Scream: ‘CNN’ has become a laugh line
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features talker Bill Maher mocking CNN and its hosts for viewing the lefty cable network as politically centrist, citing unending “gushing” over Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential nomination acceptance speech the night before.
“I watched from 8:09 to 8:23. There was just gushing about how great a speech it was,” the talk show host and comedian told CNN host Kaitlan Collins. He said it wasn’t for 15 minutes until “Lonely Scott” Jennings, one of the few conservatives paid by CNN, got a word in.
“It was like 5-to-1. It always looks like 5-to-1,” Maher said of how CNN stacks liberals against conservatives.
Collins, who a week ago faced laughter from Stephen Colbert’s audience when he called CNN fair, tried to defend the network, but Maher wasn’t hearing it. “It’s, kind of, like, the same as The View. It’s like, it’s almost better to have nobody there like MSNBC,” he dissed.
From Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO on Friday:
BILL MAHER: You made press because you were on Stephen Colbert’s show, and he said something like you guys at CNN just report the news straight, and the crowd burst into laughter.
That tells you a lot, doesn’t it? How do you guys think you are doing in that arena of, like, this is a terribly divided country. We are not only politicized, a lot of people hate the other side. And CNN, in my view, should be the place where both sides can watch. How do you think you’re doing with that?
COLLINS: CNN is the place where both sides can watch. And I think, you know, my show is evidence of that. We have lawmakers on from both parties.
MAHER: I’m talking about the people on CNN, and I know what the conservative side of America thinks, and I don’t blame them. I watched Kamala’s speech last night. It ended at 8:09, or, I guess, 11:09 in the East. It wasn’t until 11:23 ‘till the one conservative guy, what’s his name?
COLLINS: Scott Jennings.
MAHER: ‘Lonely Scott,’ I call him.
COLLINS: David Urban was there too.
MAHER: Wait a second. Wait a second. I watched from 8:09 to 8:23. There was just gushing about how great a speech it was — and I think she did fine. I didn’t think it was as good as they were making it out to be, but if I’m a conservative in America, and I’m watching CNN, just for the straight middle-of-the-road, that’s what I hear for 15 minutes is “it’s great” and then Lonely Scott. When you see — it does look like tokenism. It’s, kind of, like, the same as The View, it’s like, it’s almost better to have nobody there like MSNBC.
COLLINS: I think it was a Democratic convention. They turned to Democrats, people like David Axelrod, who ran successful presidential Democratic campaigns first, for their analysis of this, and I don’t think that you can say that CNN is anything but fair.
I mean, look at, we covered President Biden’s exit from the race very closely, the pressure on him to get out, and I feel like I could speak with authority on this — I’m from Alabama. I’m from a very red state. I have very conservative family, a lot of them are Trump voters. They watch my show every night, and I think they know that they can trust me, that we call bulls*** on every side, not just whatever leaning our audience may be, and I think that’s something that people want more of is to hear from that.
I think Scott’s voice is really important, but I think other voices are important to hear from, and everyone who was speaking last night, it’s not like they were all Democrats. I mean, Dana Bash, Jake Tapper, Abby Philip, all my amazing colleagues giving analysis.
MAHER: They come across that way. They came across that way in a moment like that. It was like 5-to-1. It always looks like 5-to-1.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “It’s hard to believe Kaitlan Collins is really that clueless about the ingrained left-wing, anti-conservative agenda of CNN. That a traditionally left-of-center comedian recognizes that reality, to say nothing of an audience in Manhattan laughing at calling CNN objective, should give Collins pause. The fact that it doesn’t shows just how ideologically blind are Collins and her CNN colleagues are. To them, nothing is more important than keeping Donald Trump out of the White House.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE Screams
■ August 19: Liberal Media Scream: Media now correcting MAGA, not just Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the media’s latest line of attack on former President Donald Trump, MAGA, and anybody who voices support for the GOP presidential nominee.
It comes from the weekend public affairs show hosts who apparently feel compelled to have the last word when featuring Trump or a Trump supporter. One offensive pick came from Face the Nation moderator Margaret Brennan, who is also co-moderating the Oct. 1 vice presidential debate.
She gratuitously hit Trump after he called Vice President Kamala Harris’s plan for price controls “communist.” Brennan promised: “We’ll tell you why that is wrong.” But after a break, she never told her viewers what was false or wrong about the Trump quote or even prompted any guest to correct Trump.
Then there was Martha Raddatz, hosting ABC’s This Week. Not only did she open the show with a cheer for Harris, but in reporting shown later, she featured a black woman who said she was leaning toward voting for Trump. “Trump’s rhetoric has clearly had an effect on her in an astonishing way,” said Raddatz, whose fact-checking about race didn’t sit well with the black woman. “There was no convincing her otherwise,” she said.
From the top of Sunday’s Face the Nation on CBS:
MARGARET BRENNAN: I’m Margaret Brennan in Washington, and this week on Face the Nation, Democrats head to their convention in Chicago as inflation cools and the political back-and-forth over economic policies intensifies. With the presidential contest lineup set to be formally locked in this week, both sides turn their attention to issue No. 1 on the minds of the voters: the economy and inflation.
KAMALA HARRIS: I will go after the bad actors, and I will work to pass the first-ever federal ban on price-gauging [sic] on food.
DONALD TRUMP: A lot of people are very devastated by what’s happened with inflation and all of the other things. But they say it’s the most important subject. I’m not sure it is. But they say it’s the most important — inflation is the most important, but that’s part of economy.
BRENNAN: The former president’s prescription is twofold.
TRUMP: Vote Trump and your incomes will soar.
BRENNAN: And a new line of false attack on Vice President Harris.
TRUMP: Kamala went full communist. You heard that? She went full communist. She wants to destroy our country after causing catastrophic inflation.
BRENNAN: We’ll tell you why that’s wrong and how the voters see the candidates’ handling of the economy in our new CBS News poll.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Welcome to the world of establishment media playing speech police, deciding whose rhetoric is so over the line that their delicate viewers must be warned that it is ‘false’ and/or ‘wrong’ without any subsequent justification offered for the effort to discredit the candidate. I await her equal vigilance with Kamala Harris or Tim Walz claims about how the ‘fascist’ Trump will ‘end democracy,’ ‘destroy NATO’ or ‘cut’ Social Security.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE Screams
■ August 12: Liberal Media Scream: PBS anchor falsely claims ‘no evidence’ of Walz’s stolen valor
(Washington Examiner post)
Imagine if a Republican military hero, say, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), lied about the high points of his career in the U.S. Marine Corps while running for vice president.
The media would be looking at every word he spoke on his career and displaying his misstatements and lies on the front pages of every newspaper.
But with Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), the Democratic vice presidential pick, the media have decided to look past his long list of fake claims about serving in “war” and Afghanistan while in the National Guard.
What’s more, some even claim that there is no evidence of his fabrications.
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features PBS New Hour anchor Amna Nawaz in the no-evidence camp. On Friday, for example, she said Vance has “no evidence” of his claims against Walz despite nonstop postings by amateur fact-checkers on social media.
She said, “This is so reminiscent of that swiftboating attack on John Kerry back in 2004,” noting that former President Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Chris LaCivita, was behind the swiftboat attacks. She asked, “Why run with these attacks when there’s no evidence for what they’re saying right now?”
Guest Eliana Johnson, editor-in-chief of the Washington Free Beacon, countered, “There’s no question Tim Walz has padded and inflated his resume.” To which Nawaz demanded: “In what way specifically?”
From Friday’s PBS News Hour, in which Johnson was joined by Jonathan Capehart, associate editor of the Washington Post:
AMNA NAWAZ: While we’ve seen Mr. Trump continue with personal attacks and kind of veering way off message, we’ve also seen from Sen. Vance focusing now on Tim Walz’s military career. This is a new line of attack we’ve seen open up from Republicans. We know Mr. Walz served in the Army National Guard for 24 years before retiring. And we’ve heard Vance attack him in this way from time to time.
SEN. J.D. VANCE: I did it honorably, and I’m very proud of my service. When Tim Walz was asked by his country to go to Iraq, you know what he did? He dropped out of the Army and allowed his unit to go without him.
AMNA NAWAZ: Eliana, this is so reminiscent of that swiftboating attack on John Kerry back in 2004. We know the same man is behind it. He’s running the Trump campaign now, Chris LaCivita. Why run with these attacks when there’s no evidence for what they’re saying right now?
ELIANA JOHNSON: Well, I do think there’s some evidence for what they’re saying, but let’s look at it in two parts. One is the issue on the merits, where I think there’s no question Tim Walz has padded and inflated his resume. And the second is his military resume.
NAWAZ: In what way specifically?
JOHNSON: Well, J.D. Vance mentioned that the timing of his retirement is suspect, and I think it would take a little bit longer to talk about the timeline of that. But the —
NAWAZ: He’s alleging that he retired because his unit was being deployed.
JOHNSON: Right. He knew that they were going to be called up. He had gotten a warning that they were going to be called up, and he said in a press release for his campaign, if called up, I have a duty to serve. He didn’t do that.
It’s clear he has — he’s inflated this, and he’s made it a part of his biography. By the way, this has been an issue in every single one of Walz’s campaigns. But, separately, I think there’s a question of how significant is this going to be down the road? You mentioned the swiftboat veterans. Those attacks were effective, but they were levied against the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party, John Kerry, back in 2004 —
NAWAZ: They were also discredited.
JOHNSON: — which is, which is different.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Nawaz illustrates what is so wrong with the modern media in how they reflexively take sides at the very moment they think they are acting as tough journalists getting at the truth. Instead of pursuing those in the Harris-Walz camp to determine the truth about Walz’s military record, she presumes the Republicans are in the wrong and so their supposedly false claims must be discredited. It proves which side of the political divide she sits.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE Screams
■ August 5: Liberal Media Scream: ABC’s Rachel Scott doubles down on Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features ABC’s Rachel Scott, fresh from zinging former President Donald Trump at a black media convention, whacking him again while discussing campaign debates on the network’s Sunday public affairs show, This Week.
Participating in a panel discussion, Scott praised Vice President Kamala Harris’s “nuance” on her mixed-race heritage. “It has been really notable for us reporters who have picked up on the nuance about how she has responded to some of these attacks questioning her racial identity,” she said.
Scott was criticized by Trump when she opened a Q&A at the National Association of Black Journalists convention by questioning his past comments on black people and why they should support him. An irked Trump shot back, “I think it’s a very nasty question.”
On This Week, she channeled a Harris campaign talking point as she fancied a Harris-Trump debate: “And imagine that on the debate stage where you have a prosecutor possibly facing off against someone who has just been convicted.”
From Sunday’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on ABC:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: I was struck, Rachel, in the vice president’s response to what happened at your interview. She seemed to be aware of what Jonathan Martin is talking about. Don’t make this back about her after he gives those comments.
RACHEL SCOTT: And it has been really notable for us reporters who have picked up on the nuance about how she has responded to some of these attacks questioning her racial identity. She is not going there, and Democrats say, “Look, she knows who she is.” She identifies as a black and Asian woman. Why does she have to go out there and respond in that sort of way? What she is doing is putting it back on Donald Trump and Republicans, saying they’re dividing, and then pivoting back to the issues.
….
SUSAN PAGE, USA TODAY: I moderated the last debate she did in 2020, the vice presidential debate. She is a good debater. She is confident. She uses a little humor. She made Mike Pence be quiet, which is something I struggled to do, and she came across as a prosecutor, and that is a good message for her.
STEPHANOPOULOS: That seems to be her sweet spot.
SCOTT: And imagine that on the debate stage where you have a prosecutor possibly facing off against someone who has just been convicted, right? And that’s the sort of image that, of course, Democrats are hoping that they can actually have on the debate stage. But yes, and thinking back to her taking on President Biden when they were running against each other in the Democratic primary, Democrats see her as someone who can thrive potentially on the debate stage. The question is, does it actually happen?
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Scott seems near-giddy over Harris, acting more as a Kamala Whisperer than as any kind of independent journalist. She may couch her ‘reporting’ by citing ‘what Democrats are hoping,’ but it’s clear she’s hoping for the same thing: eagerly anticipating ‘the prosecutor versus the felon’ debate followed by a Harris election victory.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS
■ July 29: Liberal Media Scream: CNN spins Biden as martyr for stopping Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the latest spin from CNN that President Joe Biden’s decision to drop out of his reelection race guarantees the end of President Donald Trump too.
Fareed Zakaria offered this Sunday on his “My Take” commentary:
“The final legacy of Biden is that he has returned the presidency to an office of sanity, decency, and dignity, ushering out the dangerous demagoguery and anti-democratic rhetoric and behavior that preceded him. But for that legacy to endure, and for Biden’s term not to simply be a moment in time, he needed to ensure that the United States actually closes the chapter on Donald Trump.”
Perspective didn’t matter. In fact, Biden’s “friends” pushed him out because of his poor polling, and while Vice President Kamala Harris has seen a jump in interest in her, she is leading Trump in only two of eight national polls taken after Biden’s July 21 announcement, and those leads are of 1% and 2%.
Zakaria on Sunday’s Fareed Zakaria GPS on CNN:
“The final legacy of Biden is that he has returned the presidency to an office of sanity, decency, and dignity, ushering out the dangerous demagoguery and anti-democratic rhetoric and behavior that preceded him. But for that legacy to endure, and for Biden’s term not to simply be a moment in time, he needed to ensure that the United States actually closes the chapter on Donald Trump.
“And to help make this more likely, he made the painful decision not to run for the presidency, which will also earn him a special place in the history books. Joe Biden has felt that he has been underestimated all his life. Judging by his tenure in the White House, he’s right.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “So much for jaded journalists holding to account those in power. When it comes to keeping Trump from returning to the White House, much of the media eagerly buy into advancing the party line on how Biden made a ‘painful decision’ to put the nation ahead of himself when, in fact, a skeptical journalist would realize it was nothing more than Biden applying grandiose spin, which Zakaria ate up, to cover for an impending humiliating defeat.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 22: Liberal Media Scream: NBC insider says Biden as ‘great’ as Washington
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the race among Washington journalists to erase their coverage of President Joe Biden as a senile loser and raise him to sainthood status.
The best example came from a former Newsweek reporter and NBC News contributor who not only compared Biden to former President George Washington but also to the Roman statesman Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, considered the figure of virtue for leaving his position of power to return to farming.
“I also was thinking of Joe Biden’s legacy,” Jonathan Alter said. “He will be remembered as a great president. He will be mentioned in the same sentence as George Washington. Why? Because selflessly leaving power, and the circumstances of him clinging to it in the last three weeks will be forgotten, the basic decision to leave power, which started with Cincinnatus in 439 B.C.,” he added.
From Monday’s Morning News NOW on the NBC News NOW streaming channel:
CO-ANCHOR JOE FRYER: You love history so much. What was going through your mind yesterday when this decision came down? How do you rank this in the 21st century as far as important stories?
JONATHAN ALTER: Extremely important, extremely unusual in American politics. The last time it happened was in 1968 when incumbent President Lyndon Johnson stepped away.
I also was thinking of Joe Biden’s legacy. He will be remembered as a great president. He will be mentioned in the same sentence as George Washington. Why? Because selflessly leaving power, and the circumstances of him clinging to it in the last three weeks will be forgotten, the basic decision to leave power, which started with Cincinnatus in 439 B.C.
And then George Washington picks up from Cincinnatus. The city, of course, is named for this. Why Cincinnatus? Why is he still so well known? Because this selfless act — of leaving power, which in human history is an extremely rare thing to do — elevates you. And in combination with a record of genuine achievement, it will put Joe Biden in very, very good stead in terms of history.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “What’s next? Comparing Biden to Jesus? Only a matter of time, I suspect, at least in the world of MSNBC and NBC News. Apparently, Alter is so enthralled with Biden that he can’t see a difference between the widely admired George Washington, who rejected the public groundswell urging him to become the king, and the unpopular Biden who only stepped away when faced with the near certainty of an embarrassing defeat bringing down him and much of his party.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 15: Liberal Media Scream: Anger over blood-splattered ‘fight, fight, fight’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the immediately iconic photos of a blood-splattered former President Donald Trump urging supporters to “fight, fight, fight” to restore him to the White House and the media’s queasiness with and misinterpretation of his message.
For the president and his supporters, the message was clear: Stand up to the attacks and build a unified base to win. But to many in the media, they saw it as a disturbing, angry message of revenge.
At CNN, for example, Jamie Gangel took offense to Trump, who survived the assassination attempt by millimeters. “I think what we’re hearing from people is that’s not the message that we want to be sending right now. We want to tamp it down,” she said.
This is what Gangel said on CNN Saturday night, about four hours after the shooting:
“I do want to say there was one thing that, when I watched the tape, I found odd because of all of the heated rhetoric. And that is that after he was hit, former President Trump got up and said, ‘Fight, fight, fight.’ I think what we’re hearing from people is that’s not the message that we want to be sending right now. We want to tamp it down.”
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “I’m sorry, not, that Trump didn’t display the correct decorum to satisfy Gangel a minute after getting shot and barely escaping alive in an assassination attempt. That Gangel’s first instinct was to attack the words of the victim shows the distorted worldview of CNN, where Trump and MAGA are the threats to democracy which must be suppressed.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 8: Liberal Media Scream: Welker pushes Meet the Press even further left
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the latest demonstration that NBC Meet the Press host Kristen Welker, in the anchor seat for less than a year, has pushed the show further left than Chuck Todd left it.
This Sunday, it was Welker using her trademark practice of beating her point into the ground in demanding another Republican to “accept the election results,” which she obviously believes will show President Joe Biden reelected.
Her target was Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), on former President Donald Trump’s short list of running mates.
“Can you say unequivocally, unequivocally here and now, that you will accept the results of the 2024 election no matter what they are?” she asked, ignoring warnings from the FBI about election hanky panky and some of the problems found in the 2020 ballot casting.
When Vance said he’s hoping for a clean election, Welker said he was signaling that the election won’t be fair. He fired back that it is the media’s blindness to problems that is the threat to the election outcome, not a candidate’s hope for problem-free elections.
“What I think actually undermines people’s confidence in the electoral system is when the media is incurious about obvious examples of problems in our electoral system,” Vance said.
From Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
KRISTEN WELKER: Well, here we are about a week before the Republican convention. Before I let you go, can you say unequivocally, unequivocally here and now, that you will accept the results of the 2024 election no matter what they are?
SEN. J.D. VANCE [R-OH]: So long as it’s a free and fair election, Kristen, of course we will. We will use constitutional processes to challenge issues if we think there are issues. But if it’s a free and fair election, we will do what the Constitution requires. We will respect the results. And I expect those results are going to be to reelect Donald Trump.
WELKER: It was a free and fair election in 2020. Donald Trump took his concerns to court. He lost in court. But he still has not conceded. Do you understand that when you refuse to commit unequivocally, that feeds into people’s concerns, skepticism about the nation’s electoral process?
VANCE: Well, Kristen, I don’t agree with that actually. I think that feeding into people’s concerns about our electoral process is that one-half of America’s political segment, they won’t support legislation that makes it harder for illegal aliens to vote. They won’t support universal voter ID in our elections even though you have to present ID to do almost anything in this country. I think taking people’s concerns seriously about election fraud is the way to reinforce security and confidence in our elections.
WELKER: Yes, senator, it’s already against the law for noncitizens to vote. But just on that very point, when you, when others refuse to say, “Yes, we will accept the election results,” do you understand how that undermines people’s confidence in the electoral system?
VANCE: But, Kristen, what I just said is I don’t agree with that. What I think actually undermines people’s confidence in the electoral system is when the media is incurious about obvious examples of problems in our electoral system. I think we’ve got great elections, but a lot of things could be better in certain states. I want to work to make that happen so the American people have greater confidence in their elections. That’s what I’ll keep doing.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Welker has managed to make Meet the Press more of a vehicle for the agenda of liberals than it was under Chuck Todd. Every week, it seems, she acts as a thought police operative, demanding Republican guests pay fealty to the Democratic media party line on how elections cannot be questioned, trying to undermine their very legitimacy as elected officials. In Vance’s case, she distorted his answer to appear the opposite of what it was so she could lecture him about his improper thinking.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 1: Liberal Media Scream: NBC’s Welker lies about ‘lies,’ can’t stand truthful Republicans
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features President Joe Biden’s media cheerleading squad trying to find some way to divert the public’s attention away from the fact that the president was out of it during last week’s debate with former President Donald Trump.
The top tactic of the liberal press was to say that Trump told more “lies” than the comatose president. And when Republicans pushed back, the media just ignored and pressed on.
Case in point was NBC’s Kristen Welker, the Meet the Press anchor. One of her featured guests was Gov. Doug Burgum (R-ND), who is on Trump’s short list of running mate candidates. Not only did she press him on whether he was a liar, she told lies about debate statements Trump made that have been fact-checked as truthful.
“As someone who is on Donald Trump’s short list to be his vice presidential nominee, do you think he should stop saying things that are not true?” She then recited his supposed lies: “Just to say a few: He said that Democrats want to kill infants after birth. That’s not true. He again lied about widespread fraud. Not true. He lied about his comments after Charlottesville. Should he be truthful with the American people if he wants to lead this country? Especially given what you just said that you never lie. That’s your standard, governor.”
But Democrats certainly do support allowing abortion up until birth and even death to newborns. That was clearly stated by former Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, himself a pediatric neurologist. And liberal reporters love misquoting Trump’s “good people on both sides” comment about the demonstrations in Charlottesville, Virginia, but it has been debunked, and he was not referring to Nazis as one of the “both” sides.
From Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
GOV. DOUG BURGUM: Four years ago, when we ended up with the current ticket on the Democrat side, that was this grand devil’s bargain of “everybody drop out, we’re going with these two.” Then, the biggest lie that has been foisted on the American public was seen on Thursday night. People can’t un-see what they saw. What they saw was, we’ve been told by the White House, two weeks ago, the White House was attacking journalists, including your friends, saying that no, you can’t say these stories about that Joe Biden isn’t capable of serving right now. And then, all of America saw it. And you know who else saw it? Our adversaries saw it. Putin saw it. Xi saw it. The ayatollah saw it. I mean, the nation — we keep talking about elections. We are at a greater national security risk today than we were on Thursday because the commander in chief showed that he’s not capable of serving.
KRISTEN WELKER: Well, there’s not proof of that, but governor, let me just ask you about the debate and a little bit more of what we saw. By one count, Donald Trump made more than 30 false claims during that debate. I want to play something you told my colleague Chuck Todd on this broadcast last year. Take a look.
CHUCK TODD: You ever lied in politics?
BURGUM: No.
TODD: That you know of? You don’t believe you’ve ever lied?
BURGUM: No.
TODD: You feel like you’ve always told the truth as you understood it?
BURGUM: Absolutely. That’s how I was raised and how I’ve gone forward.
WELKER: As someone who is on Donald Trump’s short list to be his vice presidential nominee, do you think he should stop saying things that are not true?
BURGUM: I think the whole manufactured thing this morning of, that Donald Trump has said something that he hasn’t said before, I mean, everything that he said on Thursday night he’s been saying before. I mean, so this isn’t, this is not news.
WELKER: This is not manufactured. But this is not manufactured, governor. I mean, just to say a few: He said that Democrats want to kill infants after birth. That’s not true. He again lied about widespread fraud. Not true. He lied about his comments after Charlottesville. Should he be truthful with the American people if he wants to lead this country? Especially given what you just said that you never lie. That’s your standard, governor.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Welker is so sure of herself, so smugly superior that she can rattle off a list of supposed lies from Donald Trump without any self-awareness that she is passing on distortions of what Trump said while she demands Gov. Burgum criticize Trump for not being truthful. And then, when Burgum makes a perfectly reasonable observation, she corrects him with the ‘there’s not proof of that’ bromide. Pot, meet kettle.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 24: Liberal Media Scream: CNN proves anti-Trump bias days before debate
(Washington Examiner post)
And just like that, CNN showed its anti-Trump bias on Monday, just three days before hosting the first debate between former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden, proving Republicans correct in complaining that the debate would be an ambush.
It came early Monday morning when anchor Kasie Hunt was hosting Trump spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt. At the time, Secrets was considering the week’s choices for the Liberal Media Scream feature with Brent Baker of the Media Research Center.
Stories about the strong anti-Trump bias of co-debate moderators Dana Bash and Jake Tapper started to appear over the weekend, so it wasn’t unexpected that Leavitt would criticize them. Readers may recall that CNN and Trump have an antagonistic relationship, highlighted when CNN host Jim Acosta tussled with Trump during a press conference five years ago.
