Search Results

DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE THE BEST STANDARDS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TWICE AS MANY: Pelosi, Who Claims to Oppose Gerrymandering, Funnels $300,000 to Democratic Gerrymandering Group.

SUPER-SPREADING SANCTIMONY AT THE SUPER BOWL:

Andrew Cuomo’s hometown paper took a similarly sanctimonious tone. ‘In Tampa, Super Bowl Celebrations Bring Superspreader concerns’, a New York Times headline screamed this morning. Back when Biden won, the paper’s super-spreader concerns were curiously absent: ‘A Rollicking NYC Celebration for Biden’s Win, Well Into the Night’.

So what’s behind the open and naked double-standards being pushed in both corporate and social media? There isn’t some grand diabolical strategy. It’s pretty simple actually. They are allowed to flaunt the rules and change how COVID affects a population based on the social causes they and political lines they espouse — and you aren’t. It is that simple. COVID-19 doesn’t affect racial protests or Democratic victories. It will however kill everyone who attends a football game or has a private gathering in their home.

No one is denying this is a deadly virus worth taking seriously; therein lies the problem with politicized public health experts who wag their fingers at people trying to get out and enjoy an event, but who explain away mass gatherings in the name of social justice. The virus doesn’t care why crowds have gathered. It spreads indiscriminately.

So does hypocrisy. If you are a public person with a byline, or an activist or a politician who ignores COVID in favor of your cause, you deserve to be ridiculed while lecturing others — you deserve to be ignored. Enjoy the parade, Tampa Bay.

Flashbacks:

Fauci resists Republican effort to turn testimony against protesters.

Fauci: There will ‘almost certainly’ be an uptick in COVID-19 cases after Thanksgiving travel.

Media Pushes Narrative that BLM Protests Did Not Contribute to Spike in Coronavirus Cases.

#FactsFirst: Jake Tapper, CNN’s coronavirus double standard on Trump and Biden rallies exposed. Tapper slammed Trump rallies as ‘reckless,’ but was concerned about being a ‘scold’ as Biden supporters hit the streets.

● “The great theme of the Trump years, the one historians will note a century from now, was the failure of America’s expert class. The people who were supposed to know what they were talking about, didn’t.”

MICHAEL BARONE: ‘Mostly peaceful’ violence and dueling double standards. “As a law student, I worked in the mayor’s office in Detroit during the 1967 riot, and I can tell you what happens to major cities with sustained increases in violent crime: Very large parts of them are destroyed. That’s what I fear could happen again.”

NEW YORK POST: Double Standards Abound at The New York Times.

To be fair, without them it would have no standards at all.

ROD DREHER: Reality Vs. Pseudo-Realities.

This is what so many of us on the normie Right failed to grasp about QAnon’s pervasiveness among our side. This is also what the Left is failing to perceive about Wokeness. [James] Lindsay goes on:

[T]he pseudo-reality is always constructed such that it structurally advantages those who accept it over those who do not, frequently by overt double standards and through moral-linguistic traps. Double standards in this regard will always favor those who accept pseudo-reality as reality and will always disfavor those who seek the truth. … [M]any normal people will fail to realize the pseudo-reality is false because they cannot see outside of the frame of normality that they charitably extend to all people, whether normal or not.

You can see that play out in a crude way in the exchange between [ESPN/The Atlantic’s Jemele] Hill and her interlocutor.

Lindsay says that liberalism — by which he means classical liberalism — has a bias against pseudo-reality because it contains within it the means to test propositions and reject them. Ideologies based on pseudo-reality — QAnon, Wokeness — depend on capturing powerful, intelligent people, who use their power and intelligence to compel the masses to believe pseudo-real claims. Lindsay:

The trend toward puritan-style pietism, authoritarianism, and eventually totalitarianism in application of this paramorality is a virtual certainty of acceptance of an ideological pseudo-reality, and these abuses will be visited not only on every participant in the constructed fictional reality but also to everyone who can be found or placed within its shadow (which can come to include entire nations or peoples or, in fact, everyone, even those who reject it). Again, this is the true alchemy of the pseudo-realist program; it transforms normal, moral people into immoral agents who must perpetrate evil to feel good and perceive as evil those who do good.

Lindsay explains that fellow travelers in cult ideologies end up thinking that the non-cultists are the crazy ones who have to be suppressed. “This represents a complete reversal of sanity, and the conversion of normal to ideologically psychopathic is, by that point, complete,” writes Lindsay. “These people, as many have learned the hard way throughout history, are the otherwise good people who are capable of perpetrating genocides.”

Read the whole thing, and then check out Jim Geraghty: Why QAnon Conspiracy Theories Can’t Be Ignored.

Exit quote from Geraghty: “Sooner or later, Congress is going to contemplate passing some sort of legislation that will be deeply divisive and controversial. Will the next group of angry extremists decide that the best way to stop Congress from passing legislation they oppose it to gather thousands and attack the Capitol building?”

SO HOW ARE THE LEFT’S EFFORTS AT POLITICAL ETHNIC CLEANSING PLAYING?

So, the Establishment has decided to address the grievances of people who feel disenfranchised, silenced, and subjected to double standards with much more disenfranchisement, silencing, and double standards. Seems like an on-brand move for the most corrupt, unwise, and incompetent – yet remarkably arrogant – ruling caste America has ever known. Good plan – deny them the right to pick their 2024 president, clap like trained seals as corporate overlords cut off their ability to express themselves, and continue to treat their own supporters well and dissenters much, much worse. That’s sustainable. Say, let’s put out this blazing fire with this handy can of gasoline.

