Search Results



DAILY CALLER EXCLUSIVE: How Buzzfeed’s ‘Data-Monster’ Leveraged User Data To Fuel Super PACs, Target Voters.

BuzzFeed partnered closely with multiple Democratic and anti-Trump super PACs in 2016 to target its own users with dozens of political advertisements that were not in accordance with its own policies, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation.

Former BuzzFeed Vice President Rena Shapiro, who led the website’s native political advertising team during the 2016 election, described candidly in a pair of unearthed interviews how she partnered closely with political groups to create ads that harnessed the data BuzzFeed collects on its audience of over 650 million people to solve their “ultimate need, which is to get elected, to get their message out there, or to canvas people together to create impact around a cause.”


BuzzFeed raised eyebrows in June 2016 when it announced it had canceled a $1.3 million advertising agreement with the Republican National Committee due to disagreements with then-candidate Donald Trump’s “offensive statements.”

Doing business with any group that supports Trump, BuzzFeed founder Jonah Peretti said after canceling the RNC ad buy, would be “hazardous to our health.”


BuzzFeed’s advertising business demonstrated in 2016 that by refusing to work with pro-Trump political groups it had skin in the political game. But Smith, the website’s editor-in-chief, insists that its news coverage of the president is rooted in the facts. He said in January that the website would have treated a Hillary Clinton presidency the same way they’re treating Trump’s.

But juxtaposing BuzzFeed’s critical coverage of Trump to that of his predecessor, President Barack Obama, suggests otherwise.

BuzzFeed’s coverage of Obama was “almost uniformly uncritical and often sycophantic,” according to a 2016 analysis by Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR), a left-leaning media watchdog group.

At this point I probably don’t have to remind you to think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines.


Flashback: Why Women’s Magazines Only “Get Political” When a Republican is in the White House.

Spin Sisters gotta spin, even if it means bias by omission.

ROGER SIMON: Iran Protests Expose Mainstream Media as Reactionary, not Liberal.

Read the whole thing. Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines desperate to keep Obama’s Iran deal alive and prevent Trump from having a key international victory occur on his watch (and fearing he’ll take full credit for it), and their de facto working for the mullahs all makes sense.


JORGE RAMOS MAKES HIS CONTRIBUTION TO THE 2020 TRUMP CAMPAIGN: Jorge Ramos Says He’s Now Having the ‘Worst Time’ of His Life in U.S. And note this:

Nearly a year into the Trump presidency, Univision anchor Jorge Ramos says he’s experiencing “the worst moment I’ve had in the 34 years I’ve been living in the United States.”

“With Donald Trump there, I have never been treated so badly. I have never been insulted so much. We’ve never been attacked so much, nor have they tried to run us out as much as now,” Ramos vented in an interview with the Spanish radio network Cadena SER.

Ramos, who proclaimed himself “if not an enemy, an opponent” of Trump in the interview, complained about the massive blowback he has received since deciding to use his media platforms to openly oppose the choice of over 62 million American voters in last year’s U.S. presidential election.

“Now the social media networks are terrible,” Ramos told his Spanish radio interviewer, Javier del Pino. “Before if someone wanted to insult you, they had to do it in person or by sending you an anonymous letter. Now they do it through the social media networks and the daily insults – you can enter my Facebook or Twitter and they are there all the time,” lamented Ramos.

How dare you peons speak with me – I’m a reporter!

Flashback: Stelter, Tur clash with Jorge Ramos on being ‘Stand-Ins for Democrats:’

At a recent National Press Club panel on the current state of the U.S. news media, the fireworks really erupted when Ramos objected to a statement made by Tur, in which she basically exhorted journalists to uphold core journalistic standards.

KATY TUR, CORRESPONDENT, NBC NEWS: Continue to report on the facts. Be as fair as you possibly can be. Be partial to the truth, and don’t be alarmist when it’s unnecessary.


After interrupting Tur for apparently advocating a much too orthodox approach to the practice of the profession, Ramos proceeded to urge the attendees at the National Press Club event to favor instead his ‘holy war’ approach to covering Trump.

JORGE RAMOS, SENIOR NEWS ANCHOR, UNIVISION: Our position, I think, has to be much more aggressive. And we should not expect the Democrats to do that job. It is our job. If we don’t question the president, if we don’t question his lies, if we don’t do it, who is gonna do it? It’s an uncomfortable position…

BRIAN STELTER, HOST, CNN’S RELIABLE SOURCES: You’re almost saying we’re a stand-in for the Democrats.

“Almost.” Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines (and in Ramos’ case, a daughter who was employed by the Hillary campaign) and it all makes sense.

Who want to aggressively “question the president…question his lies,” but dive for the fainting couch when their viewers return the favor.

IT’S A RIDDLE, WRAPPED IN A MYSTERY, INSIDE AN ENIGMA: There’s an Awakening Against Sexual Assault, So Why Is No One Talking About Bill Clinton?

Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and Bill’s conspicuous absence from all of these stories makes perfect sense. Not to mention this minor detail: Harvey Weinstein helped pay Bill Clinton’s legal bills during Monica era, Washington Post archive reveals.


I did what I could to answer Ben Strauss’ questions as well as I could, while still producing, occasionally popping on air when Clay asked me a question, and handling the phone calls. This was by no means me sitting in front of an interviewer, but Strauss relentlessly grilled me on all aspects of Outkick, my politics, and Clay’s brand of entertainment.

If you read the Politico article, you’ll notice he quoted me several times in the roughly 4500 word piece. I probably spoke over ten thousand to him myself, but he picked about six sentences. Before I discuss those, let me explain how the interview went down. I can’t accurately describe how many times I was asked some variation of this question:

So, did Clay Travis make a conscious decision to appeal to the right for monetary and celebrity purposes?

It wouldn’t just come as a question, as it would also include something like, “I mean you guys know what you’re doing, and it’s clearly working for you, but this was intentional, right?” That’s paraphrasing, but he felt the need to make up quotes and insinuations from me, so I’ll do the same to him. But, I’ll be courteous enough to admit it, and also won’t take him out of context, as he did to me.

I refused to give him the answer he walked in the door craving. This guy had an agenda, he had his title picked out, he had his “gotcha” piece scripted out in his head before he ever shook hands with either one of us this past Monday morning. To call this article biased and littered with manipulation would be a massive understatement.

Strauss would then ask the same question again, but with variance in the selected words, hoping I wasn’t educated enough to see what he was doing.

Didn’t you record your own copy of the interview? As Glenn wrote in the New York Post in 2008 after ABC edited a mashed-up video ransom note version of Sarah Palin being “interviewed” by Charlie Gibson, always bring your own video camera (or at least a digital audio recorder) to an interview. Just ask the folks who Katie Couric tried to gotcha last year.

And speaking of blasts from the past, Outkick’s Jason Martin writes:

Clay Travis isn’t alt-right in the least. I suggested to Strauss that I felt Donald Trump gave that incredibly small fringe movement a “wink and a gun” because he needed their support, and because he has no principles, merely interests. Correction, he has one interest, and it has five letters in its last name. The last four are “RUMP.”

Clay didn’t vote for Trump, and despite our many disagreements, he and I shared that in common. Never for a second did I consider Trump, and in fact as soon as he was the clear nominee, I officially registered as an Independent and removed the “R” from my name permanently. None of that matters to “journalists” like Ben Strauss, however. I’m alt-right because he and I wouldn’t necessarily vote the same way. I’m convinced most of the people that toss out “alt-right” like it’s a bodily function have no clue what it actually means.

Alt-right – for the media, it’s this decade’s version of calling everyone on the right “neocons,” ironically enough.

Exit quote:

Clay and I gave this man access, we answered his questions, we tried to ensure he had all the information he needed to write an article worthy of his time. He interviewed me, he interviewed Clay’s wife (and asked her some RIDICULOUS, uncomfortable questions about the family now being on the wrong side of history), and he even spoke to Bobby freaking Bones about Clay.

This is the behind the scenes account of how one writer came in not to learn anything, not to be objective, and not to write an intriguing portrait of a controversial public figure, but to try and find a punchline for his bad joke.

After reading the article, the punchline is actually the byline. Go figure.

Just think of Politico as being largely staffed by Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.


Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.


● Shot: “Former FEMA head Michael Brown remembers Hurricane Katrina ten years later, calling President George W. Bush’s decision to flyover New Orleans to view the aftermath and not land was a huge mistake.”

Hardball with Chris Matthews, August 28, 2015.

● Chaser: “The hosts of MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’ mocked President Trump on Tuesday over a video of him helping load disaster relief supplies in Houston for Hurricane Harvey victims.”

The Hill, today.


Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.


Think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines. Period.

And over at Hot Mic, a reminder not to play with somebody else’s fixed coin.


Earlier: Fusion GPS Illuminates the Brave New World of Manufactured News for Hire.


When a computer expert who worked for congressional Democrats was accused of stealing computers and data systems in February, members of Congress cut him loose within days, leaving Imran Awan with no supporters five months later.

Except for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

The Weston Democrat has not explained in detail why she continued to employ Awan until Tuesday when she fired him — after he was arrested on bank-fraud charges at Dulles International Airport in Virginia attempting to board a flight to Pakistan.

And she has not elaborated on what work Awan did for her after he lost access to the House computer network.

Related: Wasserman Schultz Seemingly Planned To Pay Suspect Even While He Lived In Pakistan.

As Mark Steyn told Tucker Carlson on Wednesday, the story of DWS and Awan has “everything that the Democrats and the media spent months… trying to prove [with] the Russia investigation…We have actual criminal elements. “Everything they’ve been looking for is… staring them in the face with this mysterious guy.”

Which of course, is why, with the notable exception of DWS’s hometown paper, the DNC-MSM can’t run away fast enough from story, and/or switch into “Republican overreach” mode.

As Iowahawk likes to say, “Journalism is about covering important stories. With a pillow, until they stop moving.” Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.


A CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION MASQUERADING AS A POLITICAL PARTY: Imran Awan Scandal Shows Just How Much Dirt Dems Wanted to Hide By Focusing on Trump-Russia.

Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and their efforts to sweep DWS’s scandal under the rug all makes sense.