When Leavitt hit CNN’s bias, Hunt, who often includes Republicans on her show, wouldn’t hear of it, shut off her guest’s microphone, and kicked Trump’s spokeswoman off the air. The two traded tweets afterward, but the damage was done and led to a piling on by those upset with Hunt’s liberal bias, including Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-KY) wife, who noted that Hunt called the story about an attack on the senator one of her “favorite stories.”
So, for her actions, Hunt wins our Liberal Media Scream of the week with a rating of five out of five screams.
From Monday’s CNN This Morning:
KAROLINE LEAVITT: Well, President Trump is well prepared ahead of Thursday’s debates. Unlike Joe Biden, he doesn’t have to hide away and have his advisers tell him what to say. President Trump knows what he wants to say, and he’s going to relay his vision to the American people to make this country strong, safe, secure, and wealthy again. He’s been doing that across this great nation, to all corners of this country.
That’s why he was in Detroit, Michigan, last week. He was in Philadelphia for a big rally on Saturday night, and that’s why President Trump is knowingly going into a hostile environment on this very network, on CNN, with debate moderators who have made their opinions about him very well known over the past eight years in their biased coverage of him. So President Trump is willing to bring his message to every corner of this country, to voters, to ensure that he wins this election in November. He looks forward to doing that, and I know the American public looks forward to hearing from him.
KASIE HUNT: So, I’ll just say my colleagues, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, have acquitted themselves as professional as they have covered campaigns and interviewed candidates from all sides of the aisle. I’ll also say that if you talk to analysts at debates previous, that if you’re attacking the moderators, you’re usually losing. So, I really want to focus on what these two men are going to do and say when they stand on the stage. Now, we have a little bit of what Donald Trump, your boss, has said in trying to set expectations for this debate. I want to play some of a series of his comments, and then we’ll talk about it. Watch.
DONALD TRUMP CLIPS: Maybe I’m better off losing the debate. I’ll make sure he says I lose the debate on purpose. Maybe I’ll do something like that. … I assume he’s gonna be somebody that will be a worthy debater. … Should I be tough and nasty and just say you’re the worst president in history, or should I be nice and calm and let him speak?
HUNT: So he’s basically saying there, well, will I let Joe Biden win? It does seem as though many Republicans have set the bar very low in terms of arguing that Joe Biden is basically senile. Now, you have people like Doug Burgum coming out and saying, well, President Biden’s very accomplished, trying to set expectations in a different place. What do you expect from Joe Biden?
LEAVITT: Well, first of all, it takes someone five minutes to Google Jake Tapper, Donald Trump to see that Jake Tapper has consistently, frequently likened President Trump to Adolf Hitler —
HUNT: Ma’am, I’m going to stop this interview if you continue to attack my colleagues. I would like to talk about Joe Biden and Donald Trump, who you work for. If you are here to speak on his behalf, I am willing to have this conversation.
LEAVITT: I am stating facts that your colleagues have stated in the past. Now, as for this debate, the expectations for, the expectations for —
HUNT: Now, I’m sorry, guys. We’re going to come back out to the panel. Karoline, thank you very much for your time. You are welcome to come back at any point. She is welcome to come back and speak about Donald Trump, and Donald Trump will have equal time to Joe Biden when they both join us … later this week in Atlanta for this debate. Our thanks to Karoline.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Not a good sign for Donald Trump and his supporters ahead of CNN’s debate. If Hunt’s aggressiveness is any guide, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash won’t be reluctant to use their power to kill the podium microphones to silence the candidate who says things they have a long record of denouncing and condemning. Trump may well regret agreeing to allow CNN to host a debate.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 17: Liberal Media Scream: ‘What the f***?’: Celebrities baffled voters like Trump for sounding ‘normal’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features world-class comics expressing shock that the public connects with former President Donald Trump because he sounds normal and even funny.
“What the f***?” yelped Charlamagne tha God, appearing on Friday’s Real Time with Bill Maher’s “Overtime” with liberal talker Ana Navarro.
The trio were talking about Trump and answering questions when Maher said, “Is Trump dangerous because he’s funny?”
When Maher said the fact is that people respond to Trump’s commoner way of talking, the black comic said, “Republicans are more sincere about their lies than Democrats are about their truth. Like when you listen to Donald Trump talk, you listen to Marjorie Taylor Greene, that’s what Waffle House sounds like at three in the morning. And sadly, people relate to that.”
From Friday’s Real Time with Bill Maher’s “Overtime” show posted on YouTube after the regular program aired on HBO, picking up as Maher posed questions from viewers:
BILL MAHER: Charlamagne, this is for you. “Is Trump dangerous because he’s funny?”
CHARLAMAGNE THA GOD [CTG]: What the f***? No, Trump is dangerous because at one point he was president of the United States of America and he’s running to be president of the United States of America again. If he wasn’t, you know, running to be in that position, he’d be the most hilarious person on the planet.
ANA NAVARRO: But, I mean, do you, do you actually — you’re a comedian — do you actually find him funny because people are laughing at him?
MAHER: Yes, unintentionally?
CTG: Yes.
MAHER: He’s a scream? Oh, he’s so funny, but he doesn’t know it. No, really. I mean, there are people like that. He has no—
NAVARRO: When I, when I listen to him, when he’s talking in those rallies about the sharks and the batteries, I’m waiting for the men in white jackets to show up.
CTG: But it’s only because he’s running for president. If he wasn’t running for president, you’d be like, “This stand-up is amazing.”
MAHER: But he sounds — and I’ve heard you talk about this subject before — he sounds like more of a normal person.
CTG: Yes.
MAHER: And that you, I know you said that the Republicans have a big advantage because they communicate better.
CTG: Yeah, Republicans are more sincere about their lies than Democrats are about their truth. Like when you listen to Donald Trump talk, you listen to Marjorie Taylor Greene, that’s what Waffle House sounds like at three in the morning. And sadly, people relate to that.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Charlamagne tha God seemingly reflects much of the bafflement of those on the Left as to why average, not-so-political people would be attracted by the messages delivered by Trump and other Republicans. So, aghast at the phenomenon, he must attribute it to how Trump and conservatives are better talkers and liars, not that their policy views better address the problems facing the country.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 10: Liberal Media Scream: ‘The View’ says black people not allowed to leave the Democratic plantation
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features The View engaging in racial politics and suggesting that minority viewers should stay in their Democratic lane.
On the show, Sunny Hostin was discussing Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) giving his support to former President Donald Trump. He is one of Trump’s potential picks for a running mate.
Hostin, whose roots are Puerto Rican, accused Donalds of pandering to Trump, though several polls show black voters like the ex-president, especially men, and are moving to the Republican Party after decades of pandering by the Democratic Party.
She said that such black voters are ultra-rare. “These black men that he was speaking with, I’d love to see them. It would be like looking at unicorns,” Hostin said on Friday’s show.
From Friday’s The View, a show produced by ABC News:
JOY BEHAR: Florida congressman Byron Donalds hit a new low when he told a room full of black Republicans that he misses the quote, unquote, good old days. Watch.
BYRON DONALDS, on June 4: During Jim Crow, the black family was together. During Jim Crow, more black people were not just conservative — black people have always been conservative-minded — but more black people voted conservatively. And then, H.E.W., Lyndon Johnson, and then you go down that road, and now we are where we are.
….
SARA HAINES: What’s scary is when you hear the audio, there are a lot of people going, uh-huh, uh-huh. So it feels like a class needs to be taught to everyone in that room because segregation left you with no choice. Like, you weren’t picking the family. They were literally making you go to different places. They didn’t allow for — so, talking about a black person choosing to be with your family and then looking at the greater social scheme and the injustice of that, he must not know what it is? I mean, that seems like a far leap not to understand Jim Crow, segregation, and the separation of the race. I don’t understand.
ANA NAVARRO: If he doesn’t know, shame on him, because there is nothing worse, I think, than when people achieve certain status and certain rights and don’t appreciate, take for granted, the struggles, the deaths, the fights, the marches, everything it took to be able to give Byron Donalds the opportunity he has now because, under Jim Crow, he couldn’t vote. He wouldn’t have been in Congress. He couldn’t have married his wife. He’s married to a lovely woman named Erika, who’s white. Interracial marriage was illegal in Florida until 1969. He could have not gone to Florida State University — for over 100 years, black students were not admitted to that university. Over 250 blacks were lynched in Florida under Jim Crow.
For him to be waxing nostalgic about that era that elicits so much pain — that was such a dark period in the history of the United States — is offensive. And for him to be doing it as a black man, as a person of color, is even more offensive. What really drives me crazy, though, is that it’s, like, every three months, a Republican says something more stupid about black history and slavery, right? I mean, last year, we had Ron DeSantis saying — defending that there were good things about slavery, skills that were learned that could be put to good use. Then we had Nikki Haley, who couldn’t admit that slavery was the cause for the Civil War.
JOY BEHAR: So, my question to you, Sunny: Is it stupidity, like she says, or is it something else?
HAINES: I think it’s pandering. I don’t think it’s stupidity.
BEHAR: To whom?
HOSTIN: It’s pandering to Donald Trump. I thought it was interesting that the framing was a room of black Republicans. Where are they? Where are they? Because if you look at the stats, 77% of — 81%, I’m sorry, of black men are part of the Democratic Party. Black voters consistently align with the Democratic Party. Ninety, over 95% of black women are part of the Democratic Party. So these black men that he was speaking with, I’d love to see them. It would be like looking at unicorns.
And so, I think that the sad thing is, you know, I agree with you, Ana, is that this came from the mouth of a black man, right? And so, if you’re pandering yourself and your community and your history to a man like Donald Trump, who is a disgraced, one-term, twice impeached, convicted felon, we get to say now, is even more despicable in this country.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “What a disgusting display of left-wing elitism. To think that, in the name of calling out racism, you think it’s your place as white people to lecture a black man about his views of the status of the black family and how it has fared over the decades. Liberals just can’t allow anyone to deviate from the approved liberal perspective and, if they do, they must be ‘shamed’ and corrected so they get in line.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 3: Liberal Media Scream: Stephanopoulos anti-Trump spin, condescendingly Clintonesque
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream highlights the model of the media’s bias in the legal cases against former President Donald Trump — ABC’s George Stephanopoulos.
The former Clinton White House communications boss opened his Sunday show, This Week with George Stephanopoulos, with a lecture against Trump and then brought on Trump lawyer Will Scharf to face left-wing talking points.
Scharf didn’t take it and challenged the Democratic talker, especially when Stephanopoulos tried to silence him for making points he didn’t like.
The actions by Stephanopoulos were reminiscent of the way he used to try to shut down reporters during the 1992 presidential campaign when numerous Clinton scandals were raised, a practice he and other aides continued while in the White House when facing troublesome stories, especially the Travelgate affair.
From Sunday’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on ABC:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Good morning, and welcome to This Week. In 1774, John Adams said representative government and trial by jury are the heart and lungs of liberty. Two hundred and fifty years later, the heart and lungs of liberty are facing what may be the ultimate stress test. Twelve anonymous jurors rendered their verdict on Thursday, finding Donald Trump guilty on all counts. It’s the third time in the last two years that jurors have rendered verdicts against Trump.
Jurors have yet to consider charges against Trump for even more serious crimes: blocking the peaceful transfer of power, concealing classified documents, encouraging the filing of false electors. But for now, the New York jurors have already presented their fellow citizens with a choice: Do we want to be represented, to be led, for the first time in history by a convicted felon? That answer will come in November….
STEPHANOPOULOS: The ethics panel for the state of New York said the judge was not required to recuse….
STEPHANOPOULOS: If appearance of impropriety is the standard for recusal, then why shouldn’t Justice Thomas and Justice Alito have to recuse from the cases before the Supreme Court?….
WILL SCHARF: The weaponization of our legal system, the politicization of prosecution, these are all things that President Trump absolutely has to comment on. I think the fact that he labored under a gag order for as long as he did was manifestly unjust. So, yes, absolutely, President Trump needs to be carrying his message to the American people. And I don’t see how anyone can really poke holes at that.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You talked about the weaponization of the legal system. Of course, it was former President Trump who threw out the 2016 campaign, led chants of “lock her up” about Hillary Clinton. But what do you expect from the sentencing process?
SCHARF: Well, but hold on a second, George, President Trump may have said that, but after he entered office, he certainly didn’t weaponize the Department of Justice to pursue his political opponents the way that we’ve seen … in the last couple years.
Remember, this case in New York, it was called the zombie case. It sat and sat and sat. It could have been brought at any point after 2020. And then suddenly, when President Trump announced his campaign for president, it was dusted off, rushed in front of a grand jury, and then rushed into court. You want to talk about the politicization of the legal system, I mean, this is Exhibit A. It’s absolutely unprecedented in American history. It’s not the way that our campaigns are supposed to be run. We contest elections at the ballot box, not in the courts, in this country.
STEPHANOPOULOS: That is true. But, of course, we’ve never had a former president or presidential candidate facing the kind of charges that the president faced because of his own activities. And, of course, the attorney general in Manhattan has nothing to do with the Department of Justice. Finally, what do you expect from the sentencing process?
SCHARF: I vehemently disagree that the district attorney in New York was not politically motivated here, and I vehemently disagree that President Biden and his political allies aren’t up their necks in this prosecution. I think the fact that the Biden campaign —
STEPHANOPOULOS: There’s no evidence here of that. Sir, there’s no — there’s not — I’m not going to let you continue to say that. There’s just zero evidence of that.
SCHARF: Well, how about the fact that Matthew Colangelo was standing over Alvin Bragg’s shoulder when he announced this verdict? I mean, Colangelo was the No. 3 official in the Biden Department of Justice who suddenly disappears and shows up as an assistant district attorney, right as Trump’s case in New York starts to proceed. You want to talk about political —
STEPHANOPOULOS: After the decision was made there —
SCHARF: You want to talk about political coordination, George, it’s right there in front of you.
STEPHANOPOULOS: This has nothing to do — this has nothing to do — no, it’s not. This has nothing to do with President Biden. Do you want to answer the question about the sentencing process or not?
SCHARF: I completely disagree that this has nothing to do with President Biden. With respect to sentencing, as I said before, we’re going to vigorously challenge this case on appeal. I don’t think President Trump is going to end up being subject to any sentence whatsoever. And we look forward to getting this case into the next court and taking this again all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary to vindicate President Trump’s rights.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Thanks for your time this morning.
SCHARF: Appreciate it, George.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “A Sunday sermon followed by aggressive left-wing talking points aimed at not allowing legitimacy for views which do not comport with ‘the facts’ as the very liberal and very partisan Stephanopoulos sees them. We’re in for five more months of this from the media and left-wing activists in it like Stephanopoulos: aggressive disdain for anyone making a point on behalf of Trump, imbued with condescending sneering about how there’s ‘no evidence’ for that point when there’s plenty of evidence for it.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ May 27: Liberal Media Scream: MSNBC regular cites Clarence Thomas’s white wife in racist rant
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the latest example of the Left’s hysteria over conservative judges on the Supreme Court.
MSNBC regular talker Elie Mystal said that Associate Justice Clarence Thomas not only wanted votes from black people to count less than white votes in elections, but he cited Thomas’s wife of 37 years, Virginia Thomas, who is white, as proof.
“Yeah, the through line between the Alito flag story, the Clarence Thomas coup story, and their wives, and what we saw today from the Supreme Court in this gerrymandering decision, the through line is that they don’t want black people’s votes to count equally,” Mystal said on All In with Chris Hayes on MSNBC Thursday.
“I mean, he ain’t married to Ginni Thomas for nothing, all right — like, that’s what the man thinks,” the black pundit said.
He was discussing a 6-3 Supreme Court decision last week to keep a South Carolina congressional map that a lower court had ruled included a racially drawn gerrymander. The court said the challengers had not proven their case. The decision was written by Associate Justice Samuel Alito, who has drawn fire for his wife’s flying of their American flag in the “distress” signal.
From Thursday’s All In with Chris Hayes on MSNBC:
CHRIS HAYES: I want to start on what we got from the court today and the fact it was an Alito-authored decision. It was an Alito-authored decision from the Trump majority, 6-3 majority, liberals in dissent, holding up a Republican gerrymander.
ELIE MYSTAL: Yeah, the through line between the Alito flag story, the Clarence Thomas coup story, and their wives and what we saw today from the Supreme Court in this gerrymandering decision, the through line between all of that is that they don’t want black people’s votes to count equally.
HAYES: Do you think that is true of Clarence Thomas?
MYSTAL: I know that it’s true of Clarence Thomas, all right. Their idea and Clarence Thomas, in his concurrence today, wrote straight up that he does not think the 14th Amendment and the equal protection clause of that amendment can be used to protect the voting rights of black people.
HAYES: Yes.
MYSTAL: I mean, he ain’t married to Ginni Thomas for nothing, all right — like, that’s what the man thinks. He wrote it today. The through line — understand this, Chris, when these people like Alito and Thomas support the insurrection, right, what are they really saying? They’re saying that Trump won — lost the election but won the white vote, which is true, he did, he won the white vote by a lot, white people should probably do something about that, but he won the white vote by a lot. And what Alito and Thomas are saying is that it is that white vote that Trump won is that’s the only votes that matter.
That we should do what the white voters want and when they write these decisions like they did in the gerrymandering case, what they are straight up saying is that black voters can be diluted, can have their voting rights taken away, simply because black voters happen to vote Democrat.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “How insidious an attitude to have toward an American institution when your ideological contention is that it’s Trump and MAGA who are destroying democracy. No, you’re doing that with such a disreputable, race-based attack on the court because you don’t agree with a ruling, compounded by a cheap shot at the first conservative African American on the Supreme Court as a self-hater because the race of his wife doesn’t match his. Can’t go much lower.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ May 20: No Liberal Media Scream this week.
■ May 13: Liberal Media Scream: Networks shamefully use Reagan to defend Biden
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features all three network Sunday public affairs shows going to bat for President Joe Biden’s betrayal of Israel for largely political reasons by suggesting he was just following a pattern set by former President Ronald Reagan.
“Historians would say, ‘Why is it OK for Reagan to do it and not President Biden?'” NBC’s Kristen Welker said in a key example of the effort.
At issue was Biden’s flip-flop to hold back weaponry Israel needs to push its effort to rid Hamas from Gaza after the terrorists shocked the world with brutal attacks on Israeli women, children, and troops last October. Biden’s move came in response to campus protests by pro-Hamas protesters.
The network talk shows noted that Reagan also played hardball with Israel but typically for more diplomatic reasons than domestic politics. What’s more, as Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) noted, nobody ever questioned whether Reagan had Israel’s back in facing down Arab enemies.
From the May 12 ABC, NBC, and CBS Sunday morning interview shows:
— ABC’s This Week host Martha Raddatz to Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX): You regularly invoke former President Ronald Reagan. You heard Sen. Coons bring up the fact he paused weapons to Israel as well. You constantly ask yourself, ‘What would Ronald Reagan do?’ That’s what Ronald Reagan did.
— NBC’s Meet the Press host Kristen Welker to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): President Biden is not the first president to use arms shipments to try to influence Israeli policy. As you know, former President Ronald Reagan, on multiple occasions, withheld weapons to impact Israel’s military actions. Did President Reagan show that using U.S. military aid as leverage can actually be an effective way to rein in and impact Israel’s policy?…
GRAHAM: The Republican Party is with Israel, without apology.
WELKER: Well, historians would say, ‘Why is it OK for Reagan to do it and not President Biden?‘
— CBS’s Face the Nation host Margaret Brennan to Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR): You know that past presidents have withheld military aid to Israel to force changes in behavior. President Reagan did that. President Bush did that. Why do you have a problem with President Biden doing it?
COTTON: Ronald Reagan’s decision to pause the delivery of fighter jets in the 1980s was totally different from what’s happened here. Israel is fighting a war of survival against a terrorist group that committed the worst atrocity against Jews since World War II. In the 1980s, an Israeli ambassador had been targeted for assassination. Ronald Reagan knew the pause of fighter jets would not interfere with Israel’s fighting because they had plenty of fighters. He did not pause munitions. Joe Biden is not sending munitions in the middle of a shooting war that’s a war of survival. And look at the broader context. Israel knew that Ronald Reagan had its back in the region. He sank half of Iran’s navy. Joe Biden has consistently given Iran hundreds of billions of dollars of sanctions relief that exactly funded groups like Hamas.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “The sudden respect for the policies of Ronald Reagan from members of the Washington press corps, who are normally disdainful toward him, is remarkable. It makes one think they all got a talking points memo from Biden campaign allies and are repeating them to challenge their Republican guests.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ May 6: Liberal Media Scream: ABC’s Karl cries wolf with DEFCON 1 Trump warning
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features another breathless election warning from another ABC News Trump critic, Jonathan Karl.
A week after This Week host George Stephanopoulos practically seized up over the possibility of former President Donald Trump returning to power, as many voters want, fill-in Karl spun the election as the most important ever on Sunday.
“No more crying wolf. This is it,” he said.
With six months before the election, let’s hope the New York City Fire Department starts parking an ambulance at ABC News headquarters in case one of the news readers passes out in warning America whom to vote for.
Karl, at the top on Sunday’s This Week on ABC:
“Good morning. Welcome to This Week. For as long as I’ve covered politics, politicians have said, ‘This will be the most important election of our lifetimes.’ They said that no matter how high or low the stakes actually were. Election Day 2024 is exactly six months from today, and this time, the divisions in our country are so vast and the choice so stark there’s little doubt this really is the most important election of our time. No more crying wolf. This is it.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “The election is six months away, and the top anchors for ABC News are already building themselves into a lather of outrage, lecturing their viewers on who they better not vote for — or else. One wonders how out of control they will become as the election grows closer, especially if polls continue to show Donald Trump in the lead. They’re passing DEFCON 2. Once they hit DEFCON 1, what’s next?”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ April 29: Liberal Media Scream: Could you cry more, George Stephanopoulos?
(Washington Examiner post)
For years, George Stephanopoulos ran block and worse for former President Bill Clinton. First, it was Gennifer Flowers, and then Travelgate and Whitewater. Multiple other scandals followed.
His boss got away with most and didn’t face the music until he was finally impeached for lying about the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal.
But on Sunday, in an editorial to lead off his ABC Sunday talk show, the former Clinton spokesman ripped into former President Donald Trump, who is facing several court cases for what some legal analysts see as political attacks. That every move Trump makes is hit by the media or added to his legal troubles isn’t enough for Stephanopoulos.
Instead, and the reason he’s our feature for this week’s Liberal Media Scream, he wants Trump treated differently, claiming that the former president has pushed the nation to the brink of civil war despite now being the candidate most people want to win in November, according to CNN.
“It’s all too easy to fall into reflective habits, to treat this as a normal campaign where both sides embrace the rule of law, where both sides are dedicated to a debate based on facts and the peaceful transfer of power,” he lectured on Sunday.
“But that is not what’s happening this election year. Those bedrock tenets of our democracy are being tested in a way we haven’t seen since the Civil War. It’s a test for the candidates, for those of us in the media, and for all of us as citizens,” he added.
From Sunday’s This Week on ABC:
Good morning, and welcome to This Week. Until now, no American president had ever faced a criminal trial. No American president had ever faced a federal indictment for retaining and concealing classified documents. No American president had ever faced a federal indictment or a state indictment for trying to overturn an election or been named an unindicted co-conspirator in two other states for the same crime. No American president ever faced hundreds of millions of dollars in judgments for business fraud, defamation, and sexual abuse. Until now, no American presidential race had been more defined on what’s happening in courtrooms than what’s happening on the campaign trail — until now.
The scale of the abnormality is so staggering that it can actually become numbing. It’s all too easy to fall into reflective habits, to treat this as a normal campaign where both sides embrace the rule of law, where both sides are dedicated to a debate based on facts and the peaceful transfer of power.
But that is not what’s happening this election year. Those bedrock tenets of our democracy are being tested in a way we haven’t seen since the Civil War. It’s a test for the candidates, for those of us in the media, and for all of us as citizens.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Speaking of tests, George Stephanopoulos has failed the journalism test. He seems quite proud of it and likely speaks for all too many in the news media who think they have the moral superiority to declare Trump voters not only misguided but guilty of putting the basic tenets of the country at risk. So, Stephanopoulos, a top Clinton spokesman in the 1990s who suppressed from voters information about his candidate’s misdeeds, will save us all by using those left-wing political instincts to decide which candidate voters should be allowed to pick.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ April 22: Liberal Media Scream: Historian Meacham says ‘patriotism’ demands Biden win
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream is a rare five-screamer featuring a liberal journalist turned “historian” and biographer claiming that voter patriotism demands reelecting President Joe Biden over former President Donald Trump.