Yeah, they are having fun for now. While the supine GOP is tweeting hack cliches about Muh Not Who We Are, the left is trying to tighten the noose. But we’re woke. Rasmussen puts Trump’s popularity at 51%, rising after the riots. We aren’t blaming Trump for the riots. And we sure aren’t rolling over for these bastards.

This sort of fascism won’t play well with Americans, I predict.

XI’S GOTTA HAVE IT: Chinese Media Told to Use Capitol Riot to Attack Democracy.

A reporter from Chinese state media shared with me the guidelines she received on how to report the Capitol riot.

She was told to focus on how the United States’ global reputation would be damaged and deteriorated in her article, mentioning how world leaders were shocked by this insurrection and were concerned about their alliance with the United States. She was also asked to write on how democracy could be hijacked by a group of uneducated people and how democracy could only be realized when the population is highly educated—and that China’s current education level is not suitable for democracy.

In the morning of Jan. 7, a reporter from Phoenix Media told me that an article published by her team about how social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube had all put restrictions on President Donald Trump’s accounts had spawned a series of online discussions about how Western countries such as the United States “don’t even have freedom of speech.”

These discussions were led by China’s Foreign Ministry and were fueled by a number of pro-Chinese Communist Party bloggers. A large number of Chinese netizens have long been under the impression—picking up cues from right-wing media elsewhere—that there is no real freedom of speech in Western countries. They accuse the Western world of holding double standards when criticizing the Chinese government for blocking website content, monitoring internet access, banning dissent and disagreement, and deleting social media accounts.

The reporter expressed concerns about how people interpreted her article and how that would make it even harder to start any discussion about freedom of speech and human rights in China. She had recently interviewed a few #MeToo victims and felt saddened seeing feminists fighting in an environment where the government’s control over the internet, media, and individual bloggers is tighter than it has been in the past decade—and where patriarchy is resurgent. The violence at the Capitol had aided the Chinese government, she said, by giving it another justification for arguing that control of speech is necessary.

Silicon Valley agrees, sadly. As Rod Dreher warned in November China’s “social credit system” was coming to America. The Capitol Hill riot was all the pretext Big Tech needed.

DOUBLE STANDARDS: Explosive Scene at Oregon State Capitol: Riot Declared, MRAPs and Pepper Spray Deployed. “This kind of riot line and equipment deployment seemed to be utterly missing from riots caused by antifa and Black Lives Matter throughout 2020 in multiple cities across Oregon. Yet when the people of Oregon try to exercise their constitutional rights to watch in person as their representatives do the business of the people, however, an army of police came out.”

They let Antifa do what it does because they don’t mind what it does. They go all out to stop ordinary citizens protesting because they don’t like ordinary citizens, and certainly don’t want them empowered.

ROGER KIMBALL: Reality and the Narrative.

The strongest argument for Biden’s victory is not the vote tally. It is the monolithic narrative, pumped up like one of those inflatable play castles at a child’s birthday party. With every passing day, that narrative becomes more boisterous, more assertive, more uncompromising. It is a collective primal scream, emitted with eyes shut and ears plugged.

There is a problem for the narrative, however. Or more to the point, there are 73 million problems. A major concession in the Biden-won-give-it-up-narrative is revealed by the hawkers of the “Unity Now” meme. Let us all come together as one nation, under Joe, and reassert the American normality that has been so sorely missing under the despotic reign of Donald Trump.

No. No, that’s not going to fly, and not only because of the snarling viciousness that attended Donald Trump and his entire administration from the moment he was elected until now. Granted, Democrats are masters of hypocrisy. I will give them that. Brazenness is part of the formula. They are utterly unembarrassed by double standards. Indeed, they glory in them.

Plus: “Inquiring minds want to know, how is it possible that voter turnout in just those key cities in just those key states was so high: often 90 percent or more? How is it possible that Joe Biden, who barely campaigned, garnered more votes in just those spots than even Barack Obama had done? How is it possible that, as everyone was getting tucked into bed on the night of November 3, Donald Trump had notable leads in almost all of those states and then, suddenly, all at once, in the wee hours, floods of votes poured in and—wouldn’t you know it—they were overwhelmingly, sometimes exclusively, for Biden? And what about those voting machines from Dominion: are we confident that they are secure?”

Read the whole thing.

XI’S GOTTA HAVE IT: China’s Next ‘5-Year Plan’ Likely to Increase Animosity Between Washington and Beijing. “China’s problem, which often turns into a problem for Washington, is Beijing’s consistent double-standards. China wants to be taken seriously on the world stage as a major power, yet expects to be treated in environmental and trade terms as a ‘developing country,’ subject to far more lax standards and requirements.”

“PUBLIC HEALTH” AND DOUBLE STANDARDS: Radford University is allowing a protest supporting Black Lives Matter to take place on campus despite coronavirus restrictions. “The university is not allowing events, indoor or outdoor, of more than 10 people.”

ROGER KIMBALL: Wiping Phones and Erasing the Public’s Trust.

Thanks to the efforts of the indispensable Judicial Watch, we now know that the team of Robert Mueller wiped some 30 government-issued smart phones before turning them over to the Inspector General.

Mueller’s “pitbull,” the despicable Andrew Weismann, “accidentally” wiped his device twice after entering his passcode too many times. The phone used by Lisa Page, the anti-Trump FBI lawyer who had an affair with Peter Strzok, former head of the Bureau’s counterespionage section and consigliere of the vendetta against Michael Flynn, was restored to its factory settings before the IG got it. The phone of another FBI reportedly “wiped itself” before being turned in.