TAKE A BOW, DNC-MSM: Last night, the Boy Scouts became the Hitler Youth. Today, Sean T. Collins, a freelancer who has written for the New York Times, Rolling Stone, Wired, and the New York Observer among other publications, declares “The world would be a better place if McCain died in Vietnam,” in a since-deleted tweet, as he and other Democrat operatives with bylines attack McCain for wanting to “kill” people by repealing Obamacare, as NewsBusters notes.

Lest you think this is entirely a new attitude amongst the left, recall this New Yorker flashback to the Vietnam War era. “Punch” Sulzberger, who had published the Times from 1963 through 1992, and whose family has controlled the New York Times since the late 19th century, served with distinction as a Marine in the Pacific Theater in WWII and as an officer during the Korean War. His son on the other hand…

[Arthur Ochs “Pinch” Sulzberger Jr.] had been something of a political activist in high school—he had been suspended briefly from Browning for trying to organize a shutdown of the school following the National Guard’s shooting of students at Kent State—and at Tufts he eagerly embraced the antiwar movement. His first arrest for civil disobedience took place outside the Raytheon Company, a defense and space contractor: there, dressed in an old Marine jacket of Punch’s, he joined other demonstrators who were blocking the entrance to the company’s gates. He was soon arrested again, in an antiwar sit-in at the J.F.K. Federal Building in Boston.

Punch had showed little reaction after the first arrest, but when he got word of the second one he flew to Boston. Over dinner, he asked his son why he was involved in the protests and what kind of behavior the family might expect from him in the future. Arthur assured his father that he was not planning on a career of getting himself arrested. After dinner, as the two men walked in the Boston Common, Punch asked what his son later characterized as “the dumbest question I’ve ever heard in my life”: “If a young American soldier comes upon a young North Vietnamese soldier, which one do you want to see get shot?” Arthur answered, “I would want to see the American get shot. It’s the other guy’s country; we shouldn’t be there.” To the elder Sulzberger, this bordered on traitor’s talk. “How can you say that?” he yelled. Years later, Arthur said of the incident, “It’s the closest he’s ever come to hitting me.”

Pinch and the rest of the MSM haven’t exactly matured much since the Woodstock era. As Matthew Continetti of the Washington Free Beacon wrote of the Times in a 2014 piece titled “Fast Times at Eighth Avenue High,” “The next time our reporters and producers and anchors and bloggers affect an air of moral or social superiority, the next time they pretend to know the answers to every political and economic and cultural question, remember this: They are basically teenagers.”

And regarding their adolescent rage, and that of the non-media wing of the Democrat Party, as Glenn has written, “Trump, as I keep saying, is a symptom of how rottenly dysfunctional our sorry political class is. Take away Trump and they’re just as awful and destructive. He just brings their awfulness to the fore, where it’s no longer ignorable. Now they’re willing to play with fire, risking the future of the polity over little more than hurt feelings, in a way that would have been unthinkable not long ago.”

Related: “And now, in sports news, Deadspin preparing victory lap in event of Sen. John McCain’s death,” tweeting, “I don’t want to hear another [f***ing] word about John McCain unless he dies or does something useful for once.”

I’m so old, I can remember when the left pretended to condemn eliminationist rhetoric.

UPDATE: Liberals Stop Pretending to Care About John McCain After His Health Care Vote.

DISPATCHES FROM THE HOUSE OF STEPHANOPOULOS. ABC’s Outrageous Anti-Christian Smear: “Jeff Sessions addresses ‘anti-LGBT hate group,’ but DOJ won’t release his remarks,” ran an ABC headline yesterday, screencapped by Rod Dreher, who writes:

This is genuinely shocking to read. I went to the same annual ADF meeting last summer. It was a normal gathering of religious conservative lawyers and others, who talked about various challenges to religious liberty. Yet those scamming trolls at the Southern Poverty Law Center tagged them a “hate group,” and ABC News repeats that slur. What ABC says is technically true. SPLC does in fact call ADF a “hate group.” The shocking thing is that ABC News takes that incredible charge for granted, and uses it to trash both ADF and Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Here’s a link to a PDF file from ADF that gives you the basic facts about the organization. Does this look like the moral equivalent of a neo-Nazi outfit to you?

Here’s the link to the SPLC page explaining why they labeled ADF a “hate group.”  You should be aware that if they say this about ADF, they must also say it about any church that upholds orthodox Christian teaching on sexuality. SPLC calls it “hate” — and again, ABC News repeats that vicious smear, because no doubt they think it’s true.

Just think of ABC News as Democrat operatives with bylines (and in some cases booster seats), and it all makes sense.

Related: The Insidious Influence of the SPLC.


Stelter—the employee of an exposed purveyor of biased and fake news—then wraps up his argument by blaming media consumers for the failures of his network and professional brethren.

I’m sorry to say these people, these trolls, they’re media illiterate. They don’t really know how newsrooms work.

It’s your fault, America. You just aren’t educated or smart enough to understand how being 99% in the tank for the Democrat party is what real journalism is all about.

I think the real problem here is that the news media is largely America illiterate, and Americans know more about how newsrooms work than the folks at CNN really want them to.

People don’t want to eliminate journalism.  They’re starving for it.

It’s funny how well the original slogan of “Progressivism” – “rid society of the dictatorship of the middle class” – and journalists from then-Washington Post-owned Newsweek and now CNN’s Stelter in full “Yeah, I’m in the media – screw you”* mode dovetail together. Just think of old media as Democrat operatives with bylines (lashing out with a mammoth case of status anxiety because their pose of elitism is being threatened), and it all makes sense.

* Warning: CNN takes Ginny Carroll’s odious old slogan all too literally these days.


In Reason’s newest podcast, W. Joseph Campbell says, “It makes you wonder why these news organizations are not doing a more thorough job of…fact-checking…and being a bit wary of anonymous sources.”

Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

And don’t miss his puncturing of the media’s overinflated, self-serving myths regarding their role in Watergate.


Hodgkinson also visited the office of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, whose campaign he had worked on as a volunteer, and was in email contact with the two Democratic senators from his home state.

As conservative journalist and video maker John Tabin tweets, “Amazing how a simple switch in party affiliation can turn a headline into a minor detail” that was buried 11 paragraphs into an article astonishingly headlined, “FBI: Gunman who shot congressman had no target in mind.”

A TALE OF TWO ATTACKS: “Compare the media post Giffords to post Scalise. It’s amazing.”

You spelled “unexpectedly” wrong. Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines and airbrushes, and it all makes sense.

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN: In January 2008, with video cameras rolling, far left presidential candidate Barack Obama told the editors of the San Francisco Chronicle that he would bankrupt any new coal-powered electrical plant. Since the Chronicle’s editors were (and are) Democrat operatives with bylines, rather than putting this news in giant headlines on the front page (i.e. “CANDIDATE OBAMA VOWS TO BANKRUPT NEW COAL-POWERED PLANTS”), the paper buried Obama’s quote in plain sight in the middle of a lengthy video of Q&As between the editors and Obama. It sat online for months until an enterprising video blogger spotted it and became an October surprise for Obama, though too little too late, alas. But as with Obama’s “spread the wealth around” socialist quip to Joe the Plumber also in October, anyone not completely in the tank for Obama at least knew what to expect when he took office in January of 2009.

This past Thursday, the Chronicle reported, via their AP feed:

Under a tent perched hundreds of feet above a freshly dug coal pit, about 200 miners, business leaders, and politicians celebrated amid the surge of enthusiasm for the industry. Mining headgear lay atop red, white, and blue table cloths labeled “Make Coal Great Again.”

Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf said the mine was part of an effort to bring back jobs and industry to the state. Pennsylvania awarded a $3 million grant for the project.

“We have not always capitalized on our standing as one of the world’s leaders in these resources, but we’re changing that,” Wolf said.

Trump has made reversing the decades-long decline in coal mining the central tenet of his environmental policy, blaming federal regulations aimed at curbing planet-warming carbon emissions for job losses in the industry. Trump and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt have targeted laws that protected waterways from coal waste and required states to slash carbon emissions from power plants. About a dozen protesters chanted in opposition to the mine at the opening.

Hardest hit (besides Barry himself), Democrats with bylines at the San Francisco Chronicle, who whiffed the biggest catch of the 2008 election for partisan reasons, and Hillary Clinton, who cackled gleefully in March 2016 that she would “put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business,” if elected. Her quote was made in at a CNN town hall segment in Ohio, America’s “ninth largest coal producing state in 2013,” Big Government’s Michael Patrick Leahy wrote last year regarding Hillary’s devastating Kinsley-esque gaffe.

But then, I’m so old, I remember when Democrat presidential candidates vowed to create new jobs, not crush them.



Back in February, I was riding on the New York to DC shuttle and CNN’s own Jeff Zucker was seated in the row behind me with a woman I took to be a colleague or personal assistant. She was yelling loudly into her phone, loudly enough that the other passengers took note of it, at one point escalating her voice to say: “If they want war with CNN, they got it.” When we landed, I noted the likely inspiration for the call: the administration had offered Mike Pence to every network except for CNN.

—Ben Domenech, “CNN’s War On Trump Is Going Swimmingly,” yesterday.


The media brag that they now more or less run the Democratic agenda. Univision’s Jorge Ramos (whose daughter worked for the Hillary Clinton campaign) recently thundered:

Our position, I think, has to be much more aggressive. And we should not expect the Democrats to do that job. It is our job. If we don’t question the president, if we don’t question his lies, if we don’t do it, who is going to do it? It’s an uncomfortable position.

In other words, Ramos confessed that the Democratic party apparently has neither new ideas nor a political agenda that would win over the public, and thus self-appointed journalistic grandees like him would have to step forward and lead the anti-Trump opposition as they shape the news.

Fellow panelist and CNN’s media correspondent Brian Stelter answered Ramos, “You’re almost saying we’re a stand-in for the Democrats.” Thereby, Stelter inadvertently confirmed Trump White House adviser Steve Bannon’s widely criticized but prescient assertion that the media are in fact “the opposition party” — and should be treated as such.

—Victor Davis Hanson, “Progressive Media & Democrats Form New Anti-Trump Party,” May 30th.

Hangover: Proud Sponsor of President Trump’s Nightly ‘Assassination’ — CNN’s Parent Company Time Warner:

In the next scene the Trumpian Caesar is attacked by the Senators and stabbed to death as an American flag hovers overhead, according to Sheaffer. “They had the full murder scene onstage, and blood was spewing everywhere out of his body.”