Jon Meacham, the former top editor of Newsweek, said on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, “Patriotism is allegiance to an idea. It’s not just an allegiance to your own kind. That’s nationalism. Trump is a nationalist. President Biden is a patriot.”
Talking more like an East Coast elitist than a Tennessee native, the liberal analyst added with seriousness, “I’m lucky in that I don’t have particular policy passions, particular issues.”
And he included a condescending little jab at his home state. “I want the constitutional order to continue to unfold, and President Biden is devoted to that constitutional order. Donald Trump is self-evidently not. And I would say to my Republican friends — and I live in Tennessee, so that’s redundant — that it is, in fact, a moral question.”
Here is Meacham, on Real Time with Bill Maher, reacting to the news that former Attorney General William Barr (a Trump critic) will vote for his former boss:
JON MEACHAM: What Barr is doing, and what so many — I sometimes think of them as the Peter Millar Republicans, right, these are Republicans who are not full MAGA people, they’re men’s grill types who don’t want Democrats picking judges or setting tax rates.
They talked themselves into this twice. In ’16 and in ’20. And then came December and January of 2020 and 2021, and, at that point, I believe, and I say this with care, that it is become evident, to me, anyway, that there is a patriotic duty to support President Biden against Donald Trump for this reason: Patriotism is allegiance to an idea. It’s not just an allegiance to your own kind. That’s nationalism. Trump is a nationalist. President Biden is a patriot, and I’m lucky in that I don’t have particular policy passions, particular issues. I want the constitutional order to continue to unfold, and President Biden is devoted to that constitutional order. Donald Trump is self-evidently not. And I would say to my Republican friends — and I live in Tennessee, so that’s redundant — that it is, in fact, a moral question….
To me, the interesting thing about the Republican Party is if you are, in fact, going to put partisanship as your central organizing principle, if reflexive partisanship is the most important thing — I would argue that you need to go back and read George Washington’s farewell address. You need to read the founders that otherwise, you know, they love.
You know, they love the founders when they can move it around to agree with them. It’s very clear that if party spirit became the organizing principle, that, that was going to be fatal to the Constitution, and it’s very interesting when Barr said it’s “suicide.” The idea that President Biden is leading us to national suicide. I’m not sure what he’s talking about, but Lincoln used that image in his first major speech in the 1830s. He said if we ever fall, it’s not going to be from a foreign foe: It’s going to be from someone internally rising up and mastering those passions. And those passions about partisanship, that’s what’s ruining us.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Could Meacham be any more condescending and elitist? So much for the pretense of being a journalist and not a partisan activist. His take: I’ve decided which candidate is bad for America, so if you vote for that one, you are not only not a patriot, but you will bring about the destruction of the nation. And he wonders why his neighbors in Tennessee don’t appreciate him for denouncing them as on ‘the wrong side’ of ‘a moral question.’ I bet they have a lot more respect for his views than he does for theirs.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ April 15: No Liberal Media Scream this week.
■ April 8: Liberal Media Scream: Joy Reid wants prison, not airport, named for Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream revealed again just how easy it is to make cable TV hosts suffering from “Trump Derangement Syndrome” go nuts.
With Congress on Easter break, there wasn’t much Capitol Hill news last week. So when a report was posted about a GOP proposal to rename Dulles International Airport after former President Donald Trump, MSBNC turned all its guns on the idea.
On the ReidOut, host Joy Reid said it was bad enough that the “worst” airport in America is named after Eisenhower-era Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. “Let’s make it worse” by naming it for Trump, she said.
Instead, she suggested that Trump’s name be put on a Miami prison, a reference to the legal cases he faces, one in Florida.
She and her guests, including Ali Velshi and Fordham University professor Christina Greer, piled on. Greer even bashed Washington’s national airport being renamed after former President Ronald Reagan. Reid said, “Yeah, I just call it ‘DCA.'”
From Friday’s The ReidOut on MSNBC:
JOY REID: Let’s talk a little about this idea of renaming Dulles. Now, Dulles is not the best airport — it might be the worst airport in America. The Republicans are like, “Let’s name it after Donald Trump.” I love the fact that it’s named after one of the most diabolical secretaries of state who destroyed Iran and a bunch of Central America.
ALI VELSHI: But let’s make that worse.
REID: Let’s make it worse. Also, the Democrats have said, “Instead, let’s name a prison after Trump.” Thoughts? Thoughts? Thoughts? Name a prison in Miami?
VELSHI: That is a fantastic idea.
…
REID: I think this is a great opportunity for the nerds at the table just to talk about Allen Dulles and also his brother — it was John Foster Dulles, I think, and Allen Dulles, and both of them were involved in destroying Guatemala and Iran.
VELSHI: Yeah.
REID: So I feel like that’s important, and that’s given me the opportunity, so, thank you, Republicans.
CHRISTINA GREER: Well, I mean, we’ve — they’ve already renamed National, Reagan, which I refuse to call it.
REID: Yeah, I just call it “DCA.“
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Glad something about Trump made them laugh, a brief break from the usual full hour of irrational anger at any mention of anything Trump. Naturally, Reid couldn’t hide how her contempt for Republicans goes way beyond just Trump. It’s a disdain so deep she’s still mad about Ronald Reagan getting an airport named for him and the foreign policy of a president who left office more than 60 years ago.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ April 1: Liberal Media Scream: Top editor joins CNN host in ripping MAGA with their ‘truth’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream is a rare but deserved five-screamer in which the editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer joins with a CNN host to condemn former President Donald Trump and his MAGA followers.
Appearing on CNN This Morning with Kasie Hunt, editor Chris Quinn explained why he wrote a weekend letter to readers about the paper’s anti-Trump coverage.
He said, “These are people that watch Fox News or Newsmax and they believe it because they — it appears credible. Then they come to our platforms and see the opposite and they’re conflicted because they like us. They read us for the sports coverage or the local news, or what have you.”
Quinn added, “This was for them. I had to, I owed them some sort of an explanation. And the reason it was so difficult is I don’t want to demean them. I don’t want to criticize them. But I can’t stray from the truth. The truth is this guy is a monster. He’s the worst president in history and many people understand that. Those who get their news from not credible sources believe what they’re hearing.”
Hunt said, “You said — another piece of this to your point of what the truth is, you said, ‘Trust your eyes. Trump, on Jan. 6, launched the most serious threat to our system of government since the Civil War. You know that. You saw it.’ And just before that you write, ‘This is not subjective. We all saw it. Plenty of leaders today try to convince the masses we did not see what we saw but our eyes don’t deceive us.'”
“And I think that this is the piece of it that gets me because I was there on that day and I looked out the window and I saw these people trying to attack the Capitol. And then, now, half of these political leaders are trying to say no, actually, that thing that you saw with your own eyes did not happen.”
From today’s CNN This Morning with Kasie Hunt:
KASIE HUNT: How to cover former President Donald Trump is — quite literally — one of the hardest, thorniest questions facing us as journalists. It is something that I think about quite literally every single day when I wake up to join all of you. And it is especially true in the wake of Jan. 6, which affected me both personally and professionally in addition to, of course, having enormous implications for our democracy. This is why this all stood out to me.
The Cleveland Plain Dealer decided they wanted to address this with their readers head-on over the weekend. The editor, Chris Quinn, writes this: “The north star here is truth. We tell the truth, even when it offends some of the people who pay us for information. The truth is that Donald Trump undermined faith in our elections in his false bid to retain the presidency. He sparked an insurrection intended to overthrow our government and keep himself in power. No president in our history has done worse.”
And joining me now is Chris Quinn. He is the editor of the Plain Dealer and Cleveland.com. Chris, thank you so much for being here. It’s an honor to have you.
CHRIS QUINN: Good morning.
HUNT: So I loved how you approached this because you started with your readers — with the people who write to you about this. Many of them, of course, are supporters of Donald Trump. And you write some of them are more thoughtful than others, shall I say.
But this is something that I have wrestled with because there are so many people in the country who support Donald Trump and many of them have reasons for doing that that have to do with the circumstances that they face. We don’t want to lose empathy for those people. We don’t want to not speak to those people. To be, you know, advocates and helpful in terms of providing those people with information.
But you sat down and you grappled with this question, and you tried to explain why you’re doing what you’re doing in the way that you’re doing it. Can you explain a little bit more of that to all of us right now?
QUINN: Yeah. This was a very challenging piece to write. It actually took me almost six months to get my thoughts together. I get two kinds of correspondence from Trump supporters and one is not nice. It’s very condescending and sneering. And I kind of chalk that up to people who had felt left out of society. Donald Trump gave them a club to participate in. And there’s nothing I can say or do to help them understand what we’re doing.
But the other half write me with great courtesy and implore me for an explanation. They say, “You are dismissing a large segment of the country when you say that Donald Trump is the monster you describe him as and I don’t see him that way. What do you say to me?”
These are people that watch Fox News or Newsmax and they believe it because they — it appears credible. Then they come to our platforms and see the opposite and they’re conflicted because they like us. They read us for the sports coverage or the local news, or what have you.
So this was for them. I had to, I owed them some sort of an explanation. And the reason it was so difficult is I don’t want to demean them. I don’t want to criticize them. But I can’t stray from the truth. The truth is this guy is a monster. He’s the worst president in history and many people understand that. Those who get their news from not credible sources believe what they’re hearing.
HUNT: Yeah. I will just say I think that the decline in our local media is a crisis for many, many reasons, but not least is that you, as a local paper, have a level of trust with people in your communities that is simply not possible to establish when you are a national news organization. And I think that really comes through in this piece that you wrote.
And you said — another piece of this to your point of what the truth is, you said, “Trust your eyes. Trump, on Jan. 6, launched the most serious threat to our system of government since the Civil War. You know that. You saw it.” And just before that you write, “This is not subjective. We all saw it. Plenty of leaders today try to convince the masses we did not see what we saw but our eyes don’t deceive us.”
And I think that this is the piece of it that gets me because I was there on that day and I looked out the window and I saw these people trying to attack the Capitol. And then, now, half of these political leaders are trying to say no, actually, that thing that you saw with your own eyes did not happen. Was it that that really was the thing that underscored this the most to you as well?
QUINN: Yeah. And look, it’s heartbreaking what you’re seeing today. I come from a state where we’ve had senators like George Voinovich and John Glenn — people who would never have stood by during these recent years and allowed what’s happened to happen.
And today, we have J.D. Vance and we might have Bernie Moreno, whose claim to fame is they want to be puppets for Donald Trump. And it’s not what we should be about.
And that’s why I referenced that New Yorker piece in what I wrote because the New Yorker had a book review that looked back and said the reason Hitler came to the fore wasn’t because a bunch of people went and voted to have a fascist leader. It was because the people in government, in trying to get power for themselves, appeased him and that allowed him to rise.
That’s what we have going on. Everybody knows what the truth is. The people in Congress were there. They were under threat from it. But for expedience, they’re denying it happened.
HUNT: Do you think that those people who are looking to enable Donald Trump, as you say, what is the — their level of culpability here? I mean, obviously, you talk about Trump, himself, and his, the actions that he takes and his role in trying to hang on to power. But these enablers, I mean, what responsibility do they bear?
QUINN: I think they have full responsibility. I think journalists who veer from the truth are going to end up having full responsibility.
Look, we’re a regional newsroom and we’re doing well. We’re actually one of the local newsrooms that’s kind of figured it out and we’re thriving and we’re not in any danger of going away. But we have our limited influence.
And so, we’re doing what we can. We’re, you know, we ask ourselves what’s the right thing to do here? The right thing to do is to call this out, not to say there’s two sides to Donald Trump. There aren’t two sides to Donald Trump. Anybody who has been watching and trying to discern what the truth is here knows that this guy tried to destroy our entire system of government and will do so again. Somebody has to say it.
I wish people like Dave Joyce, a congressman from Ohio who’s a good guy, would stand up and just denounce it. Because if you started to have a few people of good conscience do that, maybe we could stop this wave, which is frightening beyond belief.
HUNT: Well, I’m very grateful that you took the time to join us today, Chris, and I do commend reading this column. I will again say this is something I think about literally every single day because we do want to be a resource, a place for people who want to support Donald Trump or who feel dissatisfied with the system in their own lives. I just had to make sure that those ears are continuing to be open to us is a challenge that I grapple with every day. And I really appreciated reading this.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “With his smug moral superiority, Quinn encapsulates everything that’s wrong with modern journalism. He’s decided what ‘the truth’ is and his readers better get on board. No wonder fewer and fewer are buying local newspapers. They’ve become just as insulting to their readers as the national media have been for decades. Incredulous that anyone could see Trump as a better president than Biden.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ March 25: Liberal Media Scream: Condescending ‘Really?’ to Rubio’s wish to be Trump VP
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream reveals just how deep the disrespect for former President Donald Trump goes in the press, especially with those who have created a profitable side gig writing and talking about him.
In just one word, ABC’s Jonathan Karl heaved up a sanctimonious putdown of Trump and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) when the topic of the likely 2024 GOP presidential nominee’s pick for running mate was raised.
Rubio has said he would be honored to get the nod, as have about a dozen other leading Republicans. What’s more, Rubio would likely help Trump add to his coalition to create a potentially winning ticket.
But all Karl had to say was, “Really?”
It didn’t end there. As Rubio explained the problems President Joe Biden dumped on America, Karl couldn’t help but complain, “You’re not suggesting that’s all happening because of Biden?” Rubio affirmed, “Absolutely I am.”
Here’s the exchange on Sunday’s This Week on ABC:
JON KARL: There was some reporting this week that you are possibly under consideration to be Donald Trump’s running mate. I don’t put a lot of stock in this reporting right now. We’re early. But you said it would be “an honor” to be offered a spot on his ticket. Really?
SEN. MARCO RUBIO: Yeah, I think anyone who is offered the opportunity to serve this country as vice president should be honored by the opportunity to do it if you are in public service. I’m in the Senate because I want to serve the country. Being vice president is an important way to serve the country. But I’ve also been clear. I’ve never talked to Donald Trump. I’ve never talked to anybody on his team or family or inner circle about vice president. That’s a decision he’s going to make. He has plenty of really good people to pick from.
KARL: I mean, the reason why I asked is, I mean, look what happened to the last guy. I mean, a mob stormed the Capitol, literally calling to hang Mike Pence, and Trump defended those chants of “hang Mike Pence.”
RUBIO: I will tell you this, that when Donald Trump was president of the United States, this country was safer. It was more prosperous. We had relations, for example, in a part of the world that I care about called the Western Hemisphere that were very strong. We had a lot of good things done there. I think the country and the world was a better place when he was president, and I would love to see him return to the White House in comparison to the guy who’s there now, Joe Biden, who’s been a disaster economically.
Look at the world. Every single day, we wake up to a new crisis, to a new conflict. Everything has gone on fire since the time Joe Biden took over. Afghanistan’s gone down. Ukraine has been invaded. Now the Philippines and the Chinese are on the verge of something bad happening every single day. Not to mention the threats to Taiwan. And we have this blowup in Haiti going on in our very own hemisphere. We wake up every single day, terrorist attacks, 9 million people across the border. That’s what matters to me.
KARL: But, I mean, you’re not suggesting that’s all happening because of Biden?
RUBIO: Absolutely I am. Absolutely I’m suggesting it’s happening because of Biden. He’s president and his weakness and his —
KARL: It’s because of Biden that Russia invaded Ukraine?
RUBIO: Absolutely.
KARL: It’s because of Biden that Haiti?
RUBIO: Absolutely. I mean Putin is sitting there, saying these guys can’t even stand up to the Taliban and they have to fly people hanging off the wings of these airplanes. Now is the time to go.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “How arrogant and condescending for a broadcast network TV host to scoff at a U.S. senator for saying he’d be ‘honored’ to serve as the vice presidential candidate of his party. And then, to act astonished over a common Republican talking point about President Biden’s foreign policy failures shows Karl is little more than a liberal political operative in the guise of a journalist who is incredulous that anyone could see Trump as a better president than Biden.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ March 18: Liberal Media Scream: ‘Bloodbath’ is what media are doing to Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream focuses on the media and President Joe Biden’s distortion of former President Donald Trump’s warning of an economic “bloodbath” if he’s not returned to the White House to stop China’s dumping of autos in the U.S. under Biden.
The media, and now the Biden campaign, pulled the word out of a long Trump explanation at an Ohio political rally of auto sales to make it sound like he was calling for a civil war if he’s not elected.
It’s very similar to what the media did after the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riots and spelled out how they’d treat a President Trump if given a chance.
Leading that fake rant over the weekend was ABC and a guest on This Week, New York magazine’s Susan Glasser, formerly with the liberal-left Washington Post and Politico.
Without any sign of embarrassment for distorting Trump’s words, Glasser ranted on about how threatening Trump is.
In office, Trump did assail reporters for their “fake news” and overwhelming bias but also was the most accessible and talkative president during his one term. He followed an Obama-Biden administration that was condemned by journalists for avoiding reporters and using technology to go around the media.
Susan Glasser on Sunday’s This Week on ABC:
“Donald Trump, it seems to me, it’s very hard eight years into this. We still struggle with how to cover him as journalists, but in a way, the unhinged, rambling rants that you see from the former president of the United States are baked in, and I think, in a way, we are all desensitized and inured to the extraordinary, remarkable and very at times un-American and threatening things that the former president is saying.
“I’m not saying it’s easy to understand how to cover it, but I think we have to cover it when the former president, who’s already incited violence among his followers, says that there’s going to be a bloodbath after the election if he does not win. He is telling us what he is going to do. …
I’m sorry. I just have to say something. Like Donald Trump is attacking, in a broad-brush sense, the basic pillars of American democracy. Period. Full stop. If that’s not news to you. It’s not about tariffs. That’s not the reason why millions of Americans are supporting Donald Trump. Let’s be real about that.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Yes, after eight years of constant hyperventilating by journalists, over supposed outrageous comments from Donald Trump, many have become ‘inured,’ but it’s not journalists. It’s the public to the media’s never-ending scare-mongering about Trump bringing an end to ‘the basic pillars of American democracy.’ Glasser’s answer: Double down and get more journalists to be even more aggressive in denouncing Trump. Good luck with that, convincing anyone who has already tuned out such vitriol.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ March 11: Liberal Media Scream: Hollywood freaks over Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
Hollywood’s awards season has finally ended and in perfectly normal election-year fashion: Tinseltown freaking out over former President Donald Trump’s possible return to the White House.
Oscars host Jimmy Kimmel got a retort from Trump after he blasted the former president and his Republican allies. Kimmel responded, “Well, thank you, President Trump. Thank you for watching. I’m surprised you’re still — isn’t it past your jail time?”
But his shruggable performance was far outdone by the angry venting of actor Robert De Niro, who stepped up his attacks on Trump.
On Friday, De Niro pleased Bill Maher’s audience by blasting Trump. “Vote for Trump and you’ll get the nightmare. Vote for Biden and it will be back to normalcy,” he began.
To laughter and applause from Maher’s Los Angeles studio audience, De Niro marveled at how anyone could support Trump. He called the poll-leading former president “a total monster” who will install a “dictatorship.” More insults followed: “sociopathic, psychopathic, malignant narcissist,” as well as an “idiot” and “clown.”
From Friday’s Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO:
ROBERT DE NIRO: The bottom line is: It’s Biden vs. Trump. We want to live in a world that we want to live in and enjoy living in or live in a nightmare? Vote for Trump and you’ll get the nightmare. Vote for Biden and it will be back to normalcy. …
The guy is a total monster, and anybody, I don’t understand it. I guess they get behind the kind of logic: They want to f*** with people, screw them because they’re unhappy about something. He’s such a mean, nasty, hateful person. I’d never play him as an actor because I can’t see any good in him — nothing, nothing at all, nothing redeemable in him. Whoever the people are who want to vote for him, and they look like intelligent people around there, for some reason, it can’t be, it cannot be. If he wins the election, you won’t be on the show anymore. He’ll come looking for me. They’ll be things that happened that none of us can imagine. That’s what happens in that kind of a dictatorship — which is what he says. Let’s believe him. Take him at his word.
He’s a sociopathic, psychopathic, malignant narcissist. He is a dangerous person … the people who somehow think he’s going to be the answer to their prayers, whatever those are.
BILL MAHER: Did you know him as fellow New Yorkers?
DE NIRO: Never wanted to know him.
MAHER: Never wanted to, you must have crossed —
DE NIRO: He was an idiot. He was a clown. He was a clown in New York.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Rants like this from pretentious Hollywood celebrities probably drive more to vote for Trump than dissuade anyone from supporting him. How many care about the all-too-predictable left-wing political views of lefties in Hollywood who always denounce the Republican candidate and advocate for the Democratic one? Not anyone who is drawn to Trump.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ March 4: Liberal Media Scream: Media role is reeducating you on greatness of Bidenomics
(Washington Examiner post)
President Joe Biden has apparently realized that pitching “Bidenomics” is a loser politically, but his White House forgot to tell its media echo chamber.
According to an Issues & Insights report, Biden has “ditched” the term, with the report noting Biden and his White House used the term 59 times last July. By last month, it got a mention just 10 times.
That makes sense since most polls show that the public viewed the term negatively because they feel that the economy is poor and that prices are unjustifiably high.
But the well-paid Washington media thinks the public is stupid and needs to be reeducated on just how great Bidenomics is for them.
For example, this week’s Liberal Media Scream features longtime editor and columnist Margaret Sullivan telling fellow anti-Trumper Christiane Amanpour that it’s up to them to make sure people understand the consequences of their wrong-headedness.
“You know,” Sullivan said on Amanpour’s show, “people think that the economy is not doing well. You know, do our public service mission, which is to make sure, as sure as we can, that we have an informed electorate. Whose fault is that? Well, it’s partly the fault of the media. And I think that that ought to be rectified.”
From Saturday’s The Amanpour Hour on CNN
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: The horse race and an age-old dilemma. Why the obsession over Biden’s age misses the point.
MARGARET SULLIVAN, GUARDIAN: I wonder whether people are as aware of Trump’s authoritarian plans as they are of Biden’s age.
AMANPOUR: My next guest says enough is enough with the media’s hyperbolic herd mentality coverage of Biden’s age and competency. Critic, columnist, and academic Margaret Sullivan urges us to get real about the issues because this election is about much more than, quote, “chasing clicks.”
SULLIVAN: I think that the leaders of major American news organizations should have front and center in their minds, and be communicating to their staffs, that this is an extremely consequential election and we should be doing our public service role that it’s not so much about chasing the latest clicks and the latest horse race coverage but rather to make sure that we’re getting the stakes of the race across to people.
You know, people think that the economy is not doing well. You know, do our public service mission, which is to make sure, as sure as we can, that we have an informed electorate. Whose fault is that? Well, it’s partly the fault of the media. And I think that that ought to be rectified.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “What Margaret Sullivan advocates is exactly why the media have lost all credibility and trust for most Americans. She’s decided Trump is too dangerous to be president, so journalists should throw away all standards of journalism by openly joining Team Biden to convince voters of Biden’s virtues while downplaying his negatives. And then journalists wonder why they are seen in such low esteem when they are little more than Democratic Party operatives.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ February 26: Liberal Media Scream: Trump Derangement Syndrome flies off the charts
(Washington Examiner post)
The media have been on a rantfest lately, warning that former President Donald Trump will end democracy and execute his enemies.
Just consider what Bob Costas said over the weekend. “You have to be in the throes of some sort of toxic delusion in a toxic cult to believe that Donald Trump has ever been, in any sense, emotionally, psychologically, intellectually, or ethically fit to be president of the United States,” he said.
But that’s nothing compared to our Liberal Media Scream focus on Tom Schaller, the author of White Rural Rage: The Threat to American Democracy, who went further to attack the half of the nation that has supported Trump over the years.
White rural voters, he told MSNBC’s Morning Joe host Mika Brzezinski, “are the most racist, xenophobic, anti-immigrant, and anti-gay geodemographic group in the country. … They’re the most conspiracist group: QAnon support and subscribers, election denialism, COVID denialism and scientific skepticism, Obama birthism.” And that’s just the start of his five scream rant.