Amazing, isn’t it, how diligent Democrats are about covering their tracks, and how disingenuous? They remember what happened to Richard Nixon, who taped all his oval office conversations and lived to regret it when the tapes became public during the Watergate investigation.

The 33,000 emails that Hillary had wiped from her home-brew server were entirely private, she said, having to do with yoga classes and her daughter’s wedding. Then why resort to professional data wiping software? Why pretend not to know what it means to “wipe” a computer server? (“You mean with a cloth?”) Why instruct your minions to destroy your smart phones with a hammer?

As Kimball writes, “Nothing happened to Hillary because she occupies a zone of privilege even more exalted than that occupied by Speaker Pelosi.” Read the whole thing.

Flashback:

IF IT WASN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NONE AT ALL: Border Wall Critic Gretchen Whitmer Building 8-Foot Wall Around MI Governor Residence.

SO I GUESS IT’S OKAY TO GO AFTER THE MEDIA IF TRUMP LOSES? Ayanna Pressley Calls for ‘Unrest In the Streets.’

I’m not saying it would be right to burn down CNN and MSNBC and the WaPo/NYT headquarters. I’m just saying that the left would be in a poor position to complain if someone did it, due to their toleration of this sort of inflammatory rhetoric from their own. When you say this sort of thing you’re moving the Overton Window for your opponents, not just for your friends. But since double standards come as naturally to them as breathing, that probably doesn’t even occur to them.

ROGER KIMBALL: Double Standards on View in Outrage at Stone Commutation.

TRUST IS PUBLIC HEALTH’S MOST IMPORTANT ASSET, AND THEY SQUANDERED IT WITHOUT A THOUGHT IN THE NAME OF EXPEDIENCY: The Coronavirus Credibility Gap: Politicians and experts sow distrust with double standards on protests and dissembling about masks.

Political leaders and health officials have often invoked “science” to justify decisions manifestly guided by their personal preferences. That costs them credibility. Restoring public confidence will require acknowledging their role in politicizing the pandemic, yielding to accommodations and sensible alternatives in the areas of greatest controversy, and focusing on the widely supported goal of not overwhelming hospitals, rather than less meaningful metrics such as increases in Covid-19 cases.

One of the earliest signs of politicization was the broad animus directed at protesters who objected to the lockdowns. In a country where liberty and free expression are as fundamental as air and water, it is remarkable how casually political leaders and health officials disparaged and banned their activities—and even targeted protesters for prosecution. Politics was also at play when New York Mayor Bill de Blasio ordered police in Brooklyn to break up a crowd of mourners who gathered for a Hasidic Jewish funeral, warning that their actions were “unacceptable” and threatening to arrest them.

Contrast this with the approach that many of the same political leaders and public-health experts took toward the protests catalyzed by George Floyd’s killing. These protesters were neither maligned nor targeted with fines and arrests based on social distancing or mask mandates. They were often joined in the streets by politicians such as Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy.

The double standard in treatment was political. All these public gatherings were led by people expressing sincerely held beliefs that they felt outweighed the risk of Covid-19 transmission. Protecting such expression, regardless of viewpoint, is fundamental to the integrity of a democracy. Instead, politicians played favorites with this core American tenet. . . .

Further corroding public trust was health officials’ reversal about wearing masks. In February, they discouraged their use and told the public there was no evidence they were effective. Yet when questioned by Rep. David McKinley (R., W.Va.) on June 23, Anthony Fauci claimed the initial guidance was motivated by concerns about medical supply shortages—not doubts about mask effectiveness. No wonder many Americans don’t trust the calls to wear masks.

If political leaders and health experts want to restore their credibility and the public’s confidence, they need to begin by acknowledging that politics rather than science has influenced important public-health decisions and by making accommodations for dissenting perspectives. Alternatives to masks, for instance, include physical distancing and using face shields while indoors.

And while there is more to learn about immunity, there has not been a single confirmed case of reinfection among the 10 million cases of Covid-19 world-wide, according to a May report in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Until the data say otherwise, people who have recovered from Covid-19 should be exempt from restrictions.

Our ruling class and its satraps lack the necessary self-discipline and willingness to forego temporary gratification that is necessary to perform their jobs properly. Which is why they are performing their jobs badly.

SHOCKING NEWS FROM THE WORLD OF SCIENCE: Men and Women Differ in Their Perceptions of Sex Robots and Platonic Love Robots. “The results of the current study show that females have less positive views of robots, and especially of sex robots, compared to men.” And yet about half of women use a vibrator, which is just a primitive sex robot.

Related: Eugene Volokh on vibrators and double standards.

UPDATE: I almost forgot — nobody tell notorious robophobe Matthew Yglesias. “He seems to have a particular fear of fembots, the analysis of which I will leave to the professionals.”

DOUBLE STANDARDS: Democrats Suddenly Worried About “Politicized” Investigations.

Some Senate Democrats are complaining about Republican Sen. Ron Johnson’s plan to have the Homeland Security Committee, which he chairs, investigate the ties between Joe Biden’s son Hunter and the corrupt Ukrainian energy company Burisma. The Hill reports that “Democrats have warned for weeks, both publicly and privately, that GOP senators are using the panel to target President Trump’s political rivals.” Whatever the merits of that accusation, Republicans will say: After the Mueller investigation and the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees’ impeachment investigations, are Democrats really going to warn anyone about using investigations to target political rivals?

Sheesh.

DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE THE BEST STANDARDS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TWICE AS MANY AS LESS-PRINCIPLED PEOPLE DO: Missouri Dem Touts Endorsement From Dark Money Group After Denouncing Dark Money.

NOBODY KNOWS ANYTHING: “Social Distancing” Is Snake Oil, Not Science. There was never good evidence to support its efficacy.

UPDATE (FROM GLENN): One of the things I find most annoying about Dr. Fauci is his scientific version of Jon Stewart’s clown-nose-on-clown-nose-off routine. Sometimes he demands double-blind studies, other times — as with lockdowns and social distancing — he goes with his gut. It’s not that that’s necessarily wrong, but he’s very shifty in not explaining why he’s changing his standards.

UPDATE (From Ed):

Earlier: Woodstock Occurred in the Middle of a Pandemic.

(Updated and bumped.)

DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE THE BEST STANDARDS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TWICE AS MANY AS LESS-PRINCIPLED PEOPLE DO: Jake Tapper Exposes the False Nature of Double Standard Used Against Brett Kavanaugh.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL.

WE’VE DESCENDED INTO SOME SORT OF BIZARRE HELL-WORLD IN WHICH ANDREW SULLIVAN IS A VOICE OF SANITY: By Biden’s Own Standards, He Is Guilty As Charged.

If I were asked to detail an incident that happened a quarter-century ago, absent serious trauma, I’d be completely stumped. There’s a reason for statutes of limitation. And a reason that in a liberal society an individual is deemed innocent until proven guilty.

Nonetheless, I tend to believe women on these matters as a starting point. They have to endure all sorts of exposure and embarrassment for coming forward, and their claims should always be treated respectfully, compassionately, and fairly. It’s been a serious gain for civilized life that women are not routinely ignored or universally trashed for protesting against their assaulters and harassers. Some trust for all women is vital.

But just as vital in a liberal society is verification. I believe strongly in due process, especially with grave allegations of sexual assault. Revolutionaries, like those behind the Shitty Media Men list, don’t care if an individual is unfairly accused because, well, in the grand scheme of things, the ends justify the means.

And Andrew has quite a bit of experience in the “ends justify the means” department. Andrew’s othering of Sarah Palin in 2008 — and by extension her supporters — was a key mile marker on the road to Trump.

Related: Tough new Trump ad: The Democratic double standard on believing women.

As a matter of raw politics, the Reade allegation will benefit Trump by deterring Biden from making an issue of alleged sexual misconduct by the president. The more Team Trump flaunts its hypocrisy by targeting Biden over Reade, though, the more Democrats will want to hit back. That’s what’s clever about the ad — it doesn’t go so far as to claim that Biden is actually guilty, merely that he should be judged guilty by his party’s own dumb standards. That’s safer ground.

While the New York Times is finally talking about Reade, note the line at the end of this excerpt of Ben Smith’s column:

You don’t have to believe Mr. Clinton assaulted Ms. Broaddrick in 1978. If you’re a journalist, it doesn’t really matter what you believe, as long as you report what you know. But the handling of Ms. Broaddrick’s story was one of the most damaging media mistakes of the Clinton years. And the treatment of Mr. Clinton’s accusers by the Democratic Party and the media alike is one of the original sins that led to today’s divided, partisan news environment.

The mainstream American media in 1999, for reasons that are hard to explain or excuse today, got cold feet on a credible allegation of rape against the president.

“Hard to explain.” Ben Smith is bensmithing away the second half of the 1990s in Washington, DC.

More: Tara Reade Is Joe Biden’s Eighth Accuser. Possibly ninth? Woman says Biden sexually harassed her when she was 14.

And finally, in yet another tone-deaf move by Biden and his handlers signaling the end of the #MeToo era: Biden nominates Chris Dodd of ‘waitress sandwich’ fame to help shop for female vice presidential candidates.

DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE THE BEST STANDARDS BECAUSE YOU GET TWICE AS MANY AS LESS-PRINCIPLED PEOPLE DO: Carrie Severino on Joe Biden accuser: Dems have a ‘sudden onset’ of respect for due process.

JOE BIDEN’S DOUBLE STANDARD:

Biden’s rhetoric has also employed a de facto presumption of guilt. On a 2017 conference call with campus accusers’-rights activists, Biden offered a simple message to those who alleged that they had been sexually assaulted: “I believe you.” Proof for their claims, it seems, wasn’t necessary. The following year, during Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination hearings, Biden suggested that women making high-profile allegations deserve an even greater presumption of truthfulness: “For a woman to come forward in the glaring lights of focus, nationally, you’ve got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she’s talking about is real.”

For reasons that neither paper explained, the Times and Post articles declined to address the chasm between Biden’s past proposals on how to evaluate sexual-assault allegations against college students or his political foes and his current position regarding appropriate standards when he is the accused party. Instead, both articles provided context by exploring President Donald Trump’s past record. But the validity of past sexual-misconduct allegations against Trump has no bearing on the question of Biden’s changing standards. As lawyer and blogger Scott Greenfield observed, the key issue at play here is Biden’s “hypocrisy. Either it’s due process for all or none. Biden doesn’t get a pass.”

Sure he does:

New York Times Allowed Biden Team to Edit Story on Sexual Assault Allegation.

CNN missing in action on Biden assault accuser Tara Reade’s story.

Joe Biden Has Yet to Face Single Question on Sexual Assault Allegations.

As Glenn wrote on Tuesday, “So #metoo was basically bullshit, then.”