Among others, guess who proudly sponsors this nightly wish-fulfillment in the bloody, live and in person! assassination of the President of the United States of America?

Time Warner, the parent company of CNN.

“And keep in mind that this is the same CNN that led the charge to destroy the career of a rodeo clown for the sin of wearing an Obama mask,” John Nolte adds at the Daily Wire.

THUGGISH MANHATTAN MILLIONAIRE BITTERLY SMEARS WORKADAY JOURNALISTS. But this time around journalists yawn in response, because he’s one of their own: Bill De Blasio, media critic:

The mayor has made no secret of his disdain for the local press — in October last year, he attacked the New York Post as a “right wing rag,” and refused to call upon the paper’s reporters. He routinely rejects the premise of reporters’ questions, and has come under fire for limiting his availability to answer questions from the press corps that covers him.

But on Friday, he delivered one of his longest critiques of the media in general, and virtually none of New York City’s local media institutions were safe.

Rupert Murdoch, the owner of NewsCorp, which publishes the New York Post and Wall Street Journal, is “a right-wing media baron who is consistently trying to undermine progressive governments and progressive movements all over the world,” de Blasio said.

Of Newscorp’s media outlets, he had this to say: “Anyone who thinks that’s objective journalism is kidding themselves.”

He also criticized the Daily News’s owner, Mort Zuckerman, calling the paper, although more “balanced” than the Post, “corporate media owned by a major real estate baron.”

He also wasn’t happy with the New York Times.

“I’m greatly disappointed in the New York Times that they have greatly reduced their focus on New York City news,” he said.

“Bluntly, a lot of the media in this town spends a disproportionate time on all sorts of other things, that are not the things affecting people’s lives” de Blasio said.

“The thing that fascinates the mainstream media is not the substance,” he said. “It’s the spectacular, the scandalous, or the flavor of the moment.”

So De Blasio attacks the press on all sides of the aisle, and on Twitter today, virtually crickets. Just think of much of the media as being Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.


While the Comey hearing into Russia was and remains a big story, CNN’s John King admitted Thursday afternoon that the media will not give much (if any) attention to Jim Comey stating that he was disturbed by then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch telling him in the midst of the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal that he should refer to it as “a matter,” not “an investigation.”

“A number of significant things. One, this won’t get much attention because it’s in the rearview mirror but a pretty damming account from Jim Comey there about Loretta Lynch, the former Attorney General in the Obama administration and her handling of the Clinton e-mail investigation. It won’t get much attention, but that was pretty damning,” King admitted.

Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

JUST THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES, AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE: Dylan Byers admits on CNN that reporters tell a progressive story defined by Obama and Hillary.

Earlier: “Why would you trust a campaign?”


At a recent National Press Club panel on the current state of the U.S. news media, the fireworks really erupted when Ramos objected to a statement made by Tur, in which she basically exhorted journalists to uphold core journalistic standards.

KATY TUR, CORRESPONDENT, NBC NEWS: Continue to report on the facts. Be as fair as you possibly can be. Be partial to the truth, and don’t be alarmist when it’s unnecessary.


After interrupting Tur for apparently advocating a much too orthodox approach to the practice of the profession, Ramos proceeded to urge the attendees at the National Press Club event to favor instead his ‘holy war’ approach to covering Trump.

JORGE RAMOS, SENIOR NEWS ANCHOR, UNIVISION: Our position, I think, has to be much more aggressive. And we should not expect the Democrats to do that job. It is our job. If we don’t question the president, if we don’t question his lies, if we don’t do it, who is gonna do it? It’s an uncomfortable position…

BRIAN STELTER, HOST, CNN’S RELIABLE SOURCES: You’re almost saying we’re a stand-in for the Democrats.

“Almost.” Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines (and in Ramos’ case, a daughter who was employed the Hillary campaign) and it all makes sense.

FAKE NEWS? Old-school journalists ‘pissed’ about Gayle King’s vacation with Obamas:

Gayle King’s serious CBS colleagues had a lot to say about her recent yacht jaunt with former first couple Barack and Michelle Obama in Tahiti, and it wasn’t positive.

“The ‘Capital J’ journalists are pissed and raving mad that she was on a yacht with the Obamas over the weekend. The old-school people were talking about it. She shouldn’t be doing that. She’s an anchor of a news program that covers the White House. You’re held to a different standard. It’s one thing to be friendly. It’s another thing to go vacationing on a yacht,” a source told us of the backlash at CBS.

CBS is denying that there’s any rancor internally directed at King, which makes sense, considering that her colleague Charlie Rose pretended to have no clue about candidate Obama’s foreign policy stance on the eve of the 2008 presidential election, and last year sat with two of Obama’s speechwriters while all three laughed on air about the Big Lie of Obamacare — the over 36 times Obama told Americans, “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.”

CBS Nightly News anchor and 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley once compared global warming skeptics to Holocaust deniers, and admitted recently to accepting at face value the Hillary campaign’s story and not investigating further the cause of her infamous collapse on September 11th last year.

John Dickerson, the host of Face the Nation and the “political director” for CBS, wrote an article for Slate in 2013 charmingly titled “Go for the Throat! Why if he wants to transform American politics, Obama must declare war on the Republican Party.” This was followed last year by his asking Obama, ‘Is honesty overrated as a presidential quality?’

And the boss of CBS’s news division is David Rhodes, the brother of Obama’s infamous former deputy national security advisor, Ben Rhodes.

Just think of them all as Democrat operatives with bylines and lavaliere microphones, and it all makes sense.

THIS IS CNN: CNN Publishes Locations of Town Halls, Aiding Democrat Activists.

Democrat operatives with bylines.


Just think of NBC News as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

DISPATCHES FROM THE HOUSE OF STEPHANOPOULOS. ABC Targets Trump Supporters After Weekend Rallies Turn Violent:

“In Huntington Beach, California a protester allegedly pepper-sprayed one of the organizers,” [ABC’s David Wright] said sounding doubtful, “Witnesses say a group of flag-waving Trump supporters tackled him and proceeded to beat him up.”

For Wright, it may only have “allegedly” happened, but according to Reuters, it did occur. “Four counter-protesters were arrested, three for illegal use of pepper spray and one for assault and battery, Kevin Pearsall, a spokesman for the California State Parks Police said on Saturday evening,” they reported on Sunday.

Read the whole thing. Just think of ABC News as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

BUT OF COURSE HE DID. Mayor De Blasio Connects Racist Murder to Trump, ‘Atmosphere Of Hate:’ “At some point, it would be nice if the media would notice that the left constantly uses this climate-of-hate argument to indict the right every chance it gets but denies any such climate exists when the target is a conservative or a police officer.”

Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and you’ll understand why they never will.

WHO MADE THIS MONTAGE: CNN or DNC? “In virtually any given week during the Obama administration, CNN could have put a similarly negative pastiche. Anyone remember the network doing it?”

Just think of CNN as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.


And thus NBC comes full circle — Sharpton and Brian Williams invent fake news, and Tur conveniently forgets the real thing.

Just think of the network’s “news” division as being largely staffed by Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

FLASHBACK: NBC’s Tom Brokaw conveniently forgetting Obama’s worldview on the eve of the 2008 election:

HEH: After Likening Trump to Hitler, Journalists Upset They’re Not Getting Called on for Questions.

Hey, I think the headline writer spelled “Democrat operatives with bylines” incorrectly.

NEWS YOU CAN USE: It’s Not 1934, writes Mickey Kaus:

Yet those who adhere to this unnamed tendency — let’s call it ’34ism, unless you can come up with a better name *** –allow the power of their terrifying dream to overwhelm sober consideration of everything Trump does or intends to do, good or bad (on trade, taxes, regulations, immigration, etc). We’re supposed to draw up sides — condemning (and ostracizing) those who are “complicit” in Trump’s administration and welcoming those who “stand on the right side of history” — even before we know whether the authoritarian seed will grow or wither, disregarding all the other positively auspicious seeds (reform of trade, control of borders, fewer foreign miliary adventures,  ending the Republican threat to Social Security and Medicare, etc.) that might flourish instead. In Slate 34ist Yascha Mounk’s head it’s practically Life During Wartime already, with brave Trump critics fired from their jobs, sleeping on the couches of their secret colleagues in the Resistance. Keep the car running.

Suggested alternative: See what happens first! Don’t let the reaction to Trump be dominated by one extremely unlikely bad possibility, at the expense of nurturing the far-more-likely good possibilities.

Those asterisks above connect to a footnote from Mickey that “Better name ideas [are] appreciated — just put them in the comments section below [his post], or tweet them to @kausmickey.”

The month after Obama won the election in 2008, Virginia Postrel noted that a lot of journalists (read: Democrat operatives with bylines) had heavily invested in the notion that it was the 1930s all over again, and had a major case of what Virginia dubbed “Depression Lust,” and were busy cranking out “Depression Porn” in service to the Office of the President-Elect. Not least of which was Time magazine’s infamous cover of Obama Photoshopped into the second coming of FDR and the headline “The New, New Deal,” thinking it was a compliment, and not an ominous prediction of an economy as similarly atrophied as Roosevelt’s. Pretending that Trump is Hitler allows you, oh brave foot-soldier in the DNC-MSM, to pose as the new Dietrich Bonhoeffer. It’s simply the funhouse mirror image version of the same sclerotic meme.

For the modern left, if the economy is relatively good*, and the incoming president has a (D) after his name, he’s the second coming of JFK (see: Clinton, Bill); if the economy is bad, and he has a (D) after his name, he’s FDR — and no matter what the shape of the economy, if the president has an (R) after his name, he’s Hitler (QED: Nixon, Reagan, Bush #43, and Trump).

* And it was, despite Clinton’s rhetoric. Would Time magazine lie to you? Well yes, of course. But look what they admitted in December of 1992.

THE SJW SINGULARITY HAS BEEN REACHED: “Fighting Trump via a romance novel about gay Muslims who pretend to be animals. No, really.”

Slate is the last Website owned by the Graham family, which also owned the Washington Post until its 2013 sale to Jeff Bezos. Something very strange has gotten in the water there recently. In addition to their above weirdness spotted by Rod Dreher, NewsBusters notes that “Slate Boss Salutes Irresponsibility: ‘I’m Glad BuzzFeed Published It.’