From Monday’s Morning Joe on MSNBC:
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: As we barrel toward a likely rematch of the 2020 election, one candidate continues to have a hold over white rural voters. But it’s not Joe Biden, seen here as a boy on the right side of your screen, who went to public school, is the son of a used car salesman, and was born to a middle-class family in Scranton, Pennsylvania. Instead, it is Trump, here on the left side, a private school-educated son of a New York City real estate tycoon who became a millionaire at 8 years old and didn’t have to serve because he claimed he had bone spurs in his little feet. So, why is it that Trump appeals so much to a group he couldn’t be more different from?
Joining us now, professor of political science at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Tom Schaller, and journalist and opinion writer Paul Waldman. Their new book out tomorrow is entitled, White Rural Rage: The Threat to American Democracy. Tom, I’ll start with you. Why are white rural voters a threat to democracy at this point? You would think, as we pointed out, looking at Joe Biden’s background and Donald Trump’s, that the opposite would be true.
TOM SCHALLER: “We lay out the fourfold interconnected threat that white rural voters pose to the country. First of all, we show 30 polls and national studies that demonstrate this. So we provide the receipts in Chapter 6. They are the most racist, xenophobic, anti-immigrant, and anti-gay geodemographic group in the country.
“Second, they’re the most conspiracist group: QAnon support and subscribers, election denialism, COVID denialism and scientific skepticism, Obama birthism. Third, anti-democratic sentiments. They don’t believe in an independent press — free speech. They’re most likely to say the president should be able to act unilaterally without checks from Congress or the courts or the bureaucracy. They’re also the most strongly white nationalist and white Christian nationalists. And fourth, they’re most likely to excuse or justify violence as acceptable alternative to peaceful public discourse…
“I think this is the disconnect, right? They’d rather channel their rage. I think what a lot of white rural Americans have decided is that their economic fortunes are decided by globalization and frankly, late-stage capitalism, which is eating up all the mom and pop stores and taking away the extractive industries, in coal and farming and so forth, so they might as well vote on their culture issues, they might as well vote on God, guns, and religion because they feel like neither party is going to deliver any material benefit.
“They’re not going to reverse the closure of rural pharmacies and rural hospitals and rural healthcare facilities, which are disappearing not because of communism and not because of socialism but because of capitalism, right? Rural pharmacies and hospitals are closing because they’re not moneymakers, and unless they’re part of a regional chain, they’re disappearing. So Trump comes in and says, let’s just hate on cities, let’s just hate on minorities, let’s hate on immigrants, and at least they can deliver on that. And so they’re not even voting in their material interest anymore, and that’s causing a further decay and decline of rural communities.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “So, if a class of voters prefers a candidate you don’t like, it couldn’t be that they just have a differing opinion with which you can respectfully disagree. No, you must impugn and demean them to discredit their irrational preference for the candidate you condescendingly have decided is not in their best interest. And since this makes MSNBC viewers feel superior, you get a welcoming platform on the left-wing cable channel’s morning show.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ February 19: Liberal Media Scream: Colbert says Trump ‘going to prison’ better than sex
(Washington Examiner post)
Remember when late-night comedy shows were funny instead of being populated by left-wing lecturers?
Case in point in our weekly Liberal Media Scream is Late Show host Stephen Colbert. Along with many people last week, he watched the televised testimony of Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis and her explanation of her affair with an attorney she put in charge of the election case against former President Donald Trump.
“How good was this sex? Good enough to risk democracy over?” he asked in his monologue.
Colbert then added, “You know what feels really good? Donald Trump going to prison. That — that, my friends — is what they call a real happy ending.”
From Thursday’s Late Show with Stephen Colbert on CBS:
STEPHEN COLBERT: Now, I don’t know who’s telling the truth here yet, but I will say exchanging business cards isn’t exactly a meet cute. The movie’s not called When Harry Networked with Sally. Now, at one point, Willis had had enough and really laid into opposing counsel.
FANI WILLIS: You’re confused; you think I’m on trial. These people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020. I’m not on trial, no matter how hard you try to put me on trial.
COLBERT: Damn straight. Yeah. That’s right. That’s right. Here’s the thing. Yes, it’s true Donald Trump and his associates are on trial in this, one of the most important cases in the history of our republic. So, and, I’ve just got one follow-up question here: Given that if you are removed from the prosecution, it could delay this trial until after the election: How good was the sex? Good enough to risk democracy over? Because I’ve never had sex that good. You know what feels really good? Donald Trump going to prison. That — that, my friends — is what they call the real happy ending.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Liberals love to complain that Donald Trump has broken many norms, but prominent entertainment media figures like Colbert have destroyed late-night TV. It was a comedy refuge from hard-edged politics, but Colbert is using his show to advance left-wing talking points and push his hate of Trump and conservatives in the guise of comedy. It’s not funny, and a legend like Johnny Carson, whose political jokes were light-hearted and chided both sides, is rolling over in his grave.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ February 12: Liberal Media Scream: MSNBC host laughably says press against Biden
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream has LOL written all over it.
Imagine any cable news show host claiming that the media has a negative bias against President Joe Biden. LOL, right?
That’s what happened on Sunday’s Meet the Press when MSNBC host Jen Psaki said the media showed its bias when it simply repeated what the nearly 400-page report from special counsel Robert Hur said about the president’s foggy mind.
Psaki, who was Biden’s first White House press secretary, complained that the media should be attacking former President Donald Trump, not her former boss.
“If you’re sitting in the White House and on the campaign right now, you’re absolutely banging your head against the wall at the way that the Thursday report has been covered, given all of the things” Trump has said and done, she said.
From the roundtable on Sunday’s Meet the Press:
JEN PSAKI: If you’re sitting in the White House and on the campaign right now, you’re absolutely banging your head against the wall at the way that the Thursday report has been covered, given all of the things that have happened this week, including, and I know you asked Chris Christie about this, the fact that Donald Trump yesterday suggested that Vladimir Putin should have free rein in attacking NATO allies, and what do we see is wall-to-wall coverage of whether a guy who is four years older than his opponent is too old to be president.
KRISTEN WELKER: And we are going to get to NATO. Go ahead.
BRENDAN BUCK, former spokesman to ex-speaker Paul Ryan: Part of that job, to bring that to the front is, it’s the president’s job to bring that out and attack his opponent. I mean, the president is not taking the opportunity on Super Bowl Sunday. He’s not taking, really, any opportunities. And we hear, time and again —
PSAKI: First of all, that’s not true. It’s not being covered. He has traveled just as much as Donald Trump, as Barack Obama. It is hard to break through the cloud of Donald Trump in this media environment. That is true.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “A media hostile to a liberal cause or Democratic politician is such a novelty that liberal political operatives like Jen Psaki just can’t comprehend it. After three-plus years of sycophantic coverage of Joe Biden, he gets a few days of negative coverage, and she lashes out at the media for daring to briefly act as real journalists. Welcome to the world endured every day for decades by conservatives and Republicans.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ February 5: Liberal Media Scream: Kristen Welker likes to lecture Republicans, too
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features a look at new Meet the Press moderator Kristen Welker’s treatment of Republican leaders. And surprise — not — she continues to be just as biased as former host Chuck Todd.
First, she lectured House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) on the border bill released by the Senate on Sunday. “You are now the speaker of the House. Do you not have a responsibility to your voters, to the people who put you in office, to address what you have called a crisis and catastrophe? Isn’t something better than nothing?” she said.
Then, she passed along the Democratic talking point that after three years of aggressively enacting open border policies, “Joe Biden said he would shut down the border.”
From Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
KRISTEN WELKER: You have been calling for legislative change to actually deal with this problem. You are now the speaker of the House. Do you not have a responsibility to your voters, to the people who put you in office, to address what you have called a crisis and catastrophe? Isn’t something better than nothing?
SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON: Kristen, we did that. We did that nine months ago. And since we passed our measure in the House to solve this problem, and the reason we had to do it is because we saw that President Biden was not fulfilling his obligation under the law. That’s why it is such a failure of leadership, but we did our part. And by the way, since then, in the nine months since that bill sat on [Senate Majority Leader] Chuck Schumer’s desk, collecting dust, 1.8 million illegals have been allowed into this country, welcomed into the country, sent around the nation into every community — communities near everyone listening and watching this morning. And that is a catastrophe, and the American people know it, and that’s part of the reason that Joe Biden has the lowest approval rating of any president facing reelection.
WELKER: Even former President Trump, though, called for legislative change on this issue. You have one of the slimmest majorities in the House in history. Don’t you have to compromise to get something done? What you passed in the House can’t pass in the Senate, Mr. Speaker. You know that.
JOHNSON: We are willing to work. We are willing to work with the Senate. I am not disclosing that, and I’ve been very consistent for the hundred days that I’ve had the gavel. We are willing to work, but they have to be serious about it. If you only do a few of those components, you are not going to solve the problem, and Kristen, that is not a Republican talking point. That’s what the sheriffs at the border, the Border Patrol agents, the deputy chief of U.S. Border Patrol, a 33-year veteran of the agency, told us. He said that it’s as though we’re administering an open fire hydrant. He said, “I don’t need more buckets,” like the president has proposed. I need to stop the flow, and we know how to do that, but Joe Biden is unwilling to do it.
WELKER: Let me ask you about your decision, and by the way, Joe Biden said he would shut down the border. He’s calling for more funding. He’s calling for you to pass this legislation.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “A perfect example of a so-called journalist serving as an advocate for Washington’s media-political establishment, demanding a recalcitrant conservative get in line and adopt the approved narrative.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ January 29, 2024: No Liberal Media Scream this week.
■ January 22, 2024: Liberal Media Scream: Washington Post’s Rubin wants Trump ‘fascists’ reeducated
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features popular Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin doubling down on her Never Trump campaign.
Appearing on the MSNBC weekend show Velshi exactly a year from Inauguration Day, the onetime conservative opinion writer said that the masses appearing at former President Donald Trump’s rallies “are part of a fascist cult.”
And, she added, “they’re impervious to any kind of data, any kind of information. But what you have to do, if you care about democracy, is mobilize the people who already know that he’s a danger and reaffirm and reeducate the people who are perhaps kind of flirting in the middle — they’re soft Republicans, they’re never Republicans — about the danger of going back to Trump.”
Rubin on MSNBC’s Velshi on Saturday:
“Why it’s perhaps important to go to one of these rallies is to understand why he does have supporters. These people are part of a fascist cult. And let’s be honest, there are a lot of them. But a lot of them doesn’t mean that they are behaving logically or rationally. To the contrary, we’ve seen in other fascist regimes that millions of people, sometimes even a majority of the country, becomes intoxicated with an authoritarian figure, and these people are utterly irrational. If you speak to some of them, they will spit back these bizarro conspiracy theories. They actually believe in all of the mumbo-jumbo that he tells them.
“So I think it would be a wake-up call about what these people are about, and, no, we’re not going to convince people who are part of the cult to switch. As you say, they’re impervious to any kind of data, any kind of information. But what you have to do, if you care about democracy, is mobilize the people who already know that he’s a danger and reaffirm and reeducate the people who are perhaps kind of flirting in the middle — they’re soft Republicans, they’re never Republicans — about the danger of going back to Trump. And I think that’s the job between now and November, and that’s the challenge for the Biden administration.”
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “How condescending of Rubin to be so comfortable denigrating supporters of a presidential candidate she despises with one of the most vile insults. Just because she hates Trump doesn’t make those going to his rallies, the very embodiment of democracy in action, ‘fascists.’ Whatever happened to liberals wanting to expand participation in the democratic process?”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ January 15, 2024: Liberal Media Scream: MSNBC’s Mika all in to help Biden’s reelection
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features Mika Brzezinski, the co-host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe, fawning over first lady Jill Biden in a sign of where the cable network stands before the 2024 presidential primary season begins.
With easy questions quizzing Biden about her favorite emoji to dismissing chants of “Let’s go Brandon” that still follow the president, Brzezinski put on an able defense of the Biden White House.
Among the questions posed to the first lady was this: “The division in this country, the cruelty of MAGA Republicans against your family. Does any part of you once in a while think, ugh, maybe we bow out?”
The questions were part of Brzezinski’s Know Your Value “movement.” Our partners at the Media Research Center highlighted these from last Thursday’s show and today’s event at the White House:
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: You’ve been married to President Joe Biden for 46 years. There have been Senate races, three presidential campaigns, eight years of your husband serving as vice president. Unthinkable personal loss and challenge, and now democracy is on the ballot. What do you think when you hear people say, “Well, I just can’t vote for Joe Biden this election?” What is it that they may not know about him at this point, especially when the alternative seems to want to change this nation so radically?
BRZEZINSKI: Potentially another four years in the White House. With everything you do here, does yet another one give you any pause thinking of, like, the personal health and well-being for both of you? The division in this country, the cruelty of MAGA Republicans against your family. Does any part of you once in a while think, ugh, maybe we bow out?
BRZEZINSKI: How have you been coping personally with the onslaught of accusations against your husband and your family, including and especially Hunter, the focus of a House Oversight Committee hearing holding, holding him in contempt, obsessing over him, showing pictures of him during vulnerable moments in his battle with addiction on the floor of the House. This would crush any family.
BRZEZINSKI: What do you think when you hear Trump Republicans calling it “Biden crime family” or one congresswoman, “The Biden crime family sold out America,” Marjorie Taylor Greene, “He’s a liar, he’s mentally incompetent,” and let’s not even talk about what “Let’s go Brandon” means. But you have U.S. senators holding signs that say that.
….
BRZEZINSKI: Your favorite emoji?JILL BIDEN: Oh, my gosh. The turquoise heart.
BRZEZINSKI: Turquoise heart?
BIDEN: Yeah.
BRZEZINSKI: I don’t have the turquoise heart on my phone. What does that mean?
BIDEN: It’s like the beach. It’s calm.
BRZEZINSKI: Oh, I like that.
BIDEN: Color of the sea.
BRZEZINSKI: Do I type out turquoise heart? Comfort food?
BIDEN: Oh, french fries.
BRZEZINSKI: Umm. Yeah, yeah.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Mika Brzezinski is all in on the reelection of Joe Biden. First lady Jill Biden picked well in selecting Brzezinski to interview her, confident she wouldn’t be challenged as they both could commiserate with how awful Trump is and how mean Republicans are to her family, topped by letting her tout the turquoise heart emoji. How informative.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ January 8, 2024: Liberal Media Scream: Stephanopoulos judges Trump an insurrectionist, unqualified for 2024
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream is a five-screamer featuring an ABC host and former Clinton handler acting as judge, jury, and executioner of former President Donald Trump and his effort to remain on the 2024 primary ballots and let voters, not partisan state officials, decide his fate.
ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, on his Sunday show This Week, was quizzing his panel about the campaigns in some states to declare Trump ineligible for election because an official decided that the former president triggered a 14th Amendment ban on insurrectionists.
On his show, which occurred the day after the third anniversary of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, one of his panelists suggested the Supreme Court will decide Trump is guilty but that it will be up to Congress and not the states to erase the GOP front-runner’s name from the ballots.
“If you say he engaged in insurrection,” Stephanopoulos said, “I don’t see how you can escape the plain meaning of the 14th Amendment and say he’s qualified to run for office.”
Panelist Donna Brazile, an influential liberal and former acting Democratic Party chairwoman, told her host, “I totally agree with you, George.”
From the roundtable on Sunday’s This Week on ABC:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Sarah, what’s your guess on what the court does here?
SARAH ISGUR, SENIOR EDITOR OF THE DISPATCH: I think you’ll have the Supreme Court hold that he is not disqualified from being on the ballot. They’ll overturn the Colorado Supreme Court.
STEPHANOPOULOS: The question is, how will they do it though?
ISGUR: Correct. I think they’ll say that, in fact, the 14th Amendment makes clear it’s up to Congress. If Congress can requalify someone by a two-thirds vote, there’s no timeline on that. Which means that, you know, as one of the amicus briefs has pointed out, it’s really supposed to be post-elections about holding office, not running for office. And so I think they’ll say it’s really Congress’s job. The states can’t make up their own standard. Is it beyond a reasonable doubt? Is it more likely than not? Et cetera. What’s interesting to me will be whether or not the Supreme Court goes out of their way in order to get those three, Kagan, Sotomayor, Jackson votes, in saying, “Yes, it was an insurrection, and yes, he engaged in it, but it’s up to Congress.”
STEPHANOPOULOS: I don’t see how they can do that, Donna Brazile. If you say he engaged in insurrection, was the question I asked Nancy Pelosi, I don’t see how you can escape the plain meaning of the 14th Amendment and say he’s qualified to run for office.
DONNA BRAZILE: I totally agree with you, George.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Another example of how Stephanopoulos remains a Democratic partisan first, a journalist a distant second. No true journalist would weigh in with a definitive conclusion on what the Supreme Court should do weeks before a ruling on such a contentious issue which divides Americans. Stephanopoulos has clearly put himself in the camp with those who want to deny the public’s ability to vote for whomever they prefer. So much for saving democracy from Trump when you want to subvert the process.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ December 25, 2023 and January 1, 2024: No Liberal Media Screams these weeks.
■ December 18, 2023: Liberal Media Scream: Scaremonger Scarborough: Trump will ‘execute’ foes, crush ‘American experiment’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features MSNBC Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough’s latest anti-Trump ranting.
The host, whose earlier claim that former President Donald Trump will “execute” foes should he be reelected won the Media Research Center’s “Worst Quote of the Year,” said on Monday that Trump would destroy America’s democracy, too.
“A year from now, it could be over, the American experiment at an end one year from now,” Scarborough said in comments we graded a rare five out of five “liberal media screams.”
His comments are clearly what the latest Rasmussen Reports survey was tapping into when it found that more voters than ever believe the left bias in the media has reached a new high. The comments also raise a question about what scaremongering liberal media figures will be saying in 11 months if Trump is on the verge of beating President Joe Biden.
Scarborough on Monday’s Morning Joe in a discussion with Politico’s Jonathan Lemire:
“One year from now, it could be over. American democracy could be over. Donald Trump, one year from now, could win. He’s told us what he is going to do. When I say American democracy is going to be over, I haven’t said this. Donald Trump is the guy who said it. He is the one talking about executing generals that are not loyal enough to him, a guy that’s talking about terminating the Constitution if it gets in the way of his power. He’s the guy that’s talking about taking off news networks he disagrees with. He’s the one talking about prosecuting and putting in jail people who disagree with him. He’s the one saying that.
“So, a year from now, it could be over, the American experiment at an end one year from now. So, let me ask you, with that being the case and with Joe Biden’s poll numbers getting worse, why is the White House going around singing, ‘Don’t worry, be happy’? Because that’s basically what they’re saying. Why does Joe Biden still have all of his campaign people inside the White House? When are they going to go out and start working on the campaign — not of his lifetime, of our lifetime? When are they going to start acting like American democracy is on the line and stop telling everybody to not worry?”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Saying day after day after day the same over the top ‘the sky is falling’ warning to try to scare his viewers about Trump ending democracy is doing nothing but making Scarborough look every bit as unhinged as he wants people to see Trump. It may be catnip for MSNBC viewers, but Scarborough has become a parody of someone stuck inside a Trump Derangement Syndrome whirlwind unable to make cogent criticisms.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ December 11: Liberal Media Scream: PBS runs interference for Biden over Hunter scandals
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the efforts of Public TV and a Washington Post columnist to deflect the latest criminal indictment of first son Hunter Biden away from President Joe Biden.
Following the tax charges filed by the Justice Department against Hunter Biden, the PBS NewsHour was eager to tell viewers on Friday that it saw no connection to the president.
Anchor Geoff Bennett started with the “context” that Hunter Biden “does not work in the White House for his father in the way that Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump did. And the indictment does not in any way implicate President Joe Biden.”
PBS guest Jonathan Capehart of the Washington Post also ran block for Biden. “For Republicans to try to make a connection between Hunter Biden and trying to say that, 'Well, if you’re going to go after Trump, well, why shouldn’t we go after Biden?' these are two completely different cases,” he lectured.
From Friday’s PBS NewsHour:
GEOFF BENNETT: So, let’s start with the latest legal trouble facing Hunter Biden, with the important context that Hunter Biden’s a private citizen. He is not seeking, nor has he ever held, public office. He does not work in the White House for his father in the way that Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump did. And the indictment does not in any way implicate President Joe Biden.
And yet this will certainly add to the problems, the political problems, facing this White House, as House Republicans, Jonathan, zero in on Hunter Biden’s business dealings as part of their own investigations.
JONATHAN CAPEHART: As part of their own investigations that have been going on for years now, and they’ve been using the president’s son, the president’s troubled son, to try to sully the president. And so far, they’ve come up with nothing, even though, next week, apparently, they’re going to be voting on, you know, to authorize an impeachment inquiry, trying to make connections that aren’t there.
Look, when you read the indictment, when you hear about the indictment, it’s bad. I mean, it’s not good. It’s not good at all. But we’re talking about someone, as you — I’m glad you put that proper context there. He’s an adult. He has not held office. He’s not sought office. He’s not working for his father.
The only thing is, is that he — his father is president of the United States. He’s being held accountable. And I take — I agree with [Hunter Biden’s lawyer] Abbe Lowell that, if his last name weren’t Biden, he probably wouldn’t even have these charges. They would have worked it out.
But he’s facing the consequences, and he’s going through the legal avenues that are afforded to him. And for Republicans to try to make a connection between Hunter Biden and trying to say that, 'Well, if you’re going to go after Trump, well, why shouldn’t we go after Biden?' these are two completely different cases.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “You can almost feel through the screen how uncomfortable the PBS team was to even cover this story, but they realized they had to at least mention it, so they poured on the caveats so their audience wouldn’t be burdened with any information that might hurt their perception of President Biden. It’s the exact opposite tack they take with Donald Trump, where any allegations around him are amplified and discussed ad nauseam.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ December 4: Liberal Media Scream: Media eagerly team with Liz Cheney to undermine Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the remarkable teaming of the media with conservative Republican former Rep. Liz Cheney to stop former President Donald Trump’s 2024 bid.
Repeating her success in winning Democrats to her cause after the Jan. 6 riots and in her No. 2 role on the House Jan. 6 panel, the media have eagerly opened its best shows for her to talk about her new book and campaign against Trump.
The media have helped to promote her book and provided top platforms, notably on CBS Sunday Morning, where she warned that “one of the things we see today is sort of a sleepwalking into dictatorship in the United States.”
In interviewing her about Oath and Honor: A Memoir and a Warning, John Dickerson offered the perfect set-up question: “If a person is a member of Congress and they have sworn an oath to defend the Constitution, can they defend the Constitution and also endorse Donald Trump?”
Cheney replied: “You can’t be for Donald Trump and for the Constitution. You have to choose.”
The media's focus on the book has helped it into the No. 1 spot on Amazon on Monday, a day before it is released.
From Sunday’s CBS News Sunday Morning:
JOHN DICKERSON: After losing her 2022 Republican primary, Cheney traded the U.S. Capitol dome for the Thomas Jefferson-designed rotunda at the University of Virginia, where she has been lecturing on politics and writing a new book, Oath and Honor.
Let me ask you about that oath. If a person is a member of Congress and they have sworn an oath to defend the Constitution, can they defend the Constitution and also endorse Donald Trump?
LIZ CHENEY: No. It’s inconsistent.
DICKERSON: So, they’re breaking with their oath by saying they would like him to be the next president?
CHENEY: In my view, you know, fundamentally, there is a choice to be made. You can’t both be for Donald Trump and for the Constitution. You have to choose.
DICKERSON: It’s a lot of people who are choosing Donald Trump.
CHENEY: Yeah, it is.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Usually, to earn such a laudatory CBS News segment for your book, it must be published by CBS-owned Simon & Schuster. But Dickerson and CBS are so enthralled with her quest to destroy Trump and anyone Trump-adjacent that despite having Little, Brown and Company as her publisher, they went into full promotion mode, cuing up her talking points with no pushback.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ November 27: Liberal Media Scream: Post reporter says ‘sources’ fret public’s lack of credit for Biden ‘successes’
(Washington Examiner post)
For this week’s Liberal Media Scream, we have the latest example of a journalist inside the Beltway concerned that President Joe Biden just isn’t getting the credit he deserves for "Bidenomics," the Middle East crisis, or pretty much anything else.
Despite two years of polling that shows the public doesn’t buy the White House spin that their life is better under the Democratic administration, the Washington Post’s Leigh Ann Caldwell on Sunday’s Meet the Press cited “my sources” complaining that Biden is getting treated like the no-respect funnyman Rodney Dangerfield.