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NO GUARANTEE OF FUTURE RESULTS: “My gut says that what Reade alleges did not happen. My head instructs that it is within the realm of possibility…”

“…and fairness requires acknowledging that. And there is another point to bear in mind: Double standards work in both directions. Those who disbelieved and diminished Christine Blasey Ford face the challenge of explaining why they seem so much more eager to credit Tara Reade’s account.”

Writes Ruth Marcus in “Assessing Tara Reade’s allegations” (WaPo). Marcus wrote a book about Christine Blasey Ford and concluded that she was telling the truth. This column is (or purports to be) Marcus’s effort to not be a hypocrite.

Outrage over misbehavior only by those with whom we have ideological differences is not righteous — it is hypocritical. Skepticism about accusations only when they are made against someone with whom we are ideologically aligned is not high-minded — it is intellectually dishonest.

And yet. Reflexive acceptance of any and all allegations of sexual misconduct against any man is not staunch feminism — it is dangerous credulity that risks doing terrible injustice to the accused. #BelieveAllWomen was a dumb hashtag and a dumber approach to inevitably complex, fact-bound situations.

Flashback: WaPo Concealed Kavanaugh Party Claim From Public After Coordinating With Accuser: Strassel.

DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE THE BEST STANDARDS — YOU GET TWO! Double Standards on Rush Limbaugh’s Presidential Medal of Freedom.

AN OBSERVATION FROM A FRIEND ON FACEBOOK: “A caller to Rush’s show made an excellent point: If Romney believed just a week ago that there was not enough evidence to convict Trump without additional witnesses, how can he vote to convict today when there have been no additional witnesses?”

There’s nothing sadder than people who talk about standards and principles while engaging in transparently self-serving doubletalk. You can get the same point, made rather more pungently, at Ace’s.

DOUBLE STANDARDS: Judge Goes Easy on Crying Cop Who Planted Drugs.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: 5 Times Obama Broke The Law But Democrats Didn’t Impeach Him

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, DOUBLE STANDARDS EDITION: A&M hosts accused anti-Semite, Nation of Islam sympathizer for MLK Day event.

JOHN KASS: Jeffrey Epstein and Brett Kavanaugh, for ABC News, a tale of double standards.

Let’s remember what ABC, NBC and other media did to Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing just a year ago, destroying his reputation, smearing him without evidence because he wasn’t on their political team.

Oh, you don’t want to go near Kavanaugh? Then just get off the bus, because I’m going there.

There is just no responsible way to discuss ABC’s alleged spiking of the Epstein story — or NBC’s spiking of the Harvey Weinstein story — without dealing with how those news networks, and other media outlets, worked frantically to destroy Kavanaugh.

Many in the media had one standard for Epstein and Weinstein, who had clout with Democrats including Bill and Hillary Clinton.

But Kavanaugh? He’s a Bush Republican nominated by President Donald Trump.
So that other standard was applied, one that allowed unsubstantiated allegations to be reported and repeated, endlessly, in an attempt to ruin him and keep him off the Supreme Court.

It seems clear now, from the Ronan Farrow stories and other accounts, and from Robach’s hot mic take, that NBC and ABC showed great deference to Epstein and Weinstein.

Kass isn’t one to mince words, but “deference” is far too kind a descriptor for the act of providing friendly media cover to a serial sexual abuser and a serial child rapist.

RELATED: ABC Spiking Epstein Story Reactionpalooza.

THIS STINKS: A BIASED PRESS IS MAULING TRUMP’S TV DEFENDERS.

Lastly, there was Rudy Giuliani. He made a string of interviews and complained about the double standards of pro- and anti-Trump guests to George Stephanopoulos. He also complained about interruptions, which have been pretty pervasive across the scale. Much ink has been spilled on how Giuliani’s wild Trumpian-style defenses of President Trump (must be a New York thang) wasn’t helping Trump’s case, and he ought to be off the air. The Joe Biden team, however, is now lobbying the press to keep Giuliani off the air, which rather suggests he thinks Giuliani is helping Trump. Guess who the media intends to listen to?

Read the whole thing. Just think of the media as Democratic Party operatives — terrified of being arrested and/or locked in Biden’s closet — and it all makes sense.

Earlier:  Biden campaign says you have to hold public office to be entitled to opine on ‘the nation’s airwaves.’

IF THEY HAD NO DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:  Joe Biden and Ukraine is “Hillary’s Emails” all over again.

And it’s after the election he’ll have more “flexibility.”
And it’s Benghazi lies.
And it’s pallets of cash to Iran.
And it’s the Clinton Foundation funny business.

… after all, at this point, what difference does it make?

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Trump-Russia and Clinton-Libya: A Story of 2 Probes and the FBI.

NICE: US Shale Natural Gas: Lowering Global Prices and CO2 Emissions.

Indeed, natural gas this year will supply nearly 40% of U.S. power, about double what it provided before the shale revolution. Gas is also the backup fuel to compensate for the natural intermittency of wind and solar power: gas is needed for when “the wind is blowing” and “the sun isn’t shining.” The U.S. is now reducing its CO2 emissions faster than any country on Earth: “Thanks to Natural Gas, US CO2 Emissions Lowest Since 1985.”

Looking forward, a rapidly expanding U.S. natural gas export business (via LNG) will offer more affordable, more flexible, more reliable, and cleaner natural gas to a too slowly developing world that requires all the modern energy that it can get. Today, some 85% of the world’s population lives in still developing nations, only dreaming of the access to energy and high living standards that we Americans have enjoyed for many decades.

American capitalists are doing the planet-saving work environmentalists can’t do — and they’re saving us money and expanding human activity, rather than costing huge sums and imposing new restrictions.