CBS — which has refused to publish the details — brought on Slate editor-in-chief Jacob Weisberg, who saluted BuzzFeed’s decision to disseminate the anti-Trump hit piece.

Weisberg admitted that the document was composed of “gossip” including some which is “not true,” but nevertheless “I’m glad BuzzFeed published it because I got to read it.”

So it’s fake but accurate in Weisberg’s mind, to borrow from the New York Times’ phrase excusing RatherGate. Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense. Well, other than the gay Muslim furries part – that’s still pretty darn weird, even for Slate.

JUST THINK OF THE MSM AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES, AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE: Obama had Scandals Aplenty — The media just pretended they didn’t exist.



“It is lack of confidence, more than anything else, that kills a civilisation. We can destroy ourselves by cynicism and disillusion*, just as effectively as by bombs.”

—Kenneth Clark, script for [1969 BBC TV series] Civilisation.

—“Almanac: Kenneth Clark on how civilizations commit suicide,” Terry Teachout, today.


Judge Edwin Torres of the New York State Supreme Court, Twelfth Judicial District described how…“A society that loses its sense of outrage is doomed to extinction.” There is no expectation that this will change, nor any efficacious public insistence that it do so. The crime level has been normalized.

Consider the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre. In 1929 in Chicago during Prohibition, four gangsters killed seven gangsters on February 14. The nation was shocked. The event became legend. It merits not one but two entries in the World Book Encyclopedia. I leave it to others to judge, but it would appear that the society in the 1920s was simply not willing to put up with this degree of deviancy. In the end, the Constitution was amended, and Prohibition, which lay behind so much gangster violence, ended.

In recent years, again in the context of illegal traffic controlled substances, this form of murder has returned. But it has done so at a level that induces denial. James Q. Wilson comments that Los Angeles has the equivalent of a St. Valentine’s Day Massacre every weekend. Even the most ghastly re-enactments of such human slaughter produce only moderate responses.**

—Patrick Moynihan, “Defining Deviancy Down,” the American Scholar, Winter 1993.

Hangover: CNN’s Don Lemon: Anti-Trump Violence Against Disabled Man ‘Not Evil.’

—Tyler O’Neil, PJ, today.

* A look at England in the decades after Clark’s epochal series ran is in its own way proof of that statement as much as Rahm Emanuel’s Chicago.

** Chicago hit the 500+ murder milestone for 2016 in September. It would hit almost 800 before the year was out.

Related: Lemon is far from the only member of the DNC-MSM loathe to examine this story. The Washington Post’s Callum Borchers does a whole lotta throat-clearing (and anti-Trump, anti-GOP virtue signalling) in the lede before laying out the actual details:


Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

THIS IS CNN: Don Lemon: Anti-Trump Violence Against Disabled Man ‘Not Evil.’

CNN founder Ted Turner presumably would concur; when faced with an even more enormous crime, he became a “see no evil” man himself.

In contrast, as Anthony Bialy tweets, “Those who believed ‘Hands up, don’t shoot’ right away are unsure if the Chicago assault was a hate crime,” speaking of CNN.


Just think of Lemon and the CNN anchors in the frame capture above as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense


Which brings us to the simple question about truck ownership from John Ekdahl that drove Acela corridor progressive political journalists into a frenzy on Tuesday night: “The top 3 best selling vehicles in America are pick-ups. Question to reporters: do you personally know someone that owns one?”

Rather than answer with a simple “no,” the esteemed members of the most cloistered and provincial class in America–political journalists who live in New York City or Washington, D.C.–reacted by doing their best impersonation of a vampire who had just been dragged into the sunshine and presented with a garlic-adorned crucifix.

Just think of the MSM as (urban elitist) Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense. And that parochialism has been deeply entrenched for decades. The MSM’s reaction to Ekdahl’s simple query yesterday is yet another example of how spot-on Saul Steinberg’s classic 1975 New Yorker “View of the World from 9th Avenue” cover was, all the way to the present day, encapsulated in the theme of Dana Loesch’s recent book, Flyover Nation: You Can’t Run a Country You’ve Never Been To.



When your team includes Brian Williams, Dan Rather, Al Sharpton, Eason Jordan, Jayson Blair, Katie Couric, the JournoList, and a whole squadron of Middle Eastern fauxtographers and the Pallywood propaganda assembly line, it takes a fair amount of chutzpah to accuse the other side of “fake news” – though think of the MSM as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.


The problem with these mea culpas and modified, limited hang-outs is that anyone familiar with the history of The New York Times has seen this movie before. Baquet may think putting people out on the road is the answer, but the paper has been there and done that in 2004. David Kirkpatrick spent a year in the field, covering mostly the socially conservative tribes of Jesusland. Yet here is the NYT, right back where it started.

The pre-election lack of balance Spayd identified continues in the paper’s current coverage. The NYT has visited flyover country from time to time after the election and occasionally included comments from Trump supporters in other pieces. But as before, such stories are drowned about by the flood tide of Times coverage serving progressives’ parochial appetites.

Immediately after every presidential election, the MSM promises to improve their coverage, even in November of 2008, when the DNC-MSM went all-in to successfully elect Obama.”Unexpectedly” though, it only gets worse during each successive presidential election. You almost wish they’d run an Onion-style headline instead: DON’T WORRY COCOONED READERS, WE’LL STILL BE TOTALLY IN THE TANK FOR THE NEXT DEM CANDIDATE AND WE’LL STILL HALF-ASS IT IN 2020. At least they’d get points for being honest Democrat operatives with bylines for a change.

THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES AND YOU WON’T GO FAR WRONG: Mainstream Media Scream: Media tries to delegitimize Trump’s victory. “Question is: Who did more to interfere in the integrity of the U.S. election? The American news media which forwarded its own ‘fake news’ to discredit Trump or, if Russia really is behind the hacking, Putin’s regime which disclosed some emails that revealed truths about what Clinton’s team thought of her opponents?”

THEY DON’T CALL HIM THE “LITTLE IDIOT” FOR NOTHING: Singer Moby After Trump: ‘Americans are Either Really Stupid or Incredibly Bigoted….Really, Really Dumb People.’

I’m so old, I remember when musicians tried to increase their fan base through flattery, rather than deliberately making their appeal “more selective,” as legendary fictitious manager Ian Faith would say.

Moby’s star power has diminished significantly over the last decade, but if the media are going to rail against “Fake News,” his recommendations that the left deliberately lie to voters in 2004 are worth taking a second look at:

“No one’s talking about how to keep the other side home on Election Day,” Moby tells us. “It’s a lot easier than you think and it doesn’t cost that much. This election can be won by 200,000 votes.”

Moby suggests that it’s possible to seed doubt among Bush’s far-right supporters on the Web.

“You target his natural constituencies,” says the Grammy-nominated techno-wizard. “For example, you can go on all the pro-life chat rooms and say you’re an outraged right-wing voter and that you know that George Bush drove an ex-girlfriend to an abortion clinic and paid for her to get an abortion.

“Then you go to an anti-immigration Web site chat room and ask, ‘What’s all this about George Bush proposing amnesty for illegal aliens?’”

As Jonah Goldberg wrote in February of 2004, shortly before Andrew Sullivan endorsed Kerry and permanently broke from the right, “A couple of weeks ago, several liberal bloggers announced that they wanted their readers to deliberately make up fake emails and send them to NR because they found the real emails we were posting in the Corner too unhelpful to their cause. So far they’ve all been way too stupid to fool us, but that could change. And now, last night, Andrew Sullivan received an email that he — and I, and a lot of our mutual readers — think was made up. Whether it was or wasn’t, it now seems safe to predict that the Moby-Moore fringe of liberalism is ratcheting-up it’s ends justify-the-means approach to political discourse. Get ready for the Age of Mobyism, it won’t be pretty.”

The Age of Mobyism flowed pretty seamlessly into the Age of Vox; and along the way, a surprising number of Democrat operatives with bylines were willing to admit they had no problem with deliberate lying and obfuscation to advance the DNC-MSM cause. If the MSM really does want end the scourge of “fake news,” theirs is an awfully big swamp to drain.


(Classical reference in headline.)


The verdict on Twitter is that [Michael] Tracey was fired for publishing Dunham’s personal address, although the purchase of her home in 2014 was widely covered in the tabloids and easily accessible to anyone with Google.

Tracey tweeted today, “FYI — the Chief Operating Officer of VICE is Alyssa Mastromonaco, who attended off-record parties with the failed Clinton campaign,” along with journalists from NBC, the New Yorker, the Times, People, the Politico, Vox, and another sites staffed with Democrat operatives with bylines. But beyond that, I’m gobsmackingly gobsmacked. Doesn’t Tracey know that New York journalists should only publish the addresses and/or photos of houses owned by Missouri policemen and New York residents who legally own firearms?



The verdict against Rolling Stone is a punishment for journalistic malpractice—but it’s also something more. The case highlights the elimination of an honor culture in journalism and in public life. Vast majorities of people dislike journalists, not because journalists are liberal, although that’s part of it. Journalists are disliked because they act without honor. Such was the case with Rolling Stone’s fake rape story.

To understand the importance of honor in journalism, it helps to go back to one of the best examples of honest journalism in history. It comes from the former pages of Rolling Stone itself.

Read the whole thing.

Related: Rolling Stone’s False Rape Story Will End The Magazine.

I’m not at all sure I agree with that assessment, any more than RatherGate ended CBS News. In both cases, while those fabulist scandals exposed both institutions as being staffed by Democrat operatives with bylines, their brands are deep-pocketed enough to continue for quite some time. Even if Rolling Stone is sold, somebody will buy the brand for its boomer-era music cachet, just as there’s still a post-Washington Post, post-Daily Beast zombie version of Newsweek still on the Internet.


Saturday’s New York Times anti-Trump roundup included an ironic compliment to the Trump campaign, which has freed journalists to label (Republican) politicians as liars and racists. Times editorial board member Brent Staples perversely celebrated “The Election That Obliterated Euphemisms.” The text box: “Donald Trump made it impossible to avoid the word ‘racist.’” Staples certainly didn’t.

Staples is following the path of colleague Jim Rutenberg’s notorious August 8 front-page opinion, “The Challenge Trump Poses to Objectivity,” which argued that treating Trump like a racist demagogue was a basic journalistic duty.