“My sources are saying President Biden doesn’t get a lot of credit, not only on this, but on a whole host of things,” she said in addressing the hostage releases over the weekend.
But maybe there's hope, she added, that Biden will get the credit she says he deserves if his team just sells it better. "They have a lot of work to do to once again, like I said, try to get credit for the successes that he’s had over the past two years which he keeps on getting blamed for everything bad that’s happened."
From Sunday’s Meet the Press:
KRISTEN WELKER: Leigh Ann, I want to start with you. This is a huge test for President Biden. And obviously now, the pressure’s on to release the Americans. How is this playing for him politically, do you think?
LEIGH ANN CALDWELL: Well, obviously it’ll be great if Americans are released with those hostages. But my sources are saying that President Biden also doesn’t get a lot of credit for his successes, not only on this, but on a whole host of things. So that does concern Democrats on Capitol Hill....
Yeah, Bidenomics has really been, become a negative word, especially among Democrats, because it’s not working. I was texting with some Democratic members of Congress last night just trying to get a read over the holiday weekend, what they’re hearing at home and what people are saying, and these members said that it is just not looking good for President Biden politically out there, that he would probably lose some swing states if the election were held today. So they have a lot of work to do to once again, like I said, try to get credit for the successes that he’s had over the past two years which he keeps on getting blamed for everything bad that’s happened.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Caldwell maintained Democrats ‘have a lot of work to do to once again, like I said, try to get credit for the successes’ President Biden has ‘had over the past two years,’ but she’s clearly just as invested as any liberal Democrat in advancing that narrative to help Biden. And in that interest, she reflects much of the press corps which want to influence the outcome, as proven by how complaints that Biden isn’t getting the credit he supposedly deserves have become a common media theme.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ November 20: Liberal Media Scream: ABC’s Jonathan Karl says he wrote book to warn voters away from Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
For this week’s Liberal Media Scream, we feature the latest example of the legacy media going from self-appointed instant fact-checkers on former President Donald Trump to out-and-out enemies.
The choice is ABC’s Jonathan Karl, who admitted that he wrote his latest book on Trump to warn America about him.
Asked on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert on CBS why Trump is leading the Republican nomination contest, Karl said that “superficially” there’s “a sense” that things were better during the Trump presidency. And, he added of his just-released Tired of Winning: Donald Trump and the End of the Grand Old Party, “that’s why I wrote this book.”
He explained that “if people are going to go into this next election thinking about that, they also need to be thinking, not just about what Trump was, but what he is now and what he is proposing and planning to do, what a second Trump administration would look like. And I don’t think people have come to terms with that at all.”
Karl on Thursday’s The Late Show with Stephen Colbert on CBS:
“I think part of what’s happened is people look back. There’s anxiety in the country. People have economic anxiety. There’s discontent with Joe Biden and I think there’s some superficially a sense like ‘Look, if we could only go back to four years ago, the world was relatively at peace, inflation was low, everything was —’ I think there is some of that and that’s why I wrote this book because if people are going to go into this next election thinking about that, they also need to be thinking, not just about what Trump was, but what he is now and what he is proposing and planning to do, what a second Trump administration would look like. And I don’t think people have come to terms with that at all.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Karl’s quest is the very definition of improper political advocacy by a journalist. His job is to report the news in an impartial manner, not jump into the fray when a candidate he hates gets popular, and write a book to convince voters they are making a bad choice. How could any Trump supporter, or any Republican, ever trust his reporting when they know he has a personal interest in directing the outcome?”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ November 13: Liberal Media Scream: CNN’s Hunt says no room for ‘happy and sunny’ in GOP
(Washington Examiner post)
For this week’s Liberal Media Scream, we feature the latest CNN absurdity, a blanket declaration that there is no place for happiness in the Republican Party.
The claim came today from CNN’s Kasie Hunt, who was giving her early morning assessment on the decision by Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) to drop out of the 2024 presidential race, joining former Vice President Mike Pence on the sidelines.
“There’s just no appetite in the Republican base right now for someone who’s happy and sunny,” she said, citing her election night sources.
Of course, many pollsters would suggest that there is just no appetite in the Republican base for anybody other than former President Donald Trump, and GOP voters seem to be pretty happy with that.
Hunt, CNN’s chief national affairs analyst, on Monday’s CNN This Morning:
“The noteworthy thing to me about this — I mean, look, I think it was pretty clear that Tim Scott’s campaign never took off the way, frankly, a lot of people in Washington thought that it might. He had, you know, all the ingredients to be really successful in the traditional Republican Party. He had a lot of backing. Honestly, he wasn’t public about it, but a lot of the people who have been working against Donald Trump for more traditional candidates like Mitt Romney were working on his operation trying to figure out how they could make that happen.
“But when I talked to sources, and I did a lot of this on election night last week, they keep saying to me that there’s just no appetite in the Republican base right now for someone who’s happy and sunny. They’re angry. The base is angry. And that’s a big part of why Donald Trump has had such a durable lead in this race because he campaigns in a much different way. Tim Scott tried to be the kind of ‘Morning in America’ Republican candidate, and it’s just not what people are into. So, you know, it does make sense. He saw the writing on the wall, especially about the fourth debate, and here we are.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “None of the GOP presidential candidates are coming close to Trump, so why the particular argument Tim Scott failed because he’s a ‘happy warrior’ and the electorate is motivated by anger? Trump fans would contend his rallies are peppered with funny lines and upbeat messaging about the basis for his movement, Make America Great Again, which in itself is a happy and aspirational quest for a return to the best of America.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ November 6: Liberal Media Scream: CNN’s Zakaria says Biden better on border than Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
For this week’s Liberal Media Scream we feature the zaniest pro-White House spin yet on the historic border crisis caused by President Joe Biden’s policies.
While big city “sanctuary” mayors are crying uncle because the president’s policies are dumping in thousands of illegal immigrants without providing any money or help with housing, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria somehow thinks that the White House is handling the crisis well.
Biden is “actually not doing a bad job,” he said on Friday’s Real Time with Bill Maher. For proof, he cited the deportation of illegal immigrants, ignoring the enormous crowds of migrants waved into the U.S. every day and the high number of those who slip in undetected.
Zakaria on Friday’s Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO:
“Biden’s actually not doing a bad job, they have deported more people — if you think that’s right and I do because you want a system of laws, right? They have deported more people under the Biden administration than Trump did. They’ve been harder line. The problem for Biden is, and this is a problem for Democrats, you can’t take credit for it because then you’re going to outrage, the progressive wing is going to go nuts. And so, even the things he does, it’s like stealth enforcement. You can’t talk about it.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Talk about missing the forest for the trees. The only reason the Biden administration deported anyone was because of the Trump-imposed Title 42 to deal with COVID, which stayed in place for more than two years of his administration until he ended it in May. In the fiscal year that ended September 30, 2.4 million people crossed the southern border, the highest number since records started being kept in 1960, and that was the third straight record year, all under Biden.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ October 30: Liberal Media Scream: Speaker Johnson takes compare him to KKK and mass shooter
(Washington Examiner post)
We could see this coming from miles away.
For this week’s Liberal Media Scream, we feature the predictably sad reaction of the press to the unanimous Republican vote to confirm soft-spoken Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) as the 56th House speaker last week.
Outlet after outlet tried to portray the Bible-toting Johnson as out of touch with America, instead comparing him to a KKK leader. It’s surprising liberal media outlets didn’t identify him with his middle name, James Michael Johnson, like mass killers.
Even on CNN, analyst Gloria Borger conceded that the media was trying too hard to demonize the little-known lawmaker. It is “hard to demonize” him, she said, explaining, “He’s not the devil incarnate.”
But Bill Maher and his crew didn’t get the memo.
First, on his Friday show, Scott Galloway, a professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business, said to audience applause, “The reason this guy is speaker is none of us have the time to read his resume and realize he’s David Duke-lite.”
Maher pushed back on that characterization, but he offered his own invective, calling Johnson “a religious nut” before raising last week’s mass shooter of 18 in Maine: “Apparently he heard voices, and I thought, ‘Is he that different than Mike Johnson?’”
From Friday’s Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO and Max:
SCOTT GALLOWAY: The whole point here is that we separate church and state, that we believe in the peaceful transfer of power, and the reason this guy is speaker is none of us have the time to read his resume and realize he’s David Duke-lite.
BILL MAHER: Well, we do now. I don’t know if he’s David Duke-lite — I read today he has an adopted black son. I don’t think David Duke would do that, but he is a religious nut.
....MAHER: When you’re this much of a religious fanatic, there is no room for real democracy. That’s not what you believe in. He said it today: Look in the Bible — that’s my worldview. I was reading about this horrible shooting in Maine. We don’t know much about the guy yet, but apparently he heard voices, and I thought, ‘Is he that different than Mike Johnson?’ I mean, degree, yes, but it’s thinner than you think.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “What hypocrisy. You can’t decry how Donald Trump and MAGA have lowered discourse in America and undermined respect for democracy and then smear the incoming speaker of the House as no different than a racist Klan leader or a mass murderer. The comparisons are ridiculous and should be beneath anyone who considers themselves a serious political analyst.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ October 23: Liberal Media Scream: Morning Joe warns of Trump retaliation just short of firing squads
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features MSNBC host Joe Scarborough speculating on a second Trump White House, ranting that it will be one retaliation after another for slights he’s felt over the past eight years, starting with the media and courts.
On his show this morning, Scarborough compared Trump to hard-line Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. “He’s wiped out the judiciary, he’s wiped out the free press,” Scarborough charged.
There was no mention, of course, of how Trump made history as president with his appointments to federal courts, including three of the current U.S. Supreme Court justices, or that he was among the most accessible presidents in recent memory despite his verbal hits on the press.
But at least he offered that Trump won’t line up his enemies and shoot them.
Scarborough’s ruminations came during an interview with the Atlantic’s Anne Applebaum, who just wrote an article titled “Netanyahu’s Attack on Democracy Left Israel Unprepared.”
Joe Scarborough on Monday’s Morning Joe on MSNBC:
“I always tell people, if you want to see what Donald Trump is going to do if he gets reelected, don’t think about him lining up people against the wall and having them shot."
“Just see what [Viktor] Orban has done in Hungary where he’s bragged about having illiberal democracy, and he’s wiped out the judiciary, he’s wiped out the free press. And Anne [Applebaum], I suppose, that’s probably what Donald Trump will look for as a blueprint if he gets elected again.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Left-wing paranoia perfectly encapsulated by Joe Scarborough. No matter how bad you think a second Trump presidency would be for the nation, the idea that just because he makes derogatory remarks about judges, prosecutors, and journalists means he wants to ‘wipe out’ the judiciary and free press, is ridiculous. And even if he were so inclined, the U.S. political system would never allow it, leaving Scarborough’s warning as little more than baseless scaremongering.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ October 16: Liberal Media Scream: CBS anchor scoffs, ‘Indictment’ of Biden?
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the hypocrisy and bewildering ignorance of the media’s coverage of the classified documents cases both President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump face.
On the hypocrisy front, consider all the hours of TV coverage Trump received for his handling of documents compared to Biden. Also, consider how much time the networks gave the extraordinary two days of questions Biden faced last weekend from the prosecutor: just 48 seconds.
Then watch as CBS Face the Nation moderator Margaret Brennan appears astonished that Biden’s case and charges are similar to Trump’s and that a House Republican chairman would even suggest that they should be handled the same way.
“Indictment?” she interjected when her guest, Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said, “President Biden needs the same consequence that they pursue with President Trump.”
From Sunday’s Face the Nation on CBS:
MARGARET BRENNAN: You were talking about classified documents mishandled by the current president, and you said that when it came to Biden and Trump, they’re both equally egregious with equal classification issues. This past week, President Biden was interviewed by special counsel Robert Hur. Will there be legal consequences? Will your committee do anything to act on this? I mean, what exactly do you mean equally egregious?
REP. MIKE TURNER: Well, when you look at the documents, both the classification level and the subject matter, both sides, Trump and Biden's documents, if they had been released in the public or gotten into the hands of nefarious parties, would be damaging to the United States national security. When I look at those documents, there are documents on both sides, equally egregious, that would have negative consequences to our means, methods, techniques, and our allies. Now, in this instance, I think President Biden needs the same consequence that they pursue with President Trump. The actions are the same. And in this instance, if you notice—
BRENNAN: Indictment?
TURNER: You’re getting leak after leak after leak on the Trump documents. You’re hearing nothing on the Biden documents. So you’re continuing to see the inequality that comes out of the Justice Department as there’s silence on the other side with respect to Biden’s. And by the way, he was a serial classified document hoarder. I reviewed documents that were from all the time that he’s been in government. This really is a very serious breach by President Biden.
BRENNAN: Just to be clear here, though, are you saying that President Biden had top secret and TS/SCI classification level documents in his personal home?
TURNER: That’s public already, Margaret, so I’m not confirming something that people don’t already know. That is correct.
BRENNAN: OK. So I think you’re saying that he should be indicted when you say treated the same?
TURNER: I think they need to be treated exactly the same. Now, they’re continuing their investigation with President Biden. I don’t think if President Biden in the end has been found to violate the law, and I believe from what I’ve seen that he has, that he should be treated any differently than Donald Trump. Why would he? Just because he’s president or because he’s a Democrat? And that’s how the Department of Justice has been acting. They need to be treated the same.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Brennan’s naivete about President Biden’s potential very serious misdeeds and seeming surprise that a veteran congressman would suggest he deserves to get treated just as harshly as former President Trump, reflects the larger disinterest in Biden’s behavior by the Trump-obsessed press corps. Indeed, special counsel Robert Hur interviewed Biden over two days last week, yet the ABC, CBS, and NBC evening newscasts offered a measly 48 seconds of coverage in total.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ October 9: Liberal Media Scream: CBS touts waitress jobs as sign Bidenomics works
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the transparent effort by the media to prop up Bidenomics at a time when most people believe costs and expenses under President Joe Biden are way too high.
CBS led the way over the weekend when Face the Nation moderator Margaret Brennan said that a jobs report showing restaurant jobs up was proof Biden’s claims are right.
She cited it to counter claims from 2024 Republican presidential candidate Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) that the economy is not doing enough for people.
“That seems to undercut your argument that the economy’s broken,” Brennan said.
Scott slapped down that logic. He said, “Well, all you have to do is talk to the average American family and ask them what they feel — how they feel about Bidenomics. The answer is very simple. We’ve lost over $5,000 of spending power since January of 2021. We should always celebrate the creation of jobs, but we should never forget that we went 52 consecutive paychecks — 52 consecutive paychecks — with a loss of spending power.”
From Sunday’s Face the Nation on CBS:
MARGARET BRENNAN: On Friday, we spoke with Republican senator and presidential candidate Tim Scott from his home state of South Carolina. Our conversation began on the economy and the surprisingly robust September jobs report.
BRENNAN TO SEN. TIM SCOTT: Friday's jobs numbers shattered expectations. It showed some economic momentum. In fact, restaurant hospitality hiring is back to pre-pandemic levels. That seems to undercut your argument that the economy’s broken.
SCOTT: Well, all you have to do is talk to the average American family and ask them what they feel — how they feel about Bidenomics. The answer is very simple. We’ve lost over $5,000 of spending power since January of 2021. We should always celebrate the creation of jobs, but we should never forget that we went 52 consecutive paychecks — 52 consecutive paychecks — with a loss of spending power.
BRENNAN: And you blame political leadership, not the Federal Reserve?
SCOTT: Well, if you think about the fact that over the last, I guess, year and a half, we’ve seen 16% inflation since Joe Biden’s taken office, which led to 11 consecutive rate increases, that downward pressure on our economy certainly created cracks and fissures throughout the economy. That was caused by Joe Biden’s lack of leadership and understanding of how to create jobs in America.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Brennan put Democratic talking point spin ahead of reality in getting so excited about a jobs report largely built on gains in part-time employment and government jobs. Her priority was to undermine Scott’s very persuasive argument that Bidenomics is a disaster, something recognized by the vast majority of people outside of the media elite.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ October 2: Liberal Media Scream: MAGA just racists, says MSNBC regular
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the continued smearing of MAGA by MSNBC, this time including the broken-record claim that supporters of former President Donald Trump are racists.
Ignoring Trump’s support among black people, his friendships with notable African Americans, and his appointments of black people to top jobs during his administration, MSNBC let legal correspondent Elie Mystal rant that Trump is running for president again “on white grievance” and adding that “without racism, Trump is just dumber Chris Christie, all right?”
From Sunday night’s The Mehdi Hasan Show on MSNBC:
MEHDI HASAN: When you watch Donald Trump talking about “dampening the forest floor,” and then you look at polls that show him neck and neck with Biden or maybe in the lead by 10 points or 5 points over Biden, do you put your head in your hair in your hands?
ELIE MYSTAL: Look, Mehdi, not really. There is a recent poll, a study out of the University of Chicago that said the biggest indicator of whether or not you support Trump is whether or not you believe racism has been defeated, right? Whether or not you believe systemic racism doesn’t exist, whether or not you believe that what white people face more racism than people of color. Trump’s running on white grievance. It’s how he’s always been. It’s what he’s always done. And I feel like reducing it to racism always makes certain kinds of Democrats squeamish. We want there to be a bigger answer. We want to believe maybe Republicans actually think you should “dampen the forests.” We want to believe there is a reason. There’s nothing there there. All it is is white grievance. Without racism, Trump is just dumber Chris Christie, all right? And so, that is why he is where he is because he plays into the racism of his fans.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “How convenient it must be to be so comfortable dismissing the political choice of a large portion of the public by tarring them all as a bunch of racists. Saves time on having to actually address what failures of your side the top candidate on the other side is fulfilling. But stay in your bubble, Mr. Mystal, and you may very well be surprised when those polls, showing Trump beating Biden, come true.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ September 25: No Liberal Media Scream this week.
■ September 18: Liberal Media Scream: Meet the Press’s Kristen Welker debuts as Chuck Todd clone
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the debut of Kristen Welker as host of NBC’s Meet the Press. But other than a new face, there was no change from the lefty bias of the declining show’s MC.
To help Welker's first episode, former President Donald Trump agreed to appear. In return, he faced the usual liberal fact-checking interruptions, especially when answering questions about abortion.
Several times, Welker tried to quiet Trump’s charge that Democrats favor abortion right up to birth. “Democrats aren't saying that. Democrats are not saying that,” she said.
Her performance won failing grades from conservatives, who weren’t expecting a big shift from the bias of former host Chuck Todd.
Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway was first out with an analysis headlined, "NBC’s Kristen Welker Lied Repeatedly About Democrats’ Extreme Abortion Position." “Kristen Welker brazenly and repeatedly lied in a bizarre, conspiracy-laden debate with former President Donald Trump on Sunday,” she wrote, adding, “Welker interrupted her own pre-taped debate with the president to insert her own ‘fact checks’ that were false or were not responsive to actual claims Trump made.”
From Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
DONALD TRUMP: Roe v. Wade. For 52 years, people, including Democrats, wanted it to go back to states so that states could make it right. Roe v. Wade, I did something that nobody thought was possible, and Roe v. Wade was terminated and put back to the states. Now, people, pro-lifers, have the right to negotiate for the first time. They had no rights at all because the radical people on this are really the Democrats that say after five months, six months, seven months, eight months, and even after birth, you’re allowed to terminate the baby.
KRISTEN WELKER: Democrats aren't saying that. Democrats are not saying that. Does it bother you, though, that women say their lives are being put at risk? Do you feel you bear any responsibility because, as you say, you are responsible for having Roe v. Wade overturned?
TRUMP: What’s going to happen? It’s an issue that’s been going on for a long time. It’s a very polarizing issue. Because of what's been done and because of the fact we brought it back to the states, we're going to have people come together on this issue. They're gonna determine the time because nobody wants to see five, six, seven, eight, nine months. Nobody wants to see abortions when you have a baby in the womb. I said with Hillary Clinton when we had the debate, I made a statement: Rip the baby out of the womb in the ninth month, you're allowed to do that, and you shouldn't be allowed to do that.
WELKER: Again, no one is arguing for that, that's not a part of anyone's platform, Mr. President.
TRUMP: The Democrats are able to kill the baby after birth, and nobody wants that.
WELKER: Democrats don’t want that, either.
Kevin Tober, news analyst for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Kristen Welker either never read the 2020 Democratic platform or she's purposefully trying to gaslight her viewers in the guise of a ‘fact check’ of Trump. The current platform of the Democratic Party poses no limits on abortions. Instead of pointing this fact out, Welker decided to scold Trump for telling the truth, which apparently isn't allowed on NBC. If this is what we can expect from Welker as the new moderator of Meet the Press, Chuck Todd might as well have stayed on as the moderator. Different anchor, same liberal media bias.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ September 11: Liberal Media Scream: Chuck Todd puts self among the greats
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the departure of one of our favorite representatives of bias, Chuck Todd, the outgoing host of NBC’s Meet the Press.
Signing off from his daily and Sunday shows, Todd said he hoped he helped educate viewers on the issues of the day and that he would now turn more to nuance and bridging divides.
As he looks to his future as the network’s political analyst, he said he would follow the paths of two of the network’s past greats, David Brinkley and Tim Russert.
“I will continue, of course, to be a big part of NBC’s political coverage because, as Tom Brokaw said to me, ‘Look, some networks do some things well, but nobody does politics like NBC.’ And he was referring back all the way to David Brinkley. And that is sort of the tradition I’ve always said, from Brinkley to Russert, and that’s the stuff I want to carry on,” Todd said.
His final comments on both shows are in this clip:
Todd, at the end of Friday’s daily Meet the Press NOW on the NBC News NOW streaming channel:
“On my first day on the job on Meet the Press, I was handed an audience survey of Sunday show viewers. The No. 1 reason why folks decided to tune into any Sunday show, the No. 1 reason: to get educated. It wasn’t to find out if their side was winning or losing. They just wanted to know.”
“It’s that education piece I’m hanging my hat on for the rest of my professional life because one thing we all lament lately is the lack of knowledge and nuance in our politics. That’s a vacuum I hope to continue to fill, whether in a traditional news platform or other venues —documentaries, docudramas, or even too-close-to-the-truth fiction.”
“I’ll continue to be a big part of NBC News political coverage because no one in this business covers politics as well as NBC. Thanks for watching. I’ll see you down the road.”
Todd, wrapping up Meet the Press on NBC on Sunday morning:
“So, for nearly a decade, I’ve had the honor of helping to explain America to Washington and Washington to America, as Kristen [Welker] just quoted me about. And it’s that education piece that I’m hanging my hat on for the rest of my professional life. One thing we will lament — we all lament lately — is the lack of knowledge and nuance in our politics and citizenship. That’s a vacuum I hope to continue to fill, whether in our continued news coverage here at NBC or via other venues, like docuseries and docudramas, focused on bridging our divides, piercing these political bubbles. And I will continue, of course, to be a big part of NBC’s political coverage because, as Tom Brokaw said to me, ‘Look, some networks do some things well, but nobody does politics like NBC.’ And he was referring back all the way to David Brinkley. And that is sort of the tradition I’ve always said, from Brinkley to Russert, and that’s the stuff I want to carry on.”
“So that’s all for today. Thanks for watching and for so many years of loyalty to me and to this show. I’m happy to say my colleague, Kristen Welker, is going to be here next week because it doesn’t matter who sits in this chair. If it’s Sunday, it’s Meet the Press.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Todd, pretentious to the end. In all his years hosting Meet the Press, he never showed much interest in bringing ‘nuance’ to his liberal agenda or ‘bridging’ divides or ‘piercing ... political bubbles,’ to say nothing of never matching the journalism of David Brinkley or Tim Russert. I watched David Brinkley and Tim Russert. Chuck Todd is no David Brinkley or Tim Russert.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ September 4: Liberal Media Scream: Biden’s coverage ‘tougher than he deserves’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the classic attitude of the Washington press corps toward Democratic presidents that originally got us working with the Media Research Center to highlight out-of-touch newsies.
It is the complaint that the press is too tough when, in fact, they have barely scratched the surface of what some critics believe to be a corrupt presidential operation dating back to President Joe Biden’s days as vice president under former President Barack Obama.
NBC’s Meet the Press featured Franklin Foer, an Atlantic writer who just released a bestselling book on the president titled The Last Politician: Inside Joe Biden’s White House and the Struggle for America’s Future.
Foer told moderator Chuck Todd that “Trump caused the media to become so emotional, to get so engaged in covering all the high drama.”