THE DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE REAL, AND THEY’RE SPECTACULAR: A photo of Lena Dunham appearing to awkwardly kiss Brad Pitt has people talking about the double standards of consent.

WHO KNOWS MORE ABOUT DECEPTIVE EDITING THAN THE POLITICAL REPORTERS AT THE WASHINGTON POST? Glenn Kessler had to correct a story today using the “deceptively edited” line to defend Ilhan Omar (D-Jihadistan). In so doing, he not only got the source wrong and blamed the wrong publisher (The Daily Caller) but credited it to a person who doesn’t even work for The Daily Caller.

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly attributed the deceptive video to the Daily Caller and said it was tweeted by a Daily Caller reporter. Neither statement is correct.

Speaking of “deceptive editing”, the Post among most others have quoted President Trump telling the Jihad Squad to “Go back to where you came from.” You want deceptively edited? Here’s deceptive editing (snipped out part in italics):

“Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough.

If it weren’t for double standards, some of these people would have no standards at all.

DOUBLE STANDARDS: VIDEO: Students say Obama immigration quote racist. . .when they think it’s from Trump.

DOUBLE (x85) STANDARDS AT WILLIAMS COLLEGE: Williams College’s student government has recognized around 170 student groups. But in a blatant example of viewpoint discrimination, it has refused to recognize the Williams Initiative for Israel. (Student for Justice in Palestine is recognized, along with many other interest-based clubs.) President Maud Mandel has ensured the club can  meet on campus, but has stopped short of ensuring they are actually treated equally in terms of funding, etc. Today, you can join FIRE in calling on President Mandel to step up and put an end to this separate but unequal treatment.

UPDATE: We’re hearing that Williams may have found a way around the student government. That was quick!

TWITTER IS RUN BY LYING LIARS WHO SUCK: Twitter Suspends Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Parody Account for ‘Spammy Behavior,’ Which Seems Dubious.

UPDATE: Twitter suspends Jack Posobiec’s @MAGAphobia account for tracking violence against Trump supporters. “The latest incident is likely to fuel conservative ire at Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, who is accused of applying double standards when it comes to applying the platform’s rules to right-leaning accounts.”

Related (From Ed): Twitter temporarily suspends conservative activist David Horowitz. “The suspension, initially reported by OANN host Jack Posobiec, came the same day as Mr. Posobiec’s account devoted to documenting assaults on trump supporters, @MAGAphobia, was suspended.”

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:


Related:

Plus: Pay attention to how tight the messaging is in defense of Ilhan Omar and how precise and consistent the wording is from media, politics, academia, etc.

CHANGE: How Trump’s border policies are boosting wage growth.

Trump hasn’t officially agreed to raise the federal minimum wage above its current level of $7.25 an hour, but then again, he doesn’t have to. His policies are doing it all for him — including restricting illegal immigration.

A piece by The New York Times highlighted what’s happening in construction, where a labor shortage is pushing worker salaries to something like $25 an hour. But because the Times can’t stand to give Trump any credit, the story was framed that this shortage was a bad thing, a terrible burden for wealthy construction companies and contractors. What hypocrisy.

We can argue about efficacies of wall building in curtailing illegal immigration another time, but the numbers don’t lie: Friday’s employment report showed continued jobs gains and, lo and ­behold, a continued increase in wages. And not for hedge-fund managers, the report showed, but in those industries that employ the vast working class, such as health care, what’s known as leisure and hospitality and, of course, construction.

For years wages and benefits have remained stagnant on the low end despite all efforts by progressives from former President Barack Obama and various elected officials to increase the minimum wage and force employers to offer workers additional perks.

Now that’s changing. Wages and benefits are rising as businesses scramble to find workers in construction, health care and other industries. Government-induced minimum-wage standards and benefits often force employers to cut their payrolls to make a profit. But that’s not what’s happening now. Businesses are growing because of the Trump administration is cutting regulations, and taxes and the labor pool on the low end. . . .

The numbers don’t lie: The double whammy of lower taxes and a decline in the importing of low-wage illegal workers is making life better for the blue collar. The left loves to portray the president as xenophobic, but how is any of this racist if the beneficiaries are minorities and legal immigrants who often work in these jobs and are no longer worried about being replaced by an endless flow of cheap labor?

Pretty positive stuff from Gasparino, who’s no Trump fan.

DOUBLE STANDARDS: Campus memorials to progressive racists, eugenicists largely escape scrutiny.

YEAH, IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:  Minstrelsy.

MEGYN KELLY VS. JIMMY FALLON: NBC’s Double Standards on Blackface.

IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:  Sen. Sherrod Brown Complains That Trump Rips Babies from Families on Same Day His Party Pushes for Infanticide.

IF IT WASN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NONE AT ALL: You know the stereotypical British leftie: All refugees must be accepted because borders are racist. And we have some sort of historical Original Sin to pay for, so somehow it’s our moral responsibility to ship cubic money elsewhere. Not to mention that taking pride in your nation’s history is racist, of course.

But when UK-based consumer electronics manufacturer Dyson announced it was moving its HQ to Singapore, the UK left has gone into melt-down mode, decrying the loss of prestige that Britain will face:

“Before Dyson, so the story went, we were terrific at inventing bright ideas but rubbish at turning those ideas into profitable businesses. Brits would have the lightbulb moment, but when it came to manufacturing the actual bulbs, that work – and profit – would be shipped far away. Then along came James Dyson, hailed by successive governments, who proved it didn’t have to be that way. A British idea produced a British business.”