Ahh, the same media that concluded in 2012 that words such as “golf,” and “Chicago” were racist. The same newspaper whose columnist tweeted that year, “Stick that in your magic underwear,” to the Republican nominee. The same newspaper whose then-ombudsman wrote way back in 2004, “Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper? Of course it is.”

But this year was totally different from all of the previous election years. Until 2020, when (if Trump loses tomorrow) whoever the Republican nominee is, he’ll be considered a reactionary troglodyte compared to Trump’s nuanced views on abortion, gay rights, etc.

Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.


In response, Iowahawk adds:

But then, long before Trump came along, the previous president or GOP candidate, who received brickbats and worse from the left is magically rehabilitated to bash the current nominee. Rinse and repeat, going back to Eisenhower and Goldwater.

This past July, Jonah Goldberg explored “How the Media’s History of Smearing Republicans Now Helps Trump.”

Last night, responding to Maher, Stephen Kruiser wrote, “As he points out [in the above clip], Maher gave a cool million to the Obama campaign in 2012 to prevent Mitt Romney from being elected. In the last few weeks before the election, Democrats were portraying Romney (the man they now describe as honorable) as a sexist animal abuser who gave a woman cancer. Check back in four years to see if they’ve really learned anything about crying wolf.”

Similarly, file this prediction from Twitter user Chris Antenucci away for future reference: “Bill Maher and most liberals in 2020: ‘This year’s nominee, Rubio, is making Trump look like a moderate. He’s a radical on abortion.’”

That’s a remarkably safe bet. We’re seeing lots of mea culpas from the media and its critics about how badly it blew its reporting this year and how deeply it was in the tank for the Democratic nominee. But they could virtually be rewrites of the same faux apologies we’ve seen at the conclusion of every presidential election since at least 2004. And yet, “unexpectedly,” the MSM just never seems to learn from them, do they?

Just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.



If you’ve been paying any attention at all to the election coverage in the nation’s largest newspapers and on cable TV, you have likely found yourself a bit exasperated at how events from the campaign trail have been covered. Much of that comes from editorial bias in story selection, but more than a little is caused by the obvious bias inherent in the “explanations” of the stories which do make it into print or on the air. But it seems that the journalists aren’t too happy either. Some of them feel constrained by the musty, dusty old rules of engagement in the news game. Keep in mind that we’re not talking about “opinion journalists” like Hannity or Maddow here, but the reporters who are supposed to be covering the stories for us with all of the who, where, when, what and how details. When it comes to politics such things can be hard to define, as politicians employ greater and greater amounts of spin in their stump speeches and debate performances.

Marc Ambinder feels their pain and brings us an opinion piece at USA Today this week in which he calls for new rules of journalism. Under these revised guidelines, reporters should feel free to correct what they perceive as errors on the part of the candidates on the fly.

—“The Left is ushering in ‘new rules of journalism’ because of Donald Trump,” Jazz Shaw, Hot Air, November 1st.


As I wrote last month in “The Rise of the John Birch Left:”

The original Birchers weren’t bad people, but their Cold War paranoia got the better of them. Similarly, as Charles Krauthammer famously said, “To understand the workings of American politics, you have to understand this fundamental law: Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil,” which illustrates how a John Birch-style worldview can cause the modern leftists to take an equally cracked view of his fellow countrymen…

…Which brings us today to Marc Ambinder, who according to Wikipedia is a former White House correspondent at the National Journal, contributing editor at GQ and the Atlantic, and editor-at-large at The Week, where he blows the battle trumpet, Col. Kilgore-style: “Why Democrats should treat Republicans like their mortal enemy.”

* * * * * * *

I missed the memo though: When did Democrats stop treating Republicans like their mortal enemy?

“You Went Full Bircher, Man. Never Go Full Bircher,” Ed, December 3rd, 2014.

Meet the “new” rules of journalism — just the same as the old rules of journalism. Think of the MSM as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

SO, NOT, AS GLENN THRUSH WOULD SAY, “BADASS?” What Top Democrats Really Thought About Hillary’s Private Server: “F*****g Insane.”

Related: If The Media Investigated Hillary Like They Did Watergate, We Wouldn’t Need WikiLeaks.

RIP STEVEN DEN BESTE: Glenn and Sarah Hoyt expressed their condolences yesterday, and I’d like to as well. The rise of the Blogosphere during the immediate aftermath of 9/11 was something to behold – the best analogy that I can think of is to compare it to the golden age of television in the 1950s: a new medium was born, and for those willing to seek it out, programming of a surprisingly high quality was available to be consumed on it.

But unlike television, which then as now requires an army of craftsmen and technicians to create, the early Blogosphere was almost exclusively a series of solo acts, and living in California, from about 9:00 PM to midnight Pacific Time each weeknight, I would eagerly consume the best of the new programming as it went online, usually (forgive me If my memory of the timing is a bit off) Den Beste around 7:00 or 8:00 PM, Lileks around 9:00 or ten o’clock, and then pre-Weimar era Andrew Sullivan around 11 or midnight. And of course, Glenn firing off new posts throughout the night.

Den Beste also demonstrated how infinitely flexible blogging could be. Glenn, Mickey Kaus, Sullivan and Virginia Postrel specialized in short posts offering news aggregation and commentary, but Den Beste seemed to effortlessly generate 1,500 to 3,000 word essays on the GWOT and other breaking news events every night. Of course, they only looked effortless to those of us reading them. I imagine the work that went into them eventually contributed to Den Beste’s health issues, and the merciless brickbats he received from the tolerance and diversity-obsessed left eventually led him to focus his blogging primarily on anime and other lighter fare.

As with the Golden Age of TV, which by the early ‘60s had collapsed into Newton Minnow’s infamous “vast wasteland…of game shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, mayhem, violence, sadism, murder, western bad men, western good men, private eyes, gangsters, more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly commercials,” the Golden Era of the Blogosphere was doomed to be a fleeting epoch as well. Today, blogging is universal, but also far too corporatist, an increasingly exclusive medium for Democrat operatives with bylines to pay homage to the state. But for a time, there were a plethora of individual voices to be read, and Den Beste’s was one of the most idiosyncratic and enjoyable.

“A software engineer by trade, exhibiting a precise logic in his thinking, Den Beste was acerbic, sharp and often charmingly irascible,” Jim Geraghty writes today in encomium. “I missed his playful cantankerousness when he had merely stopped blogging. He’s missed even more now.” RIP.

UPDATE: In his tribute to Den Beste, Ace of Spades compares the heyday of the USS Clueless as belonging to “a pre-professional blogging age (such as it may well be), a novice/hobbyist phase, when writers would just write about whatever interested them at that moment, whether it ‘fit the format’ or whatever. Rather like I’ve heard FM radio was when it first came out, as opposed to heavily-programmed/demographically-targeted AM.” Given the free-form, inventing techniques and terminology on the fly nature of the early Blogosphere, that’s an apt comparison as well.

JUST THINK OF THE MEDIA AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES, AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE: The Media’s Hypocritical Moralizing About Trump Has Become Unbearable.

Now that the DNC-MSM has dropped the mask – even more so than in 2004, 2008, and 2012 – will the next batch of GOP presidential candidates do anything different in 2020 to prepare for Lucy pulling the football?

JUST THINK OF THE MEDIA AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES, AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE: “Regardless of who is your chosen – or least favorite – presidential candidate, independent minds should be concerned about the latest revelations in the news media’s unseemly relationships with government and political actors. While there are many responsible journalists working today, inside documents and leaks have exposed serious lapses constituting the most far-reaching scandal our industry has known. It’s our very own Newsgate,” Sharyl Attkisson writes.

As a reminder, CEO Les Moonves said earlier this year of Trump’s campaign, “It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS.” Its nightly news anchor Scott Pelley once likened global warming skeptics to holocaust deniers. John Dickerson, the host of Face the Nation and the “political director” for CBS, wrote an article for Slate in 2013 charmingly titled “Go for the Throat! Why if he wants to transform American politics, Obama must declare war on the Republican Party.” Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security advisor is the brother of CBS News president David Rhodes, and CBS pushed out Attkisson after her investigative coverage of Obama and Hillary’s Benghazi debacle.


JUST THINK OF THE MEDIA AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE: “Weird. Hillary had an off the record dinner w/ a bunch of journalists prior to her campaign launch to ‘frame the HRC message.’”

TO ASK THE QUESTION IS TO ANSWER IT: Why Did the Media Wait So Long to Go After Trump?

Just think of the MSM as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

JUST THINK OF THE MEDIA AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES, AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE: Hillary Campaign E-Mails Singled Out NYT’s Maggie Haberman for ‘A Very Good Relationship’ for Spin Help.


More to the point, why hasn’t all this terrible audio already surfaced? At any point in the last year, when there was still time to deprive Trump of the GOP nomination, did NBC brass ask Apprentice producer (and Trump friend) Mark Burnett for a look into his archives? Or were they complicit in allowing Trump to cruise to the GOP nomination when they knew there was likely evidence in Mark Burnett’s basement that could disqualify him?

* * * * * * * *

Back to NBC News’ anchors and reporters, who have been conspicuously silent about their network’s role in enabling Trump for years, then sitting on the explosive tape for (at least) five days before a whistleblower leaked it. Donald Trump was employed by the same network that currently employs Lester Holt, Brian Williams, Chuck Todd, Andrea Mitchell, Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes and its biggest star of all, Matt Lauer. Why the silence? They’re like Cardinals in the Vatican maintaining omerta about a pervert in their midst.*

There are clear lines of accountability here – to NBC News Chairman Andy Lack and NBCU CEO Steve Burke. Did these executives just look the other way for many months while a former employee whose bad behavior was well-known got closer and closer to the White House? And did they place the career of Billy Bush – reportedly being groomed to replace Matt Lauer on the hugely profitable Today program – ahead of the U-S presidency? That sounds absurd, but this is the twisted world of network television and NBC has some explaining to do.

Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

* Hey, even I don’t think NBC has descended to the level of the BBC in this department, but they’ve certainly maintained their omerta about the multiple fabulists working in their midst.