And with Biden, he said, there has been a "desire on the part of the press to reassert its standards of objectivity.”
But, he added, Biden has continued to complain about his press, just like every other president. “He has been covered probably tougher than he deserves,” Foer said.
That line prompted our partner Brent Baker, the Media Research Center's vice president of research and publications, to grade it five out of five screams.
From Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
CHUCK TODD: You write: “Biden considered his poor approval rating a failure of the media, which someone neglected to note all the ways in which his administration was superior to Trump’s. It was also a failure of his own White House to effectively communicate. He complained that there weren’t enough surrogates on television defending him.” I’m shocked to find out that a White House believes they have a communications problem, not a substance problem.
FRANKLIN FOER: Right. So I think that Biden has — of course, every president who suffers an upside-down approval rating is going to moan about the media, and I think that there is some truth to it in his case where Trump caused the media to become so emotional, to get so engaged in covering all of the high drama. And I think, with the Biden administration, there’s been this desire on the part of the press to reassert its standards of objectivity. So I think, on certain measures, he’s probably right. He has been covered probably tougher than he deserves. But it also —
TODD: There’s no curve? He’s not being graded on a curve?
FOER: No.
TODD: No.
Baker explains our weekly pick: “To channel what President Biden would say, ‘not a joke.’ Foer was seemingly quite serious. But it’s a ludicrous assessment to anyone but the most enthused Biden sycophants or Democratic partisans. To contend that Biden is the subject of media ‘objectivity’ and has received ‘tougher’ coverage than he ‘deserves,’ does not pass the laugh test.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ August 28: Liberal Media Scream: Dour Dana bashes Ramaswamy over KKK reference
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features CNN anchor Dana Bash repeatedly beating GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy’s comparison of liberal "Squad" member Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) to "a modern grand wizard of the KKK."
Over more than five minutes, the anchor harangued Ramaswamy, who said he made the comparison to spark a debate over the lawmaker’s suggestion that candidates of color should be in lockstep with liberals.
After four minutes of her bashing, an exasperated Ramaswamy said: “Dana, I think you’re doing, with due respect, what many in the media do, picking on some fringe comment in the context of a broader context that I was offering in a speech, avoiding the meat of the issue.”
Here’s a sampling from CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday:
DANA BASH: You took issue with comments from Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (D-MA). She reportedly said, quote, “we don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice.” About that, you said, “These are the words of the modern grand wizards of the modern KKK.” You know, I’m sure, the KKK was responsible for more than a century’s worth of horrific lynchings, rapes, murders of black people. How in any way are the views you’re talking about comparable to the views and atrocities committed by the KKK?”
VIVEK RAMASWAMY: What I said is: The grand wizards of the KKK would be proud of what they would hear her say, because there’s nothing more racist than saying that your skin color predicts something about the content of your viewpoints or your ideas.
BASH: No, you didn’t just say that. You didn’t just say that they would be proud. You said, “These are the words of the modern grand wizards of the modern KKK.”
RAMASWAMY: It is the same spirit. You’re right about that, Dana. I think it is the same spirit to say that I can look at you and, based on just your skin color, that I know something about the content of your character, that I know something about the content of the viewpoints you’re allowed to express.
....
BASH: But can you have an intellectually honest conversation when you accuse her of being a grand wizard of the KKK? Can you have that intellectually honest discussion with that kind of rhetoric?
....
BASH: If you want to have an intellectual question, do you think that maybe comparing her to the grand wizard and the notion of what she said to being a modern leader of the KKK was maybe a step too far, or you stand by what you said?
....
BASH: What I did was explain to our viewers that you were asked a question and you took it to a point where you called a sitting member of Congress who is black, who was having discussions about race, calling her the modern grand wizard of the KKK. And I’m just not sure how that’s open and honest discussion.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Bash’s constant harping was not good television. Ramaswamy explained his point and she should have moved on. But she so vehemently disagreed with him that she wouldn’t let go. In doing so, she helped prove Ramaswamy’s point about the elite who won’t countenance any contrary views on race relations, not even from the target of a racist attack.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ August 21: No Liberal Media Scream this week
■ August 14: Liberal Media Scream: Media rage at MAGA ‘alternative reality’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the latest example of the sputtering anger Washington journalists have at the support former President Donald Trump has from his MAGA millions.
Appearing Sunday on ABC’s This Week, Susan Glasser, Washington reporter for the New Yorker and a veteran of the Washington Post and Politico, coughed up a word salad to the storyline that a growing list of indictments is good for Trump while the building criminal focus on first son Hunter Biden is bad for President Joe Biden.
From the roundtable on Sunday’s This Week on ABC:
Susan Glasser: “Part of this is the incredible distortion field where we are all somehow living in Donald Trump’s alternate reality, right? We are talking about, ‘Well, it’s a great benefit to him,’ according to, you know, the big story in the New York Times today that he’s been indicted criminally, what, three times — and it looks like a fourth coming up this week — because we’re living in this warped distortion field of a Republican primary in which Donald Trump is stampeding? It’s a minority of a minority in the country, and so then, you have something like these series of abortion rights referenda in the wake of the Roe v. Wade decision.
“And you realize that in this country, even in deep-red states, there are solid majorities that don’t think, you know, Donald Trump should be the president again, who defeated him in the popular vote in 2016 and in 2020, who support, by actually record numbers, abortion rights, and yet we live in this world where it’s somehow good that Donald Trump is a criminal defendant but somehow bad electorally for the president that his son is being investigated for something, that as far as we know, does not directly concern Joe Biden.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “What an incredible lack of inquisitiveness for a journalist. Glasser is living in her own ‘alternate reality,’ one inhabited by virtually all of her Washington press corps colleagues who are enraged by everything Trump but have put on blinders when it comes to President Joe Biden. They don’t want to give legitimacy to anything which could harm Biden’s reelection fortunes.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ August 7: Liberal Media Scream: Joy Behar would exile Trump to Saudi Arabia
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the ladies of The View jumping to a whole new level of "Trump derangement syndrome" following the third criminal indictment of former President Donald Trump.
Led by Trump Hater in Chief Joy Behar, they talked up a plea deal that prosecutor Jack Smith could offer that sends the former president away for good — but not jail. Instead, and due to concerns that the Secret Service might not allow a former president to live in a jail cell if he’s convicted, Behar suggested exile in Saudi Arabia.
“Wouldn’t that be good?” she said to some audience laughter. “I don’t even care if he goes to jail. I don’t have it in my heart to punish the guy. I just want him to go away and stop ruining my country."
From Thursday’s The View on ABC:
JOY BEHAR: "Well, what about making a deal? What about, Sunny, if he makes a deal with [special counsel Jack] Smith?"
SUNNY HOSTIN: "Without jail time?"
BEHAR: "Without jail, and he says, “I’m going away and moving to Saudi Arabia”?
Wouldn’t that be good? Just go away. We don’t — I don’t even care if he goes to jail. I don’t have it in my heart to punish the guy. I just want him to go away and stop ruining my country."
HOSTIN: "I think there are certain prosecutors that would offer him a plea agreement without time if he would agree to never run for public office again anywhere."
BEHAR: "And go away. I don’t want to even see him in the Enquirer."
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Presumably, The View does not air in Saudi Arabia, so this idea might have some appeal to Trump — and many of us — who wouldn’t mind never again hearing Joy Behar’s voice, but I’d recommend flipping this and exiling the entire crew of The View to Saudi Arabia so none of us have to hear their discombobulated daily rantings.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 31: Liberal Media Scream: Chuck Todd still trying to downplay Hunter Biden scandals
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features a Sunday network public affairs show host that President Joe Biden and his cronies are really going to miss when he finally leaves his perch.
It’s NBC Meet the Press host Chuck Todd, of course, playing “D” on the Hunter Biden scandals exploding in the news today.
On his Sunday show and while interviewing yet another Democratic politician, he sounded almost apologetic for having to address the first son who is facing tax and gun charges and has been linked to bribery allegations along with his father.
Said Todd to his guest, Sen. Chris Coons, a Democrat from Biden’s home state of Delaware, “Republicans are gonna accuse” the president of misdeeds, “they’re going to make the accusation, whether they have the evidence or not,” because they “have an information ecosystem that helps amplify it.”
Todd recently announced that he was leaving his show in September to become the network's "long form" political analyst.
From Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
CHUCK TODD: Let me start with the Hunter Biden situation and I understand that, you know, you believe this is all being emphasized due to politics, the Republican — the House Republicans are doing. Let me ask you this, do you think it would behoove the president for him to come out and say, “Hey, I had no business dealings with my son. My son’s issues are my son’s issues”? Do you think he needs to say that more directly because there’s a lot of people that believe something else happened here?
SEN. CHRIS COONS: Let’s be clear about that point, Chuck. There’s been a five-year investigation. Five years by a Trump-appointed U.S. attorney. This investigation started during the Trump administration and they’ve come forward with not one shred of evidence tying President Biden to any of this. I am encouraged that, in sharp contrast to President Trump, you’ve just detailed his mountain of legal problems where President Trump is fighting, and pushing back and obstructing, Hunter Biden’s come forward, taken responsibility, paid his late taxes. As you just discussed with Chuck Rosenberg, I think the hiccup in the Delaware District Courthouse will get ironed out pretty quickly and I don’t think President Biden needs to say anything more than he has.
TODD: House Republicans are gonna accuse him. They’re going to make the accusation —
COONS: They’re going [to] accuse him of all sorts of stuff.
TODD: — whether they have the evidence or not.
COONS: Correct.
TODD: The question — and they may have an information ecosystem that helps amplify it to a point where you don’t think he needs to just — “Hey, despite what you hear, just so you know, I don’t do business with my son or my brother"?
COONS: I think he’s been perfectly clear.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “If only Chuck Todd had shown such reluctance to promote accusations against President Trump about ‘Russian collusion’ made by Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff and others, which turned out to be baseless, when they were on his program. We’d be in a whole different political-media environment. But no, Todd is only upset by publicity for revelations that may hurt the Democratic president, not the Republican one. And he wonders why so many see him as more of a liberal political operative than any kind of respectable journalist.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 24: Liberal Media Scream: CBS pushes for Hunter Biden media cover-up
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the latest example of how the networks are covering up the escalating Hunter Biden sex, gun, drugs, and taxes scandal.
Not only have most ignored the scandal going all the way back to dissing reports on the first son’s laptop full of dirty deeds, but now some in the media are urging the GOP to “move on.”
Exhibit A is CBS Face the Nation host Margaret Brennan, who this weekend said the plea deal Hunter Biden has cut should be the trigger for Republicans to end their investigation into the president’s son.
Her guest, former federal prosecutor and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, dismissed her question. “No, I wouldn’t, Margaret, and here’s why. The conduct here by the U.S. attorney in Delaware and by the Justice Department just can’t be justified,” he said.
She also rolled out the standard Democratic talking point to make her case: “You know that the U.S. attorney in Delaware was appointed by former President Trump.” It’s typical for senators to suggest prosecutors in their state and U.S. Attorney David Weiss was endorsed by Delaware’s two Democratic senators at the time.
From Sunday’s Face the Nation on CBS:
MARGARET BRENNAN: There are so many legal issues in this campaign, and I want to ask you about one involving the president’s son Hunter Biden who’s going to appear in court this week to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges and will enter into an agreement that could avert conviction on a gun-related charge. The deal has infuriated many congressional Republicans, who were holding their own hearings, and I wonder after this plea happens if you would advise your party to move on?
CHRIS CHRISTIE: No, I wouldn’t, Margaret, and here’s why. The conduct here by the U.S. attorney in Delaware and by the Justice Department just can’t be justified. It doesn’t take five years, Margaret. As you mentioned, I was the U.S. attorney in the fifth-largest office in the country for seven years during the Bush administration. It does not take five years to investigate two misdemeanor tax counts and to dismiss a gun charge, and we need to know what they were investigating and why these are the charges they concluded to. This is not just any person. This is the son of the president of the United States. And while justice needs to be equal, it needs to be equal, and it doesn’t appear to me that this is the way to do it. And I would say one thing on the gun charge. I mean, this is a case where Democrats yell and scream for more new gun laws in the country, and yet you hear no Democrat yelling about the fact that Hunter Biden intentionally lied on his gun permit application, mishandled the gun after he received it with a false permit application, and faces absolutely no penalty. Guess what? The guy who sponsored that law was his father, Sen. Joe Biden, and that charge carries a 10-year sentence, Margaret. We need to explain — they need to explain to the public why that was done.
So no, I don't think it’s time to move on.
BRENNAN: And you know that the U.S. attorney in Delaware was appointed by former President Trump.
CHRISTIE: Incompetent, Margaret. It doesn’t matter, Margaret. It doesn’t matter whether you’re appointed by a Republican or a Democrat, if your work appears to be incompetent and inexplicable, you need to explain it so we can have confidence in our justice system, and I don’t care whether Mr. Weiss is a Republican or a Democrat. He owes the American people an explanation.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “It takes a lot of chutzpah for Brennan to suggest Republicans ‘move on’ from a topic the broadcast news networks and much of the rest of the news media have done all they can to avoid in their quest to protect President Biden. Numerous revelations about Hunter and his dad have gone unreported, or get one story on one night, and then nothing more. What kind of ‘journalist’ pushes for cover-up and suppression over pressing for more coverage three days after two IRS whistleblowers detailed federal efforts to benefit Hunter and not pursue leads which could hurt the president?”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 17: No Liberal Media Scream this week
■ July 10: Liberal Media Scream: CNN’s Zakaria tells Biden, 'You've been a great president'
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features a rare one-on-one interview of President Joe Biden and a hint of what it takes to get a sit-down with him.
In the case of CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, the payback came in a phrase of praise: “You've been a great president.”
The line was part of a long setup on his Sunday show to a question about some Democrats calling for Biden to step aside.
From Fareed Zakaria GPS:
Zakaria to Biden: “You've often said when people ask you about your age, just watch me. And I think a lot of people do watch you and are impressed, and they think you've been a great president. You've brought the economy back. You've restored relations with the world. But many of these people do say, and these are hardened supporters of yours, the next thing he should do is step aside and let another generation of Democrats take the baton.”
Kevin Tober, a news analyst & staff writer at the Media Research Center’s NewsBusters, explains our weekly pick: “Zakaria displayed a masterclass in professional gaslighting Sunday when he told Biden that ‘a lot of people’ watch him and are ‘impressed.’ In reality, even many Democrats have expressed their concern about Biden's age and cognitive decline. Kissing Biden's ring is not ‘facts first’ despite what CNN wants you to think.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 3: No Liberal Media Scream this week
■ June 26: Liberal Media Scream: MSNBC historian declares GOP hopefuls insurrectionists
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream highlights the latest example of the conventional liberal media’s view that all Republicans are deplorable and, thus, dismissible.
MSNBC “historian” Jon Meacham, an author and former Newsweek Washington bureau chief, wrote off the large and historically diverse collection of Republican presidential candidates as insurrectionists and seditionists because all have been supportive at times of former President Donald Trump.
“We have a pretty clear choice in this political season. We can choose a constitutionalist, a party that has been pretty faithful to the Constitution, which is the party of the incumbent president, or we can favor a party that has been shockingly but persistently supportive of an insurrectionist or a seditionist,” he said on Friday’s Morning Joe show.
“It’s not simple, but it is straightforward. That’s the choice before the country,” said Meacham, who punctuated his analysis with declarations of “right?!”
From Friday’s Morning Joe on MSNBC:
JOE SCARBOROUGH: We were talking about the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court who, again, out of control, running roughshod over the will of the overwhelming majority of Americans. And now, we have this president, again, unprecedented, but here we are moving towards, I believe, I think, the most serious charges and the one that I think historians are going to be grappling with long after we are all gone. That is a president charged with conspiracy to commit sedition against the United States of America.
JON MEACHAM: You’re right, historians will be wrestling with it as we all do all the time. I think citizens have to wrestle with it now, right? This is, it’s so central, and I just really believe that we have a pretty clear choice in this political season. We can choose a constitutionalist, a party that has been pretty faithful to the Constitution, which is the party of the incumbent president, or we can favor a party that has been shockingly but persistently supportive of an insurrectionist or a seditionist.
That’s not a sentence we would have said about Eisenhower and Stevenson, right? That was not something that a lot of people grew up with. But it’s pretty vital. And yet that's the question: Is any policy so important that you would want to favor someone that you think is a vehicle for that policy, even if they don’t and have self-evidently tried to trash the Constitution of the United States? And we could go on, but that’s really kind of it. You know, it’s pretty basic. Do you want a constitutionalist or an insurrectionist?
Then we get into the, ‘But, but, but, taxes and judges.’ If we don’t have a Constitution, taxes and judges aren’t going to matter at all. That’s where we are, remarkably, right now. Again, we could go on, but I think it’s a fundamental question. People often say, you know, it’s simple. It’s not simple, but it is straightforward. That’s the choice before the country.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Meacham, in all his haughty glory, sees it as his role to declare every candidate in one party illegitimate presidential contenders because most of them refrain from denouncing the one candidate he really hates. Yet Meacham and Scarborough wonder why conservatives don’t heed their advice when they show such disdain for the choices made by those who don’t share their left-wing worldview.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 19: Liberal Media Scream: CNN begs ‘older’ white people to step aside, give values up
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features one of CNN’s liberal big shots decrying “older” white people in Southern states for trying to maintain values and traditions instead of giving up to the “new demography.”
Ron Brownstein, a CNN political analyst and Atlantic editor, argued it is longtime residents who are trying to impose their values in states such as Texas, not the other way around.
The discussion came Monday when CNN This Morning devoted a segment to how those in red states are “imposing” their values on the rest of the nation.
Not considered by the panel: how those in red states see themselves as simply pushing back at the imposition of left-wing LGBT Pride values that CNN euphemistically described as “inclusion.”
From CNN This Morning:
RON BROWNSTEIN: The attempt to kind of impose the values, and to force companies to toe the line of the values of one segment of society, really puts them in a hard place and, ultimately, they have to decide whether they’re going to embrace this changing, inclusive America, or whether they’re going to back down in the face of this kind of pressure.
CO-HOST ERICA HILL: This is going to feel like a rhetorical question, but I mean it very seriously, as from both a political and a business standpoint, as you’re looking at this, right, inclusion is good for business. How and where is exclusion good for business or for politics when you’re narrowing your pool?
BROWNSTEIN: Well, look, it’s very different between the red states and the blue and purple states. In the red states, you have Republican coalitions that are running state government with an electoral coalition that is fundamentally rooted in the parts of the state that are not changing, that are basically nonurban, older white voters. And they are using that to impose the values of that coalition on changing places before the new demography maybe changes the political balance in a place like Texas. So you see half the country moving in this direction. And these boycotts are kind of the business flank of that same effort that in many ways is attempting to reverse what has been six decades of nationalizing more rights and creating common rights that are available in every state.
I mean, we are moving back toward a pre-1960s world where your basic civil liberties depended much more on your ZIP code. And I think, look, that in some places, like the period before the Civil War, no institution was equally credible on both sides of the sectional divide. And these companies, much as they want to stay out of it, ultimately have to decide: Are they going to embrace the changing America, or are they going to embrace this effort to, in effect, “Make America Great Again” by going back to older rules and older values?
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “In being so concerned about conservatives ‘imposing’ their values on blue America, Brownstein is oblivious to how red-state America sees itself just pushing back against the Left’s values being pushed on them. But to Brownstein and CNN, the liberal blue America world is all that matters.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 12: Liberal Media Scream: New host Charles Barkley calls CNN ‘the Titanic’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features something we don’t hear often — a CNN host who admits the cable network is in serious trouble.
In this case, it is an incoming host and former NBA great Charles Barkley who is teaming up with CBS Mornings co-host Gayle King for a CNN prime-time show.
The show was mapped out by fired CNN chief Chris Licht, who said at the time that the show would begin in the fall.
Barkley is apparently a bit concerned about what he’s getting into. Talking hockey with NHL Hall of Famer Wayne Gretzky, Barkley said, “Apparently, with this new talk show, I’m jumping on the Titanic.”
From the Saturday night NHL on TNT pregame Face Off show:
WAYNE GRETZKY: You don’t need to go take that news job. You can come on our show. You know more about hockey than we do. You don’t have to travel out of Atlanta.
CHARLES BARKLEY: Apparently, with this new talk show, I’m jumping on the Titanic. So it’s not — everybody keeps saying “abort,” “abort,” “abort!” So, you know what, I’m looking forward to it. Gayle is awesome.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “The truth stumbles out spontaneously in the oddest of places. Barkley didn’t see that comment coming from Gretzky, so he blurted out the first thing he thought, which is the truth about the decline of CNN, before recovering with the more acceptable public stance of looking forward to the show. One suspects he’s having some second thoughts about agreeing to join CNN programming.”
Rating for telling the truth: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 5: Liberal Media Scream: Chuck Todd says he’s a ‘real political journalist’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream turns the spotlight to NBC’s Chuck Todd, who portrayed himself as a journalistic martyr in announcing that he will step down as host of Meet the Press later this year.
“Being a real political journalist isn’t about building a brand. It's about reporting what’s happening and explaining why it’s happening and letting the public absorb the facts,” he bragged Sunday.
“I take the attacks from partisans as compliments, and I take the compliments from partisans with a grain of salt,” said Todd, a favorite target of the Secrets' weekly Liberal Media Scream.
NBC said that Kristen Welker, NBC News's co-chief White House correspondent, will succeed him in what is a well-worn path to hosting Sunday public affairs shows.
Todd, on Sunday’s Meet the Press:
“I’ll be honest, though. I leave feeling concerned about this moment in history but reassured by the standards we've set here. We didn’t tolerate propagandists, and this network and program never will. But it doesn't mean sticking your head in the sand either. If you ignore reality, you’ll miss the big story. Being a real political journalist isn’t about building a brand. It's about reporting what’s happening and explaining why it’s happening and letting the public absorb the facts. If you do this job seeking popularity, you are doing this job incorrectly.
“I take the attacks from partisans as compliments, and I take the compliments from partisans with a grain of salt. The goal of this and every Meet the Press episode is to do all of the following in one informative hour: Make you mad, make you think, shake your head in disapproval, and nod your head in approval. If you do all of that in one hour of this show, we’ve done our jobs. So, again, this isn’t goodbye. But know this: No matter who sits in this chair, if it’s Sunday, it’s Meet the Press.”
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Arrogant until the end. No acknowledgment from Todd that he just might be biased in favor of the Left and against conservatives. Instead, he played the martyr card, portraying himself as the target of misguided criticism which only proves his integrity.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
May 29: No Liberal Media Scream this week.
May 22: Liberal Media Scream: NBC’s Chuck Todd says only tax cheats oppose more IRS agents
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream shows exactly the difference between small-government conservatives and big-government liberals.
Imagine wanting 87,000 more Internal Revenue Service agents. Well, that’s not only what NBC Meet the Press host Chuck Todd said, but he sneered at those who don’t want them as likely tax cheats.
On his Sunday show, he took on the GOP plan to roll back the Biden administration’s request and said, “I have never understood the resistance of extra IRA agents — unless you knowingly cheat on your taxes.” His guest, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL), replied, “That’s salacious and you know that.”
Donalds said that “when you have that many more agents, it’s not to go after the rich. It’s to go after the middle class.” Todd stood by his view that the honest have nothing to fear from more enforcement. “So if you’re paying what you are supposed to pay, then you should have nothing to fear,” he said.
The exchange on Sunday’s Meet the Press:
CHUCK TODD: But there’s one more thing House Republicans are asking for, which is they want fewer IRS agents. They want fewer attempts to try to properly get tax receipts into the federal government’s coffers. I have never understood the resistance of extra IRS agents — unless you knowingly cheat on your taxes.
REP. BYRON DONALDS: First of all, that’s salacious and you know that. Most Americans, by far, pay their taxes, and they do it honorably. What House Republicans, and frankly the Republican Party, is concerned about is having IRS agents go after middle-class families and small business owners. When you have that many more agents, it’s not to go after the rich. It’s to go after the middle class. That’s what it's for.
TODD: So if you’re paying what you are supposed to pay, then you should have nothing to fear.
DONALDS: You would make the assumption that IRS audits are up, that they’re putting out more liens on the American people. That’s not true. That data is not there. All Joe Biden is trying to do is find every possible nickel out of every couch from every American to pay for his radical spending. Why would we do that?