Waitaminnit, what? Suddenly “business” and “profitability” and “national pride” are good things?
Who knew?

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS…

THE IDIOCY OF MODERN IDENTITARIANISM SUMMED UP IN ONE STORY: Steven Spielberg’s ‘West Side Story’ Finds Its Maria, Anita, Bernardo & Chino.

“When we began this process a year ago, we announced that we would cast the roles of Maria, Anita, Bernardo, Chino and the Sharks with Latina and Latino actors. I’m so happy that we’ve assembled a cast that reflects the astonishing depth of talent in America’s multifaceted Hispanic community,” said Spielberg. “I am in awe of the sheer force of the talent of these young performers, and I believe they’ll bring a new and electrifying energy to a magnificent musical that’s more relevant than ever.” ….

“I am so thrilled to be playing the iconic role of Maria alongside this amazing cast,” said [Rachel]  Zegler. “West Side Story was the first musical I encountered with a Latina lead character. As a Colombian-American, I am humbled by the opportunity to play a role that means so much to the Hispanic community.”

Why do Puerto Rican characters in West Side Story need to be played by Latinos, but not Italian characters by people of Italian or (better yet, given the demographics of New York’s Italian community, specifically Sicilian) descent? Why is having a Colombian-American a politically-correct choice to play a Puerto Rican? What do Colombia and Puerto Rico have in common besides different dialects of the Spanish language? If you were trying to cast an Australian of 1960, would casting an English-speaking actor from the US, or India, be “authentic”? Isn’t kind of insulting to assume that all Spanish-speaking countries are interchangeable?

I’ve been working on a paper about legal definitions of race and ethnicity in the U.S., and the designation of “Hispanics” as non-white was not exactly historically inevitable. “Mexicans,” along with other Spanish-speaking peoples of the Americas, were usually considered to be legally white in the census and otherwise, though Mexicans were sometimes sent to segregated school thanks to local policy. When affirmative action programs started in the Sixties, “Chicano” (Mexican-American) groups lobbied for Mexican-Americans to be included as a “minority” group. Once Mexican-Americans were included, the category gradually expanded. First, it was anyone with a Spanish surname. But that proved overbroad, because many Italians have last names that sound Spanish, and many people of Hispanic descent do not. So eventually this morphed into “Latino” or Hispanic. But why, for example, an Argentine immigrant of Italian heritage is less “white” than a native-born American of Italian heritage is a mystery. Having lived in Peru, the irony of seeing like-skinned Latin Americans of mostly European origin who are generally contemptuous of darker-skinned Latin Americans suddenly becoming “people of color” eligible for minority preferences if they immigrate to the U.S. is something to behold.

But as Glenn might note, dividing people into artificial “races” creates extra opportunities for graft.

Oh, and while we’re at it, here is Zegler’s “racial” background:  “Her father is of Polish ancestry on his own father’s side, and of Irish, German, and Italian ancestry on his own mother’s. Rachel’s mother is of Colombian origin.” So do we give Spielberg only half-credit for finding an actor who at best is half-Hispanic? Why does anyone sane want to go down this rabbit-hole?

UPDATE: And speaking of double standards, friend read this and commented, “And why is it OK for almost none of the actors on The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel are Jewish in real life?”

UNC IS REALLY A MESS: UNC defends hosting ‘anti-semitic’ Women’s March leader for MLK Day. Double standards? Hey, at least we have standards!

Freeman Slaughter, vice president of UNC-Asheville College Republicans chapter, told Campus Reform that he believes the university is being hypocritical in inviting Mallory to be the keynote speaker.

“The Dean of Students, Jackie McHargue, stated in her commencement speech that ‘hate speech is not free speech,’” Slaughter said. “And I fail to see why this situation should be any different. Mallory is anti-Semitic and anti-Israel, but she’s being given a pass due to her work with the Women’s March.”

I’m glad the students are calling them out.

DOUBLE STANDARDS: When Mother Jones suggests approaching white supremacists with empathy, it’s ‘provocative.’

JONATHAN TURLEY: Donald Trump is completely transforming the Democrats.

Democrats are now defined by Trump the way that antimatter is defined by matter, with each particle of matter corresponding to an antiparticle. Take the secrecy. Democrats once were the party that fought against the misuse of secret classification laws by the FBI and other agencies. They demanded greater transparency from the executive branch, which is a position that I have readily supported. Yet, when oversight committees sought documents related to the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act investigation of Trump associates, Democrats denounced the very thought that Republicans would question the judgment of the FBI that any such disclosures would be tantamount to jeopardizing national security.

Democratic Party leaders including Pelosi declared that the oversight committees had moved beyond “dangerous irresponsibility and disregard for our national security” and “disregarded the warnings of the Justice Department and the FBI.” Likewise, House Intelligence Committee ranking minority member Adam Schiff expressed shock that the FBI was not given deference in withholding the information in the surveillance investigation.

Yet, when the information was finally forced out of the FBI, including the disclosure of previously redacted material, it was clear that the FBI had engaged in overclassification to shield not national security but to shield the bureau itself from criticism. It included discussion of the roles of high ranking FBI officials and their reliance on such sources as the Christopher Steele dossier, which were already publicly known. Democratic House members like Schiff presumably knew what was in the redactions and, nevertheless, wanted deference to the classification decisions of the FBI.

In supporting the investigation of Trump, Democrats have embraced expanding definitions of crimes like obstruction, conspiracy, and the like.