AFFLICTING THE COMFORTABLE: “And there we have it in a nutshell. ‘Afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted.’ That phrase, it should be pointed out, is not what ‘they’ say it’s a journalist’s duty to do. That phrase was satirical, uttered by the fictional Irish bartender ‘Mr. Dooley,’ the 1893 creation of Chicago Evening Post humorist Finley Peter Dunne. It was not intended to be taken seriously… In other words, give pain to those who don’t have it. What a motto, what a career description. Forget the five Ws, forget just telling the truth. Journalists are here to give pain to those they feel are too pain-free. And of course the press takes it upon itself to determine just who is comfortable enough to deserve affliction.”

Just think of the MSM as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

(Via Kathy Shaidle.)


Worried, actively suppressed – in any case, just think of the media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.


As I understand your use of this term, “the media” is essentially shorthand for anything you read, saw or heard today that you disagreed with or didn’t like. At any given moment, “the media” is biased against your candidate, your issue, your very way of life.

But, you know, the media isn’t really doing that. Some article, some news report, some guy spouting off on a CNN panel or at might be. But none of those things singularly are really the media.

Fact is, there really is no such thing as “the media.” It’s an invention, a tool, an all-purpose smear by people who can’t be bothered to make distinctions.

“Dear readers: Please stop calling us ‘the media.’ There is no such thing,” Paul Farhi, the Washington Post, Friday.

Thousands of conservatives and even some moderates have complained during my more than three-year term that The Post is too liberal; many have stopped subscribing, including more than 900 in the past four weeks.

It pains me to see lost subscribers and revenue, especially when newspapers are shrinking. Conservative complaints can be wrong: The mainstream media were not to blame for John McCain’s loss; Barack Obama’s more effective campaign and the financial crisis were.

But some of the conservatives’ complaints about a liberal tilt are valid. Journalism naturally draws liberals; we like to change the world. I’ll bet that most Post journalists voted for Obama. I did. There are centrists at The Post as well. But the conservatives I know here feel so outnumbered that they don’t even want to be quoted by name in a memo.

—The late Deborah Howell, then the Post’s ombudswoman (a job the Post has since eliminated), November 16, 2008.

‘Yeah, I’m In The Media. Screw You.’

—Button worn by the late Ginny Carroll to the 1992 Republican convention. Carroll was a bureau chief for Newsweek, then owned by the Washington Post.

Incidentally, this isn’t the first time that Farhi has tried to play these semantic games: As Tim Graham of NewsBusters paraphrased a similar Farhi column in 2012, “WashPost Writes The Public Be Damned: They’re Biased If They Think We’re Biased.”

Perhaps Iowahawk has the best response to Farhi’s latest column, and its smug headline, “Dear readers: Please stop calling us ‘the media.’ There is no such thing.” “Okay, how about we just call you assholes,” he tweeted yesterday.

Or Democrat operatives with bylines. Often the two phrases are quite interchangeable. (Unexpectedly.)

All of which is why, as  Kurt Schlichter writes, “We’re Laughing at the Self-Destruction of the Media Gatekeepers.”


Just think of the MSM as Democrat operatives with bylines and you won’t go far wrong.


I QUESTION THE PREMISE OF THIS HEADLINE: Hillary’s media is torching its standards to cover the election, Michael Goodwin writes in the New York Post.

Considering that we read earlier drafts of this same article in October of 2008 by then-ABC/PJM contributor Michael Malone and immediately after the 2004 election by then-Newsweek columnist Howard Fineman, what standards are left?

Former CBS journalist Sharyl Attkisson writes that until her debacle on the 15th anniversary of 9/11 (and fourth anniversary of Benghazi), Hillary’s health (or the lack thereof) “was ‘the stuff of conspiracy theorists’ until the reporters who appear to have been proven wrong, decided it was not. It’s almost as if we in the media take an editorial position with no factual basis, dare critics to prove us wrong, and then when events do, we modify our stance.”

Exactly. Or as Ann Althouse noted last month, “The media feel like lawyers for the Clinton campaign, taking whatever the evidence is and presenting it as advantageous to their client.”

It all makes sense when you think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines—and hopefully hazmat suits as well, when they’re flying with Hillary these days. Perhaps we should set up some sort of quarantine ward stat for these potential asymptomatic pneumonia carriers:


NEW YORK TIMES TRIES TO FACTCHECK GARY JOHNSON ON ALEPPO, REPEATEDLY STEPS ON A RAKE INSTEAD: “Unlike Johnson, who was asked a question on the spot, the New York Times reporter had the Internet, paid editors, and all the time in the world to help him avoid making a bunch of embarrassing errors. In spite of all that, NYT was still forced to publish not one, but two corrections of Rappeport’s reporting… It turns out that providing a correct answer to the question ‘What is Aleppo?’ is a lot harder than it looks. Especially if you’re a journalist with a surprising lack of foreign policy knowledge.”

As Obama advisor Ben Rhodes said earlier this year about what he called his “blob” of Democrat operatives with bylines, “The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing.”

It turns out that perhaps Rhodes’ use of “literally” wasn’t even in the false Biden definition of the L-word.



Just look at the rapturous expression in their faces — you can see them as well in a slightly different angle in this tweet from Andrea Mitchell, who’s just glowing — she can feel her future boss is this close to the oval office.

But note that the “blob’s”* expression also contains a healthy amount of fear as well – the media is very much the battered spouse in this relationship: “Clinton campaign warns media to tread carefully,” the Hill reports. As Steve Green asks response, “C’mon, media — you going to take this lying down?”

Of course they are. Because we saw the above image before. We see it every four years:

Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

* Classical reference.

UPDATE: “Did Hillary just tell Andrea Mitchell, ‘you’re my kind of woman’?”

UNEXPECTEDLY:  “‘CNN is so supportive of Clinton, network honchos acted like the Mafia when confronting [Dr. Drew Pinsky]’ a source told me. ‘First, they demanded he retract his comments, but he wouldn’t.’ What followed was a series of nasty phone calls and e-mails. ‘It was downright scary and creepy,’ a source close to Pinsky said.” Which is why “Dr. Drew loses show after discussing Hillary’s health,” the New York Post reports*.

Flashback: David Shuster suspended at MSNBC in early 2008 — a channel that was then at the height of its raucous Keith Olbermann slurring Bush nightly phase — for uttering the innocuous phrase, “Doesn’t it seem as if Chelsea is sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way?” by the Clinton foundation. Chelsea was then 27 years old, and on her way to be being paid $600,000 by MSNBC’s parent network for filing less than two dozen stories, one of which was a hard-hitting take no prisoners interview with…the Geiko gecko.

Just think of the network executives as Democrat operatives with bylines – and in both cases, financial contributors to the Clintons’ slush fund – and it all makes sense.


The MSM could do far more than this — if they really wanted to. As to why they don’t, just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines – and in CNN’s case, financial contributors to the Clintons’ slush fund – and it all makes sense.

WINSTON SMITH, CALL YOUR OFFICE: CNN, The Hill attempt to shield Hillary Clinton from her former KKK ‘mentor.’

Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense. CNN in particular can always be counted on dispatching a Democrat’s awkward allegiance with an openly racist longtime mentor into the memory hole during an election year.

“SOMETIMES OUR MEDIA CAN BE SO INCURIOUS:”* Remember that ‘Republican Woman for Clinton?’ She’s a healthcare lobbyist married to a Clinton operative.

* Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.

HEY, IT’S TIME FOR A QUADRENNIAL COLUMN THEME: American journalism is collapsing before our eyes, Michael Goodwin writes in today’s New York Post.

I’m so old, I remember reading this column when it was titled “Media’s Presidential Bias and Decline” in October of 2008 by ABC and PJM contributor Michael Malone, and even when it was titled “The ‘Media Party’ is over”, by Newsweek and MSNBC contributor Howard Fineman at the start of 2005.

But if you think of the vast majority of “journalists” as being, in reality, Democrat operatives with bylines working feverishly as king- and queen-makers for their party, there’s no need to write columns tut-tutting the demise of Beltway journalism, which died a very long time ago, indeed.

JUST THINK OF THE MEDIA AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES, AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE. Study: Networks dedicate over 5X more coverage to Trump comment than Mateen at Clinton rally.

JUST THINK OF THE MEDIA AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES, AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE: “Trump joked about kicking baby out of rally & media went WILD. But when father of Orlando terrorist rallies for Hillary…. CRICKETS.”

DON’T EVER CHANGE, CBS: CBS’s John Dickerson to Obama Yesterday: ‘Is Honesty Overrated as a Prez Quality?’

CBS’s Charlie Rose sat with two of Obama’s speechwriters in May as all three men laughed about the Big Lie of ObamaCare — the over 36 times Obama told Americans, “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.”

CBS’s Dan Rather told Bill O’Reilly in 2001: “I think you can be an honest person and lie about any number of things:”


Click on screen cap to be taken to video.

What’s fascinating is how many “journalists” (read: Democrat operatives with bylines) are openly willing to admit that lying is perfectly fine with them.

And just as a reminder, John Dickerson, Host of Face the Nation, Advised Obama in 2013 to ‘Destroy the GOP.’

JUST THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES AND YOU WON’T BE FAR WRONG: Leaked emails reveal Politico reporter made ‘agreement’ to send advanced Clinton story to DNC:

An influential reporter at Politico made an apparent “agreement” with the Democratic National Committee to let it review a story about Hillary Clinton’s fundraising machine before it was submitted to his editors, leaked emails published by WikiLeaks on Friday revealed.

Reporter Kenneth Vogel sent an advanced copy of his story to DNC national press secretary Mark Paustenbach in late April.

The email’s subject line read: “per agreement … any thoughts appreciated.”

Flashback: Mark Levin in 2011 on “The Sleaziness of Politico’s Kenneth Vogel.”


Just think of CBS as being Democrat operatives with bylines (for decades) and you won’t be far wrong.


Just think of them as Democrat operatives with bylines, and you won’t go far wrong.

Flashback: WaPo reports in 2006, Bill Clinton Expects That “Establishment Old Media Organizations Are De Facto Allies.”

And they were, except during their “Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media,” as ex CBS man Bernie Goldberg described it.

AND THIS YEAR, THE ROLE OF PAULINE KAEL WILL BE PLAYED BY… CBS This Morning Host Gayle King: Nobody at Party I Was at Last Night Cares About Clinton’s Emails:

With Face The Nation moderator John Dickerson in the studio to discuss the State Department’s Inspector General report that slammed Clinton’s email conduct, King protested nobody at the party she was at the night before cared about it.