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “How ridiculous. More people in any job that involves tracking the activities of others means at least some of those in their purview will get harassed. After all, the additional staff has to justify their existence. By Todd’s logic, minority communities have nothing to fear from dozens more police officers on patrol since only criminals have any reason to ‘fear’ more cops. But that’s not the view of Black Lives Matter activists. Yet, Todd and the media would never take on that premise.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
May 15: No Liberal Media Scream this week.
■ May 8: Liberal Media Scream: Even if Trump loses, Washington Post editor sees America’s ‘dissolution’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream demonstrates that anti-Trumpers have jumped off the deep end eight months before the first primary and caucus vote is cast in the 2024 race.
We feature Washington Post columnist and editor-at-large Robert Kagan, who has long criticized former President Donald Trump, once dubbing him a “Frankenstein monster.”
In his latest expression of "Trump derangement syndrome," he talked about Trump running again and how it will ruin the nation. But in this case, Trump doesn’t win but loses and claims fraud.
The result: America ends. “At that point, I think we face a very serious possibility of dissolution of the United States and secession,” the neoconservative Never Trumper said on the First Look podcast hosted by the Washington Post's Jonathan Capehart.
It even seemed too much for the host, who called Kagan’s take “a pretty apocalyptic view, and I’m laughing to keep from crying.”
From Friday’s First Look on Washington Post Live:
ROBERT KAGAN: If you look ahead a year, I think it’s very hard. I really don’t think most Americans — even attentive Americans — have really focused on the fact that a year from now, Donald Trump is going to be the strongest person in the country in some respects. Certainly, he’s going to dominate the Republican Party. At that point, he will be accumulating votes, which in this country is the ultimate certification of legitimacy. And so I think he’s going to be in an incredibly powerful position.
He’s going to make it clear to his supporters that if he loses, it can only be as a result of fraud. And therefore, I think the entire Republican Party is going to, if Trump loses, say that the election was fraudulent. And at that point, I think we face a very serious possibility of dissolution of the United States and secession. I know that that sounds extreme, but secession has been pretty common, what used to be a very common activity or at least, you know, in the first hundred years of our republic, and our country hasn’t changed that much. So, I think that’s what we’re looking at in the 2024 scenario right now.
JONATHAN CAPEHART: Danielle [Allen], do you share? I mean, that’s a pretty apocalyptic view, and I’m laughing to keep from crying, Bob, but—
KAGAN: For the first thing in the morning.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “The ultimate in 'Trump derangement syndrome' scaremongering. It’s not good enough for former President Donald Trump to lose. Per Kagan, even if Trump loses, we’ll get an apocalyptic outcome. So, the only way for the U.S. to survive as a nation is for Trump to not even run. For someone who sees Trump as a destroyer of democracy, Kagan isn’t very confident in the strength of our democratic institutions.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ May 1: Liberal Media Scream: Todd cues up Mayorkas to tout Biden as ‘incredibly sharp’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream shows how the Washington political/media machine works when it comes to a matter both sides just don’t want to address fully, such as reports President Joe Biden doesn’t have the mental capacity or stamina to run for reelection or serve out a second term.
On Sunday’s Meet the Press, moderator Chuck Todd cued up Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to champion Biden as fully fit for reelection. Todd: “Is he up for a second term?” Mayorkas: “100%. Incredibly sharp, incredibly probing, incredible command of the details, probing on the details.”
Todd’s follow-up: “You have full confidence he can serve a second term?” Mayorkas repeated his 100% line, and then Todd wrapped up the segment without ever challenging the upbeat assurances from Mayorkas.
From Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
CHUCK TODD: You’re in Cabinet meetings. There’s a lot of questions about President Biden and his ability to serve in a second term. You see him up close, face-to-face. What say you? Is he up, is he up for a second term?
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS: Oh, Chuck, 100%. Incredibly sharp, incredibly probing, incredible command of the details, probing on the details, asking tough questions. Absolutely. I’m incredibly proud to serve in his administration. I am incredibly proud of the work that we have done across the board —
TODD: You have full confidence he can serve a second term?
MAYORKAS: 100%.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “It’s the obtuse leading the blind. Everyone knows Joe Biden is as ‘incredibly smart’ as the border is secure, as Mayorkas has repeatedly assured. All but a few Biden sycophants know neither is true, yet Todd let Mayorkas get away with the laugh line.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ April 24: Liberal Media Scream: Government-funded PBS has Biden scandal, gaffe-free
(Washington Examiner post)
If ever there was an example that Twitter had it right when the social media giant slapped “government-funded” and “state-affiliated” on PBS and NPR, consider our Mainstream Media Scream example this week featuring politically delusional contributors David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart.
Imagine a conservative calling President Joe Biden a strong speaker who is gaffe- and scandal-free, ignoring his refusal to meet with the media, his weekly mistaken mumbles, and the investigations into the family finances or the historic crisis on the border.
Well, roll the tape from the Friday PBS NewsHour. There you will see Brooks cheering Biden’s reelection plans and saying that the president “gave a strong State of the Union,” and adding that “there hasn’t been any obvious gaffes, big scandals or anything like that.”
From Friday’s PBS NewsHour:
GEOFF BENNETT, ANCHOR: President Biden’s allies say the fact that he’s facing only token primary opposition from author Marianne Williamson and anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. really is a show of strength for him.
DAVID BROOKS: Oh, for sure. I mean, there’s — in the polling, there’s still a lot of Democrats who think he should not run, but that’s mostly an age issue, not an ideology issue. But the midterm election sort of silenced all that. And he’s been looking strong. He gave a strong State of the Union. There hasn’t been any obvious gaffes, big scandals or anything like that.
And so there’s nothing — or, even ideologically, I’d say, over the two years so far, two and a bit, that he’s pretty well massaged the center-left fights that happen in the Democratic Party by doing things that some people, the centrists like, and some things that people on the Left like.
And so there’s no natural home for an opposition candidate, and everyone’s united by Donald Trump. And so, you know, I think what’s interesting about him, he’s been sounding pretty candidate-y for six months now. He’s been talking like, 'I really want to go after Trump.' And he’s been doing it.
You know, I think what has to concern the White House a little is they’ve had improving inflation, a lot of good domestic policy achievements, Republicans have staked out some pretty extreme ground on a lot of issues. And if you look at the polls, it’s still reasonably close. His approvals are still in 46s.
And it could be that we’re just in an extremely partisan, divided country, an extremely cynical country, where, on the national level, nobody — and this is global — no national leader gets popular anymore. No national leader gets to 55, because there’s so much cynicism across the Western world.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “How surreal to visit the world of PBS News, where Joe Biden is ‘strong,’ has had ‘a lot of good domestic policy achievements’ and hasn’t had any ‘obvious gaffes’ or scandals. Biden is a ‘gaffe’ machine! As for scandals, hello Hunter Biden and Chinese money going to the Biden family, to say nothing of the ongoing scandal of the out-of-control border. Just because PBS ignores Biden’s confusion and malfeasance doesn’t mean he’s good at his job. But to PBS, this is analysis from the ‘conservative’ house analyst. No wonder conservative taxpayers are so annoyed about having to fund PBS.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ April 17: Liberal Media Scream: ABC pundit says Republicans are the bossy ones
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features an ABC News pundit ripping Republicans for pushing people around.
Jane Coaston, once with the New York Times, cited abortion in claiming Republicans are America’s busybodies, ignoring how the Democrats are engaged in a wide-ranging effort to force the country to accept electric cars, gas stoves, and kiddie transgender operations.
“I think the most important political priority for any political party is to not be the people telling people what to do,” she said.
Thankfully, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was sitting next to her on ABC’s This Week. He countered, “Democrats are going to have a hard time making that case when you look at public education and what their position is, which is, us and the teachers’ unions know what to tell your children and where they should go to school and how they should be taught.”
From the roundtable on Sunday’s This Week on ABC:
JANE COASTON: I think the most important political priority for any political party is to not be the people telling people what to do. For the last five years, we’ve heard from Republicans, especially even during COVID, about how freedom was going to reign and that they were just going to let people make decisions for themselves. They want to be the cool mom of politics. Well, that era has ended.
And I think that there’s a specific type of libertarianism that is very popular in America. Unlike the Libertarian Party. But there’s a specific type of, don’t tell me what to do, let me make my decisions. Let me make my decisions for my family, that is very politically profitable. And I think that if Democrats are able to say that we are the party that says you can make these decisions, you can make decisions for your family, your family can make decisions for themselves, I think that that will be politically profitable. And I think that for Republicans, it’s going to be challenging to try to sound simultaneously like cool mom and the Moral Majority that so many of us grew up with.
CHRIS CHRISTIE: Well, the Democratic Party is all for that on abortion, but they are against it when it comes to public education. When it comes to public education, people shouldn’t be able to make their own decisions, you shouldn't be able to have the ability to have your child go to parochial school if you can’t afford it, or to go to a charter school if they’re not available in your town. Or to be able to decide what your children should be able to learn about sexuality and at what age they should learn that. So the Democrats are going to have a hard time making that case when you look at public education and what their position is, which is us and the teachers’ unions know what to tell your children and where they should go to school and how they should be taught.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “What a total lack of self-awareness. If you really think ‘the most important political priority for any political party is to not be the people telling people what to do,’ how can you be a Democrat, as Coaston obviously is, since telling people what to do is the fundamental passion of modern Democrats on everything from the kind of car you can drive to the type of stove you can put in your kitchen? As the famous line goes, where Democrats can be substituted for liberals, liberals don’t care what you do as long as it’s mandatory.’”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ April 10: Liberal Media Scream: Liberals can’t handle the truth
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the news industry’s knee-jerk reaction to the expulsion of two Tennessee Democrats from the legislature for violating floor rules in aggressively demanding gun control.
MSNBC political pundit Jon Meacham gets our spotlight for his rambling tie-in of abortion, gender, guns, and, of course, former President Donald Trump to the ouster of state Reps. Justin Jones and Justin Pearson last week.
“These things are connected,” Meacham said in dismissing Republicans and blaming Trump in the latest example of the media’s Trump derangement syndrome. “It’s a reminder that what Trump has represented, which is this showmanship, this, ‘We’re going to own the libs,’ is actually of enormous real-world consequence, right? His reality show, which is about his attention and his fundraising and his ego and his narcissism, has an impact on how people live and how the vulnerable live.”
Our curator, Media Research Center’s Vice President Brent Baker, gave a rare five out of five “scream” rating and said the meandering performance showed that liberals can’t handle the truth.
“The Republicans in control of the Tennessee legislature were following the very rules of the state constitution in expelling the two Democrats, the kind of orderly process Meacham advocated but can’t accept when it reminds him of Trump-like wrath,” Baker said in his analysis.
Meacham on Monday’s Morning Joe on MSNBC:
I can’t help, just because of where I’m sitting in Nashville, to bring this up as well. You know, 14 days ago, the children, the teachers, the adults who were murdered at the Covenant School were getting ready for school at this hour. And I bring it up because there are — there’s the issue of reproductive health, there’s the issue of a wildly and, if I may, weirdly expansive view of the Second Amendment, there’s an anti-democratic, lowercase “D” movement because we have a supermajority here. Because Republicans can expel two members, they did.
And these things are connected. It’s a reminder — and imagine a world where we haven’t even mentioned the indictment of a former president and the potential indictments coming — it’s a reminder that what Trump has represented, which is this showmanship, this, “We’re going to own the libs,” is actually of enormous real-world consequence, right? His reality show, which is about his attention and his fundraising and his ego and his narcissism, has an impact on how people live and how the vulnerable live. And people who are vulnerable who don’t even know they’re vulnerable because they’re 9 years old and they’re going to school. And so, the right wing — and, Joe, you alluded to it, you grew up around this, you were elected — the right wing needs to be a fully functioning part of a two-party constitutional system. And they can believe what they want to believe about reproduction and about guns, and that’s all what they’re supposed to do. Then you take it to the people. And when you take it to the people, you then obey the result because that’s what we do. That’s what separates us from chaos.
Think about what the Right is doing here. They’re doing two things: They’re pushing, arguably, too far on these important issues, and then if they get a result they don’t like, they storm a capital, or they throw people out of a legislature. Seems to me you can have the first, but you can’t have the second, and if you insist on having both, then you are not part of this conversation, and we need a conversation that has people of good faith, whether you agree with them or not. These are difficult issues, right? I mean, the definition of life and the Roe system. This isn’t easy.
There are people of enormous goodwill, enormous goodwill, who differ from lots of folks that we’re talking to and about. But you take it to the system, you take it to the Constitution, and if there’s a decision, you respect it, and if the decision goes the other way, you work within channels. You don’t throw people out of legislative bodies.
Baker explains our weekly pick: “A classic example of Trump derangement syndrome, though this time in a droll and low-key manner, yet still an instance of how liberals in the media see everything through a Trump prism. The Republicans in control of the Tennessee legislature were following the very rules of the state constitution in expelling the two Democrats, the kind of orderly process Meacham advocated but can’t accept when it reminds him of Trump-like wrath.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ April 3: Liberal Media Scream: 60 Minutes’ hate list against Marjorie Taylor Greene
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the acid 60 Minutes interview of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene by Lesley Stahl.
In it, the Georgia Republican pushed back hard against Stahl’s trolling interview that included a hater’s list of nasty comments thrown at the lawmaker ever since she first ran for the North Georgia House seat.
For her reporting project, Stahl went on social media to “look up” some of the comments. She read them to Greene, who shrugged, “Looks like the average troll in my Twitter feed, so I don’t really care.”
There was no mention in the televised story of the times Greene has been swatted in several cases where she was worried about becoming a so-called “death by police” victim.
Stahl also couldn’t resist the standard liberal media mantra on the necessity of raising taxes.
On the debt ceiling, Stahl asked, “Would you be willing to vote for compromise? In other words, raise some taxes?” Greene replied: “I don’t think we have a revenue problem in Washington. We have a spending problem.” Stahl sneered, “That’s glib. That’s glib.”
From Sunday’s 60 Minutes on CBS:
LESLEY STAHL: We looked up some words that have been said about you.
MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE: OK.
STAHL: “Crazy,” “Q-clown,” “Looney Tune,” “unhinged,” “moron.” Pretty ugly stuff.
GREENE: Looks like the average troll in my Twitter feed, so I don’t really care.
STAHL: You’re used to it?
GREENE: I don’t let name-calling bother me or offend me. I just don’t.
.....
STAHL: Would you be willing to vote for compromise? In other words, raise some taxes?
GREENE: I don’t think we have a revenue problem in Washington. We have a spending problem.
STAHL: You know something? That’s glib. That’s glib. That, what does that mean? The two sides have to come together and hammer it out.
GREENE: Cut spending.
STAHL: Both sides.
GREENE: Both sides need to cut spending.
STAHL: Where do you want to cut it?
GREENE: COVID bailout money and a lot of green energy spending.
STAHL: But are you willing to let us go into default?
GREENE: No. I’ve always said I wouldn’t do that.
STAHL: So, would you compromise?
GREENE: It depends.
STAHL: On taxes? You won’t.
GREENE: No, I’m not raising taxes.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “The 60 Minutes story was unremarkable in many ways as Stahl painted, as you’d expect from the establishment media, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene as a crazy far-right extremist. But Stahl showed how she and CBS News consider the congresswoman first and foremost to be an impediment to their consistent demand that taxes must be raised. In that respect, to CBS she’s just as awful as any conservative who prefers cutting spending to raising taxes.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ March 27: Liberal Media Scream: Jon Stewart says America all talk on ending discrimination
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features liberal activist Jon Stewart claiming that efforts in America to embrace the diversity, equity, and inclusion movement are just an inch deep, a “salve” to make people feel good.
On CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS, the former host of the Daily Show on Comedy Central lumped critical race theory in with DEI and said that despite all the hand-wringing by many to change society’s views on discrimination, it’s mostly just talk.
He pointed to the National Football League as an example. The NFL has the so-called Rooney Rule, which requests that teams interview minorities when a top job comes open, nothing more.
“So here’s what we are going to do,” Stewart said. “We’re going to have to talk to one black guy. ‘Are we good? I think we’re good.’”
Jon Stewart on Sunday’s Fareed Zakaria GPS on CNN:
By the way, all these diversity initiatives and CRT and all those other things are only there because we refuse to actually fix the real problem. The diversity and equity initiatives are a salve. They are to pacify and mollify because we won’t actually do the real thing. We won’t actually dismantle the vestiges of all the systemic racism and all the systemic classism and all the systemic gender issues. We won’t actually dismantle that.
But what we will do is you can have an office in the building. And every few months, we’re going to have to sit and listen to you talk for, like, an hour. “And so we’re good, right?” Like, it’s a country that won’t face — I’ll explain it like, OK, the NFL, right? You know the Rooney Rule? The Rooney Rule in the NFL is because there are so few African American coaches, you have to at least interview, like, one of them. So that’s the rule now, instead of it’s the thing you put in place instead of looking at the owner’s box, and realizing, oh, right, that’s just the legacy of the economic segregation that’s been in our country since its founding.
So we’re never going to deal with that. So here’s what we are going to do. A diversity and equity initiative, we’re going to have to talk to one black guy. “Are we good? I think we’re good.” But that’s what I’m, what I’m trying to say is we don’t — the thing that they’re pointing at is the thing that’s in place because we won’t do the actual thing.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “To conservatives, DEI is undermining the American ideal of equal opportunity and replacing it with forced equal outcomes that exacerbate racial tensions. Stewart put himself clearly on the Left, contending DEI doesn’t go far enough but complaining it’s ‘in place because we won’t do the actual thing.’ Yet he never explains what that ‘actual thing’ would entail.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ March 20: Liberal Media Scream: Joy Reid coddles reporter fired for hostility to DeSantis
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream turns to the case of an Axios reporter who was fired for describing as “propaganda” a news release dished out by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Instead of backing Axios in her interview with the reporter, MSNBC’s liberal host Joy Reid blamed DeSantis and gave the reporter a chance to blast Axios and claim that the likely Republican presidential candidate bullied Axios into action.
Reid said, “There is a bullying aspect and a lot of trolling" of those who work for DeSantis.
The Tampa-based journalist Ben Montgomery said on Reid’s show, “I feel like what Axios did to me has a chilling effect on the entire news media.”
Here’s what happened, according to the New York Post:
“Journalist Ben Montgomery was fired from the news outlet [Axios] after a staffer in the state Department of Education tweeted out a screenshot of him telling the department’s press office over email, ‘This is propaganda, not a press release’ in reply to a release that highlighted the GOP governor hosting a roundtable on ‘Exposing the Diversity Equity and Inclusion Scam in Higher Education.’”
Oh, and of course, he's thinking of cashing in with a book.
From the March 16 episode of The ReidOut on MSNBC:
BEN MONTGOMERY: So we have the Florida Department of Education, that’s kind of engaged in, in my view, campaigning for DeSantis for 2024 presidential campaign. So what they are doing is weaponizing these emails that we sometimes send and trying to make us look like lefty activists when really we’re just interested in them serving the people and being true public service and doing the right kind of work that the taxpayers are paying them for.
JOY REID: There is a bullying aspect and a lot of trolling. They do a lot of Twitter trolling. They tried to bully my dear friend and colleague Andrea Mitchell for asking a question not even to DeSantis, to the vice president, Kamala Harris. Did you experience, before this, any kind of bullying behavior from the DeSantis camp?
BEN MONTGOMERY: Look, I mostly write about fluffy kind of things. I cover the news, of course. I’ve been an investigative reporter for a long time but not with this administration. By and large I have not had the opportunity to really do any kind of depth, in-depth reporting on a DeSantis administration. I’m not a person that they should be afraid of, I don’t think.
I’m not writing about them every day. I’m not digging deep, in other words. So yeah, but this was propaganda and it was a waste of my time. That’s ultimately what I was saying to them. It’s wasting my time and it’s done in a clear vein of propaganda. This is objectionably propaganda.
And I read the whole thing because I give them the benefit of the doubt because they work for the people of Florida. And I want to do right by my readers. And so when this wastes my time and it’s just propaganda, I feel like I have a right to say so. And I feel like what Axios did to me has a chilling effect on the entire news media. It’s a very sad thing.
REID: Oh, it 100% does! It does show that bullying works. And that sends a message to every other journalist. You put up a sort of fun tweet after this all happened saying that you made a quiche. What are your next plans?
MONTGOMERY: I was talking to my agent today about whether there was a book in this, and maybe there is. Maybe it’s time that somebody isn’t afraid to stand up to DeSantis, write a true biography of him. So I might be the guy to do that. We’ll see.
REID: Yeah, good luck, he has his military records, people have lots and lots of questions. Maybe you can pull it off. Ben Montgomery, thank you man. Really appreciate you being here, and best of luck in whatever you do next.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Montgomery’s attitude betrayed as true what the DeSantis staff saw; he is, despite his denial, a ‘lefty activist,’ just one that a media outlet, in a rarity, held accountable. Reid, of course, saw it all through the prism of her hatred for all things DeSantis and thus treated him as the victim instead of as the one who violated the trust of his readers.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ March 13: Liberal Media Scream: MSNBC wants baseball out of Florida over DeSantis
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features a new call from an MSNBC anchor for baseball to pull spring training out of Florida over some of the recent social policy moves by likely 2024 presidential candidate and Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Anchor Lindsey Reiser compared Florida under DeSantis to the days of Jim Crow as she featured Washington Post sports writer Kevin Blackistone, who had just published a column urging Major League Baseball to respond to “Ron DeSantis’s culture wars.”
She said: “You outlined Major League Baseball’s move out of Florida for spring training in yesteryear — late ‘40s, a state with some of the harshest Jim Crow laws as the league was introducing black players to the league.”
He responded that MLB has already shown a hand, moving the 2021 All-Star Game out of Georgia over voting reform laws that turned out to be a nonfactor in last year’s elections that saw record numbers of people at the polls.
Baseball, he said, “should express if it has some uncomfortableness with the things that are going on in the DeSantis campaign, in the way that he’s run the state of Florida, and in some of the other legislation that has been passed there that they should speak out.”
From MSNBC Reports in the 10 a.m. ET hour, on Friday:
LINDSEY REISER: Back in DeSantis’s home state, his fellow Republicans are pretty busy this week with lawmakers introducing three new bills that would expand on legislation that critics call the "Don’t Say Gay Law," another that would ban abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, and a proposal to require bloggers who write about Florida politics to register with the state. This all comes just over a month after Gov. DeSantis's decision to block AP African American Studies from Florida schools, but as Florida sees all kinds of controversy over those proposals, it’s also in the middle of a spring tradition with 15 Major League Baseball teams currently holding spring training and the league and players facing growing calls to speak out against those bills.
Joining me right now, ESPN panelist and sports commentary writer for the Washington Post, Kevin Blackistone. He’s out with a new piece called “Baseball can no longer ignore Ron DeSantis’s culture wars.” Kevin, thanks for being with us. I want to talk to you about the piece. You outlined Major League Baseball’s move out of Florida for spring training in yesteryear — late ‘40s, a state with some of the harshest Jim Crow laws as the league was introducing black players to the league. In 1947, again, Jackie Robinson joining the Brooklyn Dodgers, his team moving spring training to Havana, Cuba. That same year, the Cleveland Indians, the New York Giants moved spring training to Tucson.
KEVIN BLACKISTONE: So baseball reacted, right, and they started to depart from, or certain teams did, from Florida. And that really began the tradition of the Cactus League in Arizona. So that is the through line to what is going on now. And baseball has in the very recent past, right, in 2021, they moved the All-Star Game out of the state of Georgia in protest to some of the election laws that a lot of people in the state of Georgia felt were burdensome on black voters in particular and other people of color and people who were marginalized in that state.
So I just think that, you know, baseball has spoken out on these issues before, and I think it should express if it has some uncomfortableness with the things that are going on in the DeSantis campaign, in the way that he’s run the state of Florida, and in some of the other legislation that has been passed there that they should speak out.
You know, we talked about — and I know this network has — about the review of books for youth in the public schools in the state of Florida and some of those that have not yet been allowed back on the shelves. One of those books happens to be a book about Jackie Robinson, so think about the irony of that. They also temporarily suspended the distribution of books about Roberto Clemente and Hank Aaron, two of the great black stars of baseball.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “What an incredibly insidious historic precedent to cite, the Democratic Party’s century of enforcing segregation, as a rationale now for punishing the people of Florida over a disagreement with policies pushed by the Republican DeSantis. Nothing DeSantis has ever advocated comes close to the kind of racist, inhumane policies Florida enforced in the 1940s.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ March 6: Liberal Media Scream: Whoopi cheers erasing history she’s ‘not in tune with’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features a feud on the Left about “woke” history rewriting between Bill Maher and Whoopi Goldberg.