In the clip flagged by media watchdog NewsBusters, King appeared perturbed that Clinton’s server was once again at the forefront.

“So John, put it in perspective,” King said. “How big a deal is this really? I was at an event last night, and both Democrats and Republicans were quoting Bernie Sanders saying, ‘I’m sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails.’”

“But that was a long time ago, and he’s since changed some of that,” co-host Charlie Rose said.

“Yeah, he has, but the people at this party last night haven’t, so how big a deal is it?” King asked.

Just as a reminder, Dickerson advised Obama to ‘Destroy the GOP’ in a 2013 Slate column. Charlie Rose recently joined in with the on-air mirth-making with two of Obama’s speechwriters who joked about the millions who’ve lost their health insurance policies thanks to Obamacare. The president of CBS News is David Rhodes, the brother of Obama advisor and failed novelist Ben “Lonesome” Rhodes, who recently committed ritual seppuku in the New York Times. Just think of CBS’s “journalists” as Democrat operatives with bylines, and you won’t go far wrong.

To paraphrase the late Pauline Kael, these newsreaders live in a rather special world. Where the people who dislike Hillary are, they don’t know. They’re outside their ken. And since they’re in midtown Manhattan, they can’t even feel them in the theaters.



I’m not sure though, that doing everything possible to ensure that this story doesn’t develop legs counts as yawning. Silence definitely implies consent in this case.

JUST THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES, AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE: White House Press Corps Asks Obama Three Questions About Trump, None About Ben Rhodes.

Related: As You Would Guess, There Are No Republicans In the White House Press Corps.

JUST THINK OF THE MEDIA AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES AND YOU WON’T GO FAR WRONG: The New York Times profiles Ben “Lonesome*” Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, or as they dub him “The Aspiring Novelist Who Became Obama’s Foreign-Policy Guru,” who all but tells the Grady Lady their reporting stinks on ice:

The job he was hired to do, namely to help the president of the United States communicate with the public, was changing in equally significant ways, thanks to the impact of digital technologies that people in Washington were just beginning to wrap their minds around. It is hard for many to absorb the true magnitude of the change in the news business — 40 percent of newspaper-industry professionals have lost their jobs over the past decade — in part because readers can absorb all the news they want from social-media platforms like Facebook, which are valued in the tens and hundreds of billions of dollars and pay nothing for the “content” they provide to their readers. You have to have skin in the game — to be in the news business, or depend in a life-or-death way on its products — to understand the radical and qualitative ways in which words that appear in familiar typefaces have changed. Rhodes singled out a key example to me one day, laced with the brutal contempt that is a hallmark of his private utterances. “All these newspapers used to have foreign bureaus,” he said. “Now they don’t. They call us to explain to them what’s happening in Moscow and Cairo. Most of the outlets are reporting on world events from Washington. The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing.”

As John Podhoretz writes at the New York Post in response to Rhodes making perhaps the ultimate Kinsley gaffe, “Congratulations, liberals of the Washington press corps and elite organizations: You’re a bunch of suckers. We all know this because the Obama White House just told us so.”

Tough break, Juicebox Mafia; you did everything you could for Obama, but he and his staffers still have no respect for such cheap dates, especially as they kick back and play out the remaining string until January.

As for Rhodes’ foreign policy skills — or the lack thereof — Ace of Spades has you more than covered, as he fisks wide swatches of the article, including this passage:

His lack of conventional real-world experience of the kind that normally precedes responsibility for the fate of nations — like military or diplomatic service, or even a master’s degree in international relations, rather than creative writing — is still startling.

Gee, wait ’till the Times discovers who Rhodes’ boss is.

But wait, there’s more! “Obama’s Foreign Policy Guru Boasts of How the Administration Lied to Sell the Iran Deal,” Lee Smith writes at the Weekly Standard: “Those readers who found Jeffrey Goldberg’s picture of Obama in his March Atlantic profile refreshing for the president’s willingness to insult American allies publicly will be similarly cheered here by Rhodes’s boast of deceiving American citizens, lawmakers, and allies over the Iran deal. Conversely, those who believe Obama risked American interests to take a cheap shot at allies from the pedestal of the Oval Office will be appalled to see Rhodes dancing in the end zone to celebrate the well-packaged misdirections and even lies—what Rhodes and others call a ‘narrative’—that won Obama his signature foreign policy initiative.”

* Sorry, cheap joke. Though to be fair, the real Lonesome Rhodes spent his last days as an Obamacare pitchman, thus bringing his career full circle.

MISSED IT BY THAT MUCH: “For News Outlets Squeezed From the Middle, It’s Bend or Bust,” the New York Times’ Jim Rutenberg notes, in a piece built around the recent Buzzfeed stunt of streaming an exploding watermelon live, generating millions of views in what was basically a glorified 1980s-era Late Night with David Letterman segment. Rutenberg goes on to quote a downhearted freelance journalist who responds “the watermelon … is us,” and Politico co-founder Jim VandeHei who portentously adds, “journalists are killing journalism…[by] stubbornly clinging to the old ways.” That’s defined, Rutenberg writes, “as producing 50 competing but nearly identical stories about a presidential candidate’s latest speech, or 700-word updates on the transportation budget negotiations.”

But note the donkey in the room. At the start of his piece, Rutenberg writes:

Earlier this month, a couple of inventive young go-getters at Buzzfeed tied enough rubber bands around the center of a watermelon to make it explode. Nearly a million people watched the giant berry burst on Facebook Live. It racked up more than 10 million views in the days that followed.

Traditional journalists everywhere saw themselves as the seeds, flying out of the frame. How do we compete with that? And if that’s the future of news and information, what’s next for our democracy? President Kardashian?

Dude — if you’re wondering why, as AP recently noted, the vast majority of Americans don’t trust the MSM, it’s because President Kardashian is in the White House right now. And the Times, the Post, and the Politico and Buzzfeed (self-admitted Journolist member Ben Smith joined Buzzfeed as editor-in-chief in 2011) went all-in to both put him there and prop him up in 2012. So yes, journalists are killing journalism by stubbornly clinging to the old ways — the old ways of being Democrat operatives with bylines. They could change, but that would mean reporting White House scandals, instead of trying to whitewash them away. Until then, don’t be surprised if the public has caught on to the game.

ALL THE PRESIDENT’S POSTMODERNISTS: In “The day Trump killed the fact,” the Washington Post’s Alexandra Petri displays a rather short — and selective — memory:

It’s Tuesday, March 29, 2016, and facts are dead.

They had a good run.

It used to be that when people said “Who are you going to believe, me, or your own eyes?,” they were joking. Not the Donald Trump campaign. It remains stubbornly impervious to reality.

“But we have video footage of this happening,” you can say. “Look, here it is!”

“Ah,” the Trump campaign says, bending eight spoons and then vanishing into a telephone, “but what if the whole world exists only as a figment of our minds?”

The Trump campaign has been an ongoing test of how few things people are willing to Google.

But long before the rise of Donald Trump’s political career, the Washington Post has also had a casual, elastic relationship with capital-T truth. Let’s take a look at couple of their more recent lapses into postmodernism. In 2010, in response to Richard Armitage being ignored in Fair Game, Sean Penn’s film version of Valerie Plame’s memoirs, Post film critic Ann Hornaday sniffed and responded ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ :

In Washington, watching fact-based political movies has become a sport all its own, with viewers hyper-alert to mistakes, composite characters or real stories hijacked by political agendas. But what audiences often fail to take into account is that a too-literal allegiance to the facts can sometimes obscure a larger truth.

* * * * * * *

Thus, the movies about Washington that get the right stuff right — or get some stuff wrong but in the right way — become their own form of consensus history. “Follow the money,” then, assumes its own totemic truth. Ratified through repeated viewings in theaters, on Netflix and beyond, these films become a mutual exercise in creating a usable past. We watch them to be entertained, surely, and maybe educated. But we keep watching them in order to remember.

Hornaday’s article is titled “Washington-set films may fudge facts, but good ones speak to larger truths.”

That same year, Matt Yglesias, then writing columns for the preBezos Post before joining GE-backed tweeted:


And there’s that whole Watergate thing and the origins of legendary Post mole “Deep Throat,” aka disgruntled FBI agent Mark Felt, and how he was shielded for decades by the Post.

“As a famous Soviet dissident joke put it: ‘In the Soviet Union, the future is known; it’s the past which is always changing,’” Dennis Prager once wrote, and reality has been equally fungible at the Post as well. Having argued in favor of postmodernism for years, and having aggressively defended two presidents in recent memory who lived by that philosophy*, they’ve failed to notice that facts in the MSM in general and the Post specifically died long before Tuesday, March 29, 2016. Perhaps if the Post had defended truth more rigorously when it was abused by administrations that its Democrat operatives with bylines supported, the newspaper would be in a better position to complain when a presidential candidate its staff collectively loathes comes along to make a hash of it.

* To the point where Newsweek, then-owned by the Washington Post spiked its exclusive by Michael Isikoff on Bill Clinton’s oval office dalliance with Monica Lewinsky at the start of 2008, thus inadvertently fueling the meteoric rise of the Drudge Report, and at the start of 2009, perhaps declaring its own obituary before being offloaded soon after by the Post a $1.00, famously declared “We Are All Socialists Now” on its cover.

Related flashback: Washington Post cartoonist Ann Telnaes depicts children of Hispanic presidential candidate as monkeys.

BIAS BY OMISSION: Carl’s Jr. HQ Moving From Calif. to Nashville; Press Avoids Saying Why.

“Why did management clearly choose to go elsewhere? Among other things, [Andrew F. Puzder, the CEO of CKE Restaurants, the parent company of the Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s fast-food chains] told the Journal in 2013 that the Golden State’s labor laws are intolerable.”

To borrow one of Glenn’s leitmotifs, just think of old media as Democrat operatives with bylines, and their omission of why Carl’s Jr. is leaving California makes perfect sense.

JUST THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES, AND YOU WON’T GO FAR WRONG:  Vice-Chair Tulsi Gabbard Resigns From DNC; AP Buries the News in a Timeline. “Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard resigned her position as Vice Chair at the DNC and immediately endorsed Bernie Sanders for President… Perhaps AP is awaiting word from either Team Clinton or the White House as to what they’re going to be allowed to report.”

JUST THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES AND YOU WON’T GO WRONG: Media Pundits Often Fail to Disclose Financial Ties to Hillary Clinton.


“Senator Cruz, this might be my favorite political ad of all time,” Jim Geraghty writes, though he asks if the ad works “if you haven’t seen the Office Space scene? Is it funny enough to watch Hillary and her aides destroying her server?” I think the message comes through loud and clear even if you’ve never seen Office Space — though the copier destroying scene is probably the film’s most viral* clip.

* Explanation of the 21st century usage of this word in case Hillary is reading.

UPDATE: Democrat operatives with bylines “Andrea Mitchell and Chuck Todd were appalled by a new Ted Cruz commercial attacking Hillary Clinton, labeling it ‘vicious’ and ‘rough.'” Because they’re all about sensitive feelings and safe spaces at MSNBC.

DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES: Inviting foreigners to intervene in US elections.

WHY, IT’S LIKE THEY’RE DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES OR SOMETHING: CNN’s Cooper Lets Slip: White House Press Corps ‘Agrees’ With Obama.

H.L. MENCKEN LEFT THE BUILDING A VERY LONG TIME AGO: Baltimore Sun editor calls for ‘searchable database of gun owners online.’

That program would of course, also serve double-duty as a searchable database of their neighbors without guns. Which presumably means that unlike these scaredy-cat Democrat operatives with bylines, Sun deputy editorial page editor Tricia Bishop would have no problem displaying a “This Home Proudly Gun-Free” sign on her front lawn, right?

DISPATCHES FROM THE PARENTHESES STATES: California, Leading from Behind, Victor Davis Hanson writes:

California somehow has managed to have the fourth-highest gas taxes in the nation, yet its roads are rated 44th among the 50 states. Nearly 70 percent of California roads are considered to be in poor or mediocre condition by the state senate. In response, the state legislature naturally wants to raise gas taxes, with one proposal calling for an increase of 12 cents per gallon, which would give California the highest gas taxes in the nation.

Because oil prices have crashed, state bureaucrats apparently believe that the public won’t notice the tax increase in their fill-up costs* – even though special California fuel mandates already help make gas prices 25 percent higher than the national average.

Consider California’s upside-down logic.

The state wanted to discourage driving and promote hybrid vehicles by upping taxes on carbon fuels. It worked, though it cost the public dearly. People drove less and bought more fuel-efficient cars. But now, because less gas is burned, fewer taxes are collected. So the state wants to reward motorists for their green sacrifices by raising their taxes even higher to make up for missing revenue. If state motorists drive even less and cram into two-seat commuter cars, will California further reward them with even higher gas taxes?

Meanwhile, in the other big blue parenthesis state, “Cigarette tax revenue plunges as smokers buy outside New York:”

New York state cigarette tax collections have plunged by about $400 million over the past five years…sales of taxed cigs in New York are off by 54 percent in the past decade, which is also cutting into the profits of local store owners peddling smokes. In that same period, about 19 percent of New Yorkers stopped smoking, a pace well below the huge sales dip.

“The Germans call it ‘schadenfreude’ when you take pleasure from another person’s misfortune,” noted Dan Mitchell, a tax expert at the Washington DC-based Cato Institute, commenting on the New York smoking tax fiasco.

Mitchell added, “I confess that I get a certain joy from this story because politicians are being punished for their greed. I like the fact that they have less money to waste.”

To paraphrase VDH’s conclusion, both states have governments that ultimately serve one purpose — reminding Americans what not to do.

*And they’re counting on their Democrat operatives with bylines not to point that out — who are all too eager to follow their marching orders.

BIAS BY OMISSION: “Drivers get no gifts at pump,” read the headline on the front page of the dead tree edition of the San Jose Mercury yesterday, with the subhead, “While most of the nation celebrates holidays with low gas prices. Californians get a lump of coal.” The body of the article is online here; note that there’s no reference to California having some of the highest gas taxes in the country — coupled with some of the worst roads, as the Orange County Register noted earlier this month:

Transportation officials have identified about $57 billion in repairs needed for state roads in the coming decade in addition to about $78 billion needed for local roads, which are partly funded with state money.

Lawmakers in the special session, which was convened by the governor in June, are hoping to introduce a plan early next year that would fund at least a quarter of the total need. But reaching agreement has proved difficult.

Beall has introduced a plan to raise $4.3 billion annually while costing the average motorist about $130 a year, including a 12-cent increase in gas taxes. Gov. Jerry Brown proposed a more modest plan that would raise $3.6 billion a year with an average annual cost to motorists of about $84, including six cents more in gas taxes.

For a variety of reasons, average gas prices in California are already about 25 percent higher than the nation. As of Oct.1, the price in California includes about 41 cents per gallon in state and local taxes and fees, the fifth highest rate in the nation, according to the American Petroleum Institute.

And in their role as Democrat operatives with bylines, the MSM has always been in favor of more and more gas taxes — which is also missing from the Merc’s article.

THIS JUST IN AT THE NEW REPUBLIC: Yes, you can be a liberal and a sexual abuser:

Spreading the message of progressivism was the job of the firm’s founder and president, Trevor FitzGibbon. But it didn’t stop him from being a sexist lout who preyed upon women. Per the Huffington Post’s reporting, the allegations of prospective employee Sierra Pedraja inspired many others who had experienced similar harassment and abuse from FitzGibbon, some of them his own employees. And he is hardly alone.

Vox’s Emily Crockett used a perfect phrase to describe workplaces like FitzGibbon Media: “putatively progressive.” Too often, it is assumed that the people who wear progressive labels put those ideals into practice in their personal and professional lives. FitzGibbon is an extreme example disproving that assumption, but this should be an alarm, particularly for men to examine themselves, especially liberals. They need to stop believing that liberalism elevates us over the possibility of being sexist, because that’s a Republican thing. Nor should we assume progressivism based upon a few nice tweets, rah-rah columns, or even actual work for liberal causes. FitzGibbon just showed that such work can be used in service not of ideals, but one’s own ego, power, or dick.

Or to put it another way; if the charges prove out, they lend further credence to Kate McMillan’s March of 2008 observation, which was proved out in spades that fall as Democrat operatives with bylines carved up Sarah Palin: “Scratch a progressive, and you’ll find a misogynist.” (See also: Playboy’s “hate-f*ck” meltdown the following year aimed towards conservative women; repeated racist smears to attack Michelle Malkin, etc.)

But man, the magical thinking that by merely having the correct ideology, a person is absolved of all sin is strong at TNR — and amongst the left in general.

DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES: Politico Abandons Veil of Objectivity, Pushes Democrat Narrative on Gun Control.

DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES: Suspended CNN Reporter Conspired With Clinton Campaign to Smear Rand Paul.

DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES ALL THE WAY DOWN: NBCUniversal Executive Hosts Fundraiser for Hillary Clinton.

HAVING SOLVED ALL OF MANHATTAN’S PROBLEMS, BILL DeBLASIO TURNS TO REDUCING ITS SODA CONSUMPTION — and his Democrat operatives with bylines are eager to help: The New York Times and the Daily News near-simultaneously advocate for increased soda taxes.

Perhaps the goal is to implement the Blue Zone Taxes incrementally, but isn’t there a paradox here? Don’t all those additional taxes more greatly harm those with lower incomes, thus increasing income inequality?

THE BIDEN ECLIPSE AND THE TRUMP PLATEAU: Peggy Noonan makes a couple of miscalculations in her latest essay. First on Hillary and Obama in 2008, Noonan writes, “The 2008 Democratic contest was a rush to the center, with both leading Democrats, Mrs. Clinton and Barack Obama, trying to show they were moderates at heart.”

But in retrospect, that isn’t quite accurate. In January of 2008, Obama famously told the editors of the San Francisco Chronicle in a chilling monotone that “if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted…Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

But being good Democrat operatives with bylines, they buried the story instead of realizing the front page scoop they were just handed — “LEADING DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE TO BANKRUPT COAL INDUSTRY.” In the fall of 2008, Obama’s future Secretary of Energy Steven Chu mumbled, “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe,” to the yawn of a largely urban elite MSM who entirely agreed with his punitive goals.

Similarly, when news that Obama spent nearly two decades in the church of a radical socialist — and racist — who shouted “God damn America” in his “sermons,” the media built a wall around Obama that CNN dubbed — on the air while “interviewing” Obama — as “The Wright-Free Zone.” Much the same was true of Obama’s elitist bitter clingers speech.

It wouldn’t have taken much from old media to highlight Obama’s inner liberal fascist and egg him on to reveal more of it, but 2008 was the year in which any vestigial claims of “objectivity” were completely discarded and the mask was dropped.

Which brings us to Noonan’s second misfire, in which she writes:

The only thing I feel certain of is how we got here. There are many reasons we’re at this moment, but the essential political one is this: Mr. Obama lowered the bar. He was a literal unknown, an obscure former state legislator who hadn’t completed his single term as U.S. senator, but he was charismatic, canny, compelling. He came from nowhere and won it all twice. All previously prevailing standards, all usual expectations, were thrown out the window.

Anyone can run for president now, and in the future anyone will. In 2020 and 2024 we’ll look back on 2016 as the sober good ol’ days. “At least Trump had business experience. He wasn’t just a rock star! He wasn’t just a cable talk-show host!”

Yes, the road to Idiocracy’s President Camacho is paved with good intentions — not the least of which from pundits who held themselves out as conservatives, yet found themselves writing in the fall of 2008:

The case for Barack Obama, in broad strokes:

He has within him the possibility to change the direction and tone of American foreign policy, which need changing; his rise will serve as a practical rebuke to the past five years, which need rebuking; his victory would provide a fresh start in a nation in which a fresh start would come as a national relief. He climbed steep stairs, born off the continent with no father to guide, a dreamy, abandoning mother, mixed race, no connections. He rose with guts and gifts. He is steady, calm, and, in terms of the execution of his political ascent, still the primary and almost only area in which his executive abilities can be discerned, he shows good judgment in terms of whom to hire and consult, what steps to take and moves to make. We witnessed from him this year something unique in American politics: He took down a political machine without raising his voice.

You don’t need to speak very loudly when all of your enablers and useful idiots have the megaphones (and the Memory Hole.)