The initial focus is Maher’s defense on CNN of former President Abraham Lincoln, who ended slavery, and an apparent reference to the Washington, D.C., Emancipation Memorial that featured what many believe is a thankful former slave at his feet.
“Abraham Lincoln was not a controversial figure among liberals. We liked him. Now they take his name off schools and tear down his statues. Really, Lincoln isn't good enough for you?” said Maher on CNN.
Enter Goldberg, a critic of the statue, who slammed the woke movement, claiming she and other black people have always been “woke” to undercurrents of racism.
“And this idea of woke, I'll say it again: Most of y'all were asleep,” she said on The View, drawing a look from co-host Joy Behar.
From ABC’s The View on Thursday:
WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Maher also had some criticism for the other side of the aisle, claiming the Left lost the definition of the term "woke." Huh? OK. Take a look.
BILL MAHER: Democrats sometimes can take it too far. You know, I would categorize liberal as different than woke. Woke, which started out as a good thing, alert to injustice — who could be against that? But it became sort of an eye roll because they love diversity except of ideas. Abraham Lincoln was not a controversial figure among liberals. We liked him. Now they take his name off schools and tear down his statues. Really, Lincoln isn’t good enough for you?
WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Well, that statue was not good enough. Because it showed a slave down at Lincoln’s feet. And if we’re tearing down statues that are really not in tune with where we are as a nation, or at least where we were a couple of months ago, yeah, you got to take it down. That’s why they removed stuff. That’s why people are moving stuff around. And this idea of woke, I’m going to say it again: Most of y’all were asleep.
JOY BEHAR: Who are you speaking to?
GOLDBERG: I’m talking to all those folks that use that word “woke” all the time. Y’all were asleep. We were never asleep. We had to stay awake watching you. So, you woke up and you thought, “Oh, my God, there’s lots of women running amok doing things they’re not supposed to be doing and drag queens everywhere and oh, my God, people of color!”
You know, you always talk about the snowflakes — look in the mirror. Y’all can’t seem to handle anything. You can’t seem to handle competition from Democrats to Republicans. You can’t seem to handle the discussions of why people feel the way they do. Your idea is to get rid of everything. So, stop calling us snowflakes.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “One wonders if Goldberg will be so pleased when the calls come to take down statues of Martin Luther King and remove his name from roads and schools. After all, like her argument with Lincoln, ‘he’s really not in tune with where we are as a nation’ since, by 2023 standards, he was homophobic and transphobic.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ February 27: Liberal Media Scream: Hollywood says banning filming plastic bottles will save the world
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream is going a little off beat to highlight a new Hollywood claim that movie studios and actors are saving the world and the environment with an honor system to ban plastic bottles “on camera.”
It came from Fran Drescher, the president of the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists and the star of The Nanny, a hit sitcom in the 1990s, as she addressed the SAG Awards show last night.
To a smattering of applause, Drescher said that Hollywood’s effort to stop showing plastic on camera was the industry’s biggest effort “to save the planet since World War II.”
Drescher, during the SAG Awards carried live Sunday night on Netflix’s channel on YouTube, said:
“I am very proud to say that SAG-AFTRA and MPAA has forged Green Council, the biggest joint effort of stars and studios to save the planet since World War II. Mission No. 1: an honor system to eliminate single-use plastic on camera, behind the scenes, and leverage star power to challenge audiences around the world to do the same. You may notice this year on your tables, they’re all glass bottles.”
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Nothing better encapsulates out-of-touch Hollywood celebrities than the hubris displayed by Drescher to describe actors not using single-use plastic on camera as key to the greatest effort ‘to save the planet since World War II.’ That’s ludicrous, and even her own union members realized that, hence the very minimal applause in the room. Many viewers watching at home were likely laughing at her absurdity. Perhaps she should be a little more concerned about her members demanding on-set trailers and private jets.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ February 20: Liberal Media Scream: The View hits ‘Ron DeSaster,’ would ‘ban the alphabet’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the hosts of ABC’s The View and their escalating screeching about Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) and his efforts to have public school lessons conform with state law and what Sunshine State parents want.
Instead of a level-headed discussion about his efforts, the hosts attacked DeSantis as a right-wing social warrior who liberal Republican and never-Trumper Ana Navarro dubbed “Ron DeSaster.” The name-calling included unhinged charges that the governor is so anti-education that he would “ban the alphabet.”
The ranting followed moves by DeSantis to question a new College Board Advanced Placement class on black history. He and some other governors are concerned the liberal class plan teaches critical race theory and other lessons banned in the state.
“I think he’s going to ban the alphabet. Holy hell,” said Navarro.
From ABC’s The View on Thursday, Feb. 16:
ANA NAVARRO: What this is all about getting on Fox News. What this is all about is fanning the flames of grievance, of white grievance. What this is all about is manufacturing culture wars that do not exist so that he can come out like William Wallace, the guy in Braveheart — “Freedom!” Listen, I live in Florida. I live under Gov. Ron DeSaster!
SUNNY HOSTIN: You got to move, Ana.
NAVARRO: Every day, I wake up and wonder what he’s going to be. What’s the flavor du jour today? What’s he going to be against today? He’s against AP He’s against DEI — diversity, equity, and inclusion. He’s against [environmental, social, and governance] this week. He’s against electric stoves.
HOSTIN: Don’t say gay.
NAVARRO: He’s against LGBTQ. I think he’s going to ban the alphabet. Holy hell.
JOY BEHAR: These people, these fascists out there like DeSantis, they think that we’re just going to sit back and let them do whatever they want. No, we’re not. We’ve seen this movie before. OK? Those of us who lived in the '60s and '70s, we saw this movie. There were many, many fascist tactics coming down the pike from Nixon and the rest of these fascists; that’s what they are. And we protested and we protested, and we ended a war that was illegal. And we did stuff. And it’s happening again. That’s the good news.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “The unhinged reaction to Ron DeSantis says something about who the left is most afraid of running for president. The stars of The View can’t have an honest discussion about his policies and ideas, so they rant and rave and call him a ‘fascist’ and make other ridiculous accusations. It may entertain liberal viewers, but it should be embarrassing to ABC News, which produces the daily gabfest.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ February 13: Liberal Media Scream: Stephanopoulos demands GOP investigate Trump family
(Washington Examiner post)
Armed only with a Washington Post story about Saudi links to Kushner and Trump, Stephanopoulos asked Rep. James Comer (R-KY), chairman of the panel, “Will you be investigating that as well?”
Comer called for strict ethics disclosure laws, which Democrats have resisted, but that wasn’t good enough for the media star and former Clinton White House aide. “To be clear,” he said, “you believe that this should apply to Kushner and Trump as well as the Bidens at this point?”
The exchange on Sunday’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on ABC:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask you more about your oversight responsibilities. You made it clear you are going to be looking at Hunter Biden and his financial entanglements with foreign countries including China. I want to put up a front-page story from the Washington Post this morning detailing Jared Kushner’s ties to the Saudis. “After helping the prince's rise, Trump and Kushner benefit from Saudi funds.” A $2 billion investment in Kushner’s funds from the Saudis. We know the president, former President Trump, has also received funds related to the Saudi golf tour. Sen. Ron Wyden says these entanglements deserve investigation. Will you be investigating that as well?
REP. JAMES COMER: I think everything’s on the table. Look, we’re investigating Joe Biden. We know that Joe Biden said during the presidential campaign that he had no knowledge of his son’s business interests. He wasn’t involved. He didn’t benefit from them. We have evidence that would suggest otherwise, and this is very concerning. ...
The Democrats complained about Kushner’s foreign dealings. Republicans are certainly complaining about the entire Biden family’s foreign business dealings. We need to know what is allowable and what isn’t allowable. We need to have strict ethics laws, and we need to significantly increase the disclosure laws in America. So I think this investigation is going to be very important to fix a problem before it gets out of hand.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But to be clear, you believe that this should apply to Kushner and Trump as well as the Bidens at this point?
COMER: I believe that when we talk about passing legislation to set a line as to where you can be with relatives of high-ranking government officials with respect to doing business with adversaries overseas, then it would apply to everyone. We need to fix this before it gets worse in the next administration.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “If only the Washington press corps were as eager over the years to jump on stories about Hunter and Joe Biden getting money out of China as they have consistently been to promote every new allegation against anyone in Donald Trump’s orbit. It’s almost as if Stephanopoulos is trying to deflect from Joe Biden, to apply his own version of ‘both-siderism’ to undermine the impact of Congressman Comer’s upcoming hearings on the Bidens.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ February 6: Liberal Media Scream: Reporters beg for Biden to get ‘credit’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream shows how desperate some in the media are for President Joe Biden to get “credit” for his efforts at a time when polls show that 62% do not believe the Democrat has accomplished much.
The top cheerleader is NBC reporter Andrea Mitchell who said on Meet the Press that the president isn’t getting the thanks he deserves.
“He’s not getting credit for the economy, and should be,” she told host Chuck Todd.
From Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
ANDREA MITCHELL: And he’s not getting credit for the economy, and should be. Look at it, you know, I think the danger of recession is receding. It’s not altogether gone. We see a big jobs market. It’s a problem for Jay Powell [chairman of the Federal Reserve] because now they do have to keep tightening. But, you know, wage growth is moderating.
CHUCK TODD: I tell you, people don’t–
MITCHELL: Layoffs are only in a few sectors, they’re not universal.
TODD: There's no doubt–
AMY WALTER: Manufacturing is building.
TODD: –but people still feel like this economy’s just not–
MITCHELL: That’s right, because inflation’s stable.
TODD: It still feels wobbly.
CORNELL BELCHER: Mid-summer, mid-summer – let’s, let’s check in on that.
TODD: That’s fair.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “How nice it must be to be a Democratic president so you have leading members of the Washington press corps spinning talking points in your favor, days before your big speech, about how you ‘should be’ getting more credit. Mitchell’s contentions about Biden’s record are better suited for someone from the White House press office than someone who is supposed to be a dispassionate journalist.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ January 30: Liberal Media Scream: Hammer time: Speaker McCarthy pounds media bias and double standards
(Washington Examiner post)
Last week, for example, when a reporter didn’t like McCarthy’s answer to a question, the speaker said: “Let me be very clear and respectful to you. You asked me a question. When I answer it, it's the answer to your question. You don't get to determine whether I answer your question or not, OK?”
Then, on Face the Nation, he bristled when host Margaret Brennan criticized his appointment of “election deniers” to committee posts. Noting that she didn’t complain when Democratic deniers of former President Donald Trump’s election got good committee seats, he said, “If you want to hold Republicans to that equation, why don’t you also hold Democrats?”
From Sunday’s interview on CBS’s Face the Nation:
Margaret Brennan: I want to ask you about some of the makeup of your caucus.
Speaker Kevin McCarthy: Yes.
Brennan: According to CBS records, 70% of the House GOP members denied the results of the 2020 election. You put many of them on very key committees: Intelligence, Homeland Security, Oversight. Why are you elevating people who are denying reality like that?
McCarthy: Well, if you look to the Democrats, their ranking member [Jamie] Raskin had the same thing, denied Trump or Bush was in there. Bennie Thompson —
Brennan: Did you see those numbers we just put up there? Seventy percent!
McCarthy: Did you also be fair and equal where you looked at Raskin did the same thing, Bennie Thompson, whose a ranking member and was a chair? These individuals were chair of the Democratic Party.
Brennan: I’m asking you, as leader of Kevin McCarthy’s House, why you made these choices? These were your choices.
McCarthy: Yeah, they're my choices, but they’re the conference choices. But I’m also asking you when you look to see just Republicans — Democrats have done the same thing. So maybe it’s not denying. Maybe it’s the only opportunity they have to have a question about what went on during the election. So if you want to hold Republicans to that equation, why don’t you also hold Democrats? Why don’t you hold Jamie Raskin? Why don’t you hold Bennie Thompson? When Democrats had appointed them to be chair, I never once heard you ask Nancy Pelosi or any Democrat that question when they were in power, in the majority. When they questioned —
Brennan: You’re talking about things going back to 2000, which was a time, I didn’t have this show back then, which is why I’m asking you now about your leadership.
McCarthy: No, no! They were in power last Congress. So why —
Brennan: You’re talking about questions from the 2000 election.
McCarthy: You’re asking me about questions that happened to another Congress.
Brennan: About these choices you just made, just made. This is your Congress.
McCarthy: These are members who just got elected by their constituents, and we put them into committees. And I’m proud to do it.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “It’s always refreshing to see a politician push back against a liberal media storyline the journalist presumes is beyond questioning, especially when the journalist is someone so oblivious as Brennan is to her bias.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS (CHEERS).
■ January 23: Liberal Media Scream: MSNBC’s Joy Reid says DeSantis likes only ‘happy slaves’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream highlights the latest cable TV attack on Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s war on woke policies in what is likely to become a regular media pattern as the top Republican rival of former President Donald Trump steps closer to a 2024 bid.
The attack came from MSNBC’s Joy Reid, enraged that DeSantis scuttled a pilot AP black course in state schools. But it’s not that simple, despite her spin.
According to the DeSantis administration, the new course offered by College Board violates Florida's new anti-"woke" law because it is favorable to critical race theory.
“As submitted, the course is a vehicle for a political agenda and leaves large, ambiguous gaps that can be filled with additional ideological material, which we will not allow,” said Bryan Griffin, the governor’s press secretary. “As Governor DeSantis has stated, our classrooms will be a place for education, not indoctrination."
Reid, however, smeared DeSantis as a racist for his administration’s actions. “I’m not saying Ron DeSantis is racist, but to quote [former Tallahassee Mayor] Andrew Gillum, I think the racists might think he’s racist.”
She added that DeSantis wants only happy history taught in schools, “the history of slavery as happy slaves, good slave masters.”
Plus, watch as she twists the other AP history classes taught in Florida as she bashes the “book-banning wannabe president.”
From Thursday’s The ReidOut on MSNBC:
Joy Reid: The [Stop Woke Act] is aimed at eradicating the teaching of history, gender identity, and sexual orientation in favor of curriculum that centers and lionizes people who look like Ron DeSantis. Just take a look at what AP courses are deemed educationally valuable in the state of Florida per the book-banning wannabe president. European history, of course. Along with courses on the history and language of Italy, where DeSantis’s family hails from, Germany, and Japan, which happened to be the Axis countries the U.S. fought during World War II. Now, whether Ron would consider fascist Italy to have been a bad guy in that war, well, that’s up for debate. ...
So, what DeSantis is essentially saying is that the only valuable Advanced Placement class for a Florida student are classes that are about Europe or the other Axis countries. That’s it. African-American studies is not deemed valuable, and it’s not that he’s saying you can’t teach black history, but here’s the evidence. It’s how you teach black history that he’s got a problem with.
DeSantis, when he was a high school history teacher — this is the quote from one of his former students. He was a high school history teacher at a private school in Georgia. ‘Mr. DeSantis was mean to me and hostile toward me,’ said Miss Pompey, who graduated in 2003. ‘Not aggressively but passively because I was black.’ She recalled DeSantis teaching, this is the important part, Civil War history in a way that sounded to her like an attempt to justify slavery. So, when I add that to the fact he’s going after the National Hockey League because they dare to recruit nonblack people, essentially saying you may recruit white people and continue to keep a very white league white, but you may not try to recruit minorities. You know, I’m not saying Ron DeSantis is racist, but to quote Andrew Gillum, I think the racists might think he’s racist. ...
It’s the Daughters of the American Revolution, the pro-Confederate groups who insisted that we can only teach the history of slavery as happy slaves, good slave masters. If you’re doing that, I promise you an AP class that taught that, that slavery was good, because it seemed at least per his former students, Dr. [Steve] Gallon [member of the Miami-Dale school board] that he wanted to teach history of slavery as sort of gallant slave owners who were kind to their happy slaves.
He’s cool with that. And if the AP course said that, he’d be fine with it. I also think that you’ve seen the revelation of what this is really about. A guy named Stanley Kurtz claims he read the story, that he read the curriculum, and he said, ‘The larger danger here is that these courses, if they’re approved, will see the college board devise AP courses in women's studies, gender studies, transgender studies, Latino studies, environmental studies, a full panoply of polarized studies that have Balkanized and politicized higher education.’ Dr. Gallon, in your view, is this an attempt to shut down the teaching of not just black history but any history but the Hallmark card of white and European history?
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Reid’s vitriol shows DeSantis must be succeeding in making inroads to undercut institutions, such as the education establishment, as vehicles for liberal indoctrination of students. So, DeSantis must be discredited with over-the-top invective before he gains any traction in a presidential race. But Reid’s hatred toward him will only elevate the admiration for him amongst conservatives and many independent voters.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ January 16, 2023: Liberal Media Scream: In Chuck Todd’s ‘facts,’ Sen. Ron Johnson sees bias
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream raises an interesting question in today’s partisan Washington. Why do Republicans talk to liberal journalists if they know that they are going to be insulted?
That was the case Sunday on Chuck Todd’s Meet the Press when Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WY) appeared, knowing he was holding the short end of the stick no matter what he said. Johnson even said so: “This is pretty obvious to anybody watching this, is you don’t invite me on to interview me. You invite me on to argue with me.”
The host, of course, was having none of it. In between his favorite authority openings of “Look” and “So,” he got the last insult in when he said, “You can go back on your partisan cable cocoon and talk about media bias all you want. I understand it’s part of your identity.”
From Sunday’s Meet the Press:
CHUCK TODD: I’ll take it at your word that you’re ethically bothered by Hunter Biden. I’m curious, though. You seem to have a pattern.
SEN. RON JOHNSON (R-WI): Are you not? Are you not?
TODD: I’m a journalist. I have to deal in facts. I deal in facts, so senator, my question to you is, I have skepticism of both parties. I sit here with skepticism of a lot of people’s work.
JOHNSON: So do I.
TODD: And I’m curious, are you — were you at all concerned — your Senate Democrats want to investigate Jared Kushner’s loan from the Qatari government when he was working in the government, negotiating many things in the Middle East? Are you not concerned about that? I say that because it seems to me if you’re concerned about what Hunter Biden did, you should be equally outraged about what Jared Kushner did.
JOHNSON: I’m concerned about getting the truth. I don’t target individuals —
TODD: You don’t? You’re targeting Hunter Biden multiple times on this show, senator. You’re targeting an individual.
JOHNSON: Chuck, you know, part of the problem, and this is pretty obvious to anybody watching this is, you don’t invite me on to interview me. You invite me on to argue with me. I’m just trying to lay out the facts that certainly Sen. Grassley and I uncovered. They were suppressed. They were censored. They interfered in the 2020 election. Conservatives understand that. Unfortunately, liberals in the media don’t. And that’s part of the reasons our politics are inflamed is we do not have an unbiased media. We don’t. It’s unfortunate. I’m all for a free press, and it needs to be more unbiased.
TODD: Senator, look — go to partisan — Senator, look, we’re trying to do issues here and facts. Look, you can go back on your partisan cable cocoon and talk about media bias all you want. I understand it’s part of your identity.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Chuck Todd, in all his obnoxious glory. Kudos to Sen. Ron Johnson for taking on Todd’s obvious bias and hostility to the concerns of conservatives, even if he is obvious to his own ‘cocoon.’ Pot meet kettle.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ January 9, 2023: Liberal Media Scream: James Comer nails Chuck Todd’s biased views
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream is the first proof that there is a new sheriff in town, a House GOP majority that is eager to point out the biased and often hypocritical views in the media.
In our spotlight is Rep. James Comer (R-KY), incoming chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, invited on to Chuck Todd’s NBC Sunday show, Meet the Press. He faced the typically biased questions and views of the host, such as when Todd suggested the GOP would be holding votes on legislation it knows President Joe Biden won’t sign, as if Democrats never held “show” votes.
Todd also sneered at Comer’s investigation agenda, suggesting it was just political theater.
But instead of taking it, the lawmaker pushed right back, calling out the biased media.
When Todd dismissed Republican plans to hold votes on term limits and a balanced budget as “show votes,” Comer countered, “A lot of times, as you know, Chuck, you have to take bills through numerous sessions of Congress before they finally become law.”
And when Todd hit GOP plans to probe the Biden administration as “more partisan than professional,” Comer said, “I think the only people that see this as a partisan investigation are the media and the hardcore Democrats.” And for good measure, he added, “Are you kidding me!”
Two of the exchanges from Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
CHUCK TODD: I‘m curious, those two things you mention, those are show votes. They’re not going to pass. They have no chance of passing. Some of them might need to be constitutional amendments, and you know how arduous that process is. What’s the point of passing a bill that basically, you get to put a press release out on, but it doesn’t get enacted?
REP. JAMES COMER: A lot of times, as you know, Chuck, you have to take bills through numerous sessions of Congress before they finally become law.
TODD: Let me ask you this. You’re going to do a lot of oversight. You’re going to have a lot of subpoenas. Many people look at what you’re doing, and they see that it looks more partisan than professional. Tell me how you’re going to try to departisanize an investigation? Or do you expect it to be partisan?
COMER: Well, with all due respect, Chuck, I disagree with that. I think the only people that see this as a partisan investigation are the media and the hardcore Democrats. Look, at the same moment that the Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee released Donald Trump’s taxes, they then moments later turned around and said, “Comer’s investigation of the Biden family influence peddling is a revenge hearing.” I mean, are you kidding me?
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Comer is off to a great start, recognizing the news media are his enemy just as much as Democrats. It was refreshing to hear an elevated Republican leader take on Todd for his multiple hypocrisies, suddenly concerned, now that Republicans are in charge in the House, about the partisanship of an investigation and the futility of votes on two conservative agenda items that will embarrass Democrats. As if Democrats have never had ‘show votes,’ to put Republicans in a bad light, which most journalists found admirable.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS (CHEERS.)
■ January 2, 2023: Liberal Media Scream: MSNBC calls GOP the party of il Duce
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features MSNBC doing its best to become the network of the crackpot Left, talking itself into irrelevance for just about everyone else.
Not satisfied with its record of attacking Republicans and conservatives as MAGA crazies, the cable channel rolled out a host and guest who dismissed the party as fascists. And not just simple fascists such as World War II-era Italian leader Benito Mussolini.
How about “neo-fascist,” “proto-fascist,” and “semi-fascist?” Now that’s got to hurt.
The name-calling came Saturday when Mehdi Hasan hosted Yale University philosophy professor Jason Stanley on Velshi on MSNBC.
Stanley, who authored a book titled How Fascism Works, warned, “I think ‘semi-fascism,’ ‘fascism,’ ‘neo-fascism,’ these are accurate descriptions. We need to drop talk of populism, drop these misleading descriptions that hide what we’re actually facing.”
From Saturday’s Velshi:
MEHDI HASAN: Jason, the GOP is back in power again, at least in the House of Representatives, which means there will be a fair bit of normalizing of them again by the media. In your view, is it fair to describe the modern GOP as ‘neo-fascist’ or ‘proto-fascist’ or, to quote Joe Biden on the MAGA movement, ‘semi-fascist?’
JASON STANLEY, Yale University: There’s certainly within the modern GOP, as the scapegoating of LGBT citizens demonstrates, a fascist movement rising. We — and, to talk about this as some kind of European thing is a confusion since fascism is Jim Crow with a foreign accent. So we have a native, we have multiple native far-right extremist movements: Christian Nationalism, we’ve got, sort of, heritage of Jim Crow. We’ve got an anti-democratic business establishment. And this is a structure, a grouping, that’s going to bring people to vote for an authoritarian party. And that’s what we have, that’s what the modern GOP is increasingly looking like — as Ruth [NYU history professor Ruth Ben-Ghiat] said, an anti-democratic party. I think ‘semi-fascism,’ ‘fascism,’ ‘neo-fascism,’ these are accurate descriptions. We need to drop talk of populism, drop these misleading descriptions that hide what we’re actually facing.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Quite the multiple-choice, a range which says more about the narrow thinking of MSNBC hosts and guests trying to discredit Republicans than it does about anything to fear from Republicans. Hasan dreads ‘normalizing’ Republicans because it’s a lot easier to demonize them than to take on and seriously address views with which you disagree.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
> Liberal Media Screams for 2021 and 2022
> For all of 2020.
> For all of 2018.
> For July through December 2017.
> For January through June 2017.
> For July through December 2016.
> For January through June 2016.
> For July to December 2015.