If it weren’t for double standards…

DOUBLE STANDARDS: If only the Knights of Columbus were a Muslim organization instead of a Catholic one…

MEMORIAL TO TREE OF LIFE SYNAGOGUE SHOOTING VICTIMS VANDALIZED AT POMONA COLLEGE: But the perpetrators were apparently leftist activists, not neo-Nazis, so no one at Pomona cares. As the saying goes, if the left didn’t have double standards, they’d have no standards at all.

MATT MARGOLIS: Why Allegations of Campaign Finance Violations Won’t Bring Down Trump. “Obama is guilty of worse, and nothing happened to him.”

Double standards, Matt. Double. Standards.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THERE’D BE NO JOURNALISTIC STANDARDS AT ALL:

IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS THEY WOULDN’T HAVE STANDARDS AT ALL:  Of bombs and responsibility.

TO BE FAIR, DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE THE ONLY STANDARDS THEY’VE GOT: New Hampshire Democrats Display Double Standard On Sex Assault Allegations. “It’s amazing all the screaming and shouting about what’s happening in Washington, but when it comes to what’s happening in their own back yards, they’re silent.”

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Robert “Beto” O’Rourke Will Not Get the Kavanaugh Treatment.

JUVENILE LOGIC: Unforgiven. Liberals used to be in favor of leniency for juvenile offenders. But of course they didn’t mean Republicans, as Kay Hymowitz writes in City Journal:

That Kavanaugh’s fiercest opponents are now using a (tenuously recalled) adolescent crime as proof of his unfitness is an irony worth considering. The Left has always been at the forefront of the fight for leniency for minors. Progressives founded the juvenile court in 1899. Liberals fought “law and order” conservative attempts to try juveniles as adults initiated during the crime wave of the 1970s through 1990s. They pointed out, accurately, that those policies affected black kids far more than white. They were rightfully indignant that prepubescent children could be labelled sex offenders. “Children are regularly put on sex offender registries, sometimes for their entire lives, for conduct less serious than what Kavanaugh is accused of,” writes [New York Times columnist Michelle] Goldberg. Well, yes. That’s exactly the tough-on-juvenile-crime approach that has five times as many black as white juveniles in prison and that Goldberg herself would justify against Kavanaugh.

If it weren’t for double standards . . . .

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS THEY WOULDN’T HAVE STANDARDS AT ALL: This is Louis Farrakhan’s pinned tweet. He has over 300K followers. Why did Twitter ban, say, Tommy Robinson, but Farrakhan is left alone?

IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:  Trump May Lose Star on Walk of Fame, But Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey Won’t.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Mark Levin: Interrupt Obama and reporters are racist, interrupt Trump and they’re heroes.

Hall of Fame conservative radio host Mark Levin is blowing the whistle on what he sees as a double standard over the Trump administration’s move last week to bar a CNN White House reporter from an event after she shouted several questions at the president inside the Oval Office.

On his top-ranked radio show, Levin mocked media that has “circled the wagons” around CNN’s Kaitlan Collins who asked Trump, sitting with European Union Commission head Jean-Claude Juncker, about tapes the cable network had of the president allegedly talking with his former lawyer about payments to a Playboy model.

The White House claimed the questions were rude and came after the press pool was asked to leave the Oval Office. As a result, they barred her from a subsequent event, prompting most media including Fox to defend Collins.

C-SPAN pulled out this section of the scrum showing that the event was over when Collins started asking her questions. Juncker appears to be chuckling at the scene as aides try to get reporters to leave.

Levin raised the double standard and the handling of conservative press by the former Obama administration and how when they were targeted the liberal media didn’t rally for them.

He noted, for example, that three reporters from conservative outlets that endorsed Sen. John McCain’s presidential bid in 2008 were refused entry on the Obama campaign plane. “So he gets rid of the conservatives, gets rid of them, and by the way Glamour magazine and others were allowed to stay on the plane,” said Levin, the latest member of the Radio Hall of Fame.

That’s different, because shut up racist.

IT’S AS IF FEMINISM IS MORE ABOUT PAYBACKS THAN JUSTICE: Labor backbencher Emma Husar has been accused of telling a male staff member to do her dishes so he could learn about “white male privilege”, Sky News reports.

The revelation comes as former Labor senator Sam Dastyari claimed Ms Husar was a victim of sexist “double standards”, downplaying extensive allegations from several of her former staff of workplace bullying and misconduct in her Western Sydney electorate office.

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton has called on Labor leader Bill Shorten to explain whether or not Ms Husar had been misusing taxpayers’ money to employ staff.

It’s different when we do it, because shut up, bigot.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS… The peaceniks of the media suddenly deplore dialogue.

On Monday night, MSNBC assembled a panel of spiteful Trump critics to throw a wet blanket over the summit. The doves turned into hawks and spent much of the evening trying to peck at Trump. Most of the people on the panel are apologists for this or that communist thug—just go back and look at MSNBC’s fawning coverage of Fidel Castro’s death—but on Monday night they played hardliners. Rachel Maddow, furrowing her brow as usual, objected to Trump even holding a summit. She has finally found a communist leader she thinks America should ostracize. When Obama met with the Castro brothers, she burbled with enthusiasm. But she covered this moment of historic diplomacy like a funeral, shuddering at the thought of North Korea joining the “community” of nations.

MSNBC saw the summit as just one more occasion for obsessive anti-Trump fault-finding. The disgraced Brian Williams is still hanging around for some reason and looked like he wanted to give the summit the kind of newsy, anchormanish treatment of old, but he couldn’t pull it off in the company of jabbering Trump haters, for whom wild opining is all that counts. Plus, Williams is too reduced a figure for the cocksure Maddow to give any equal time. But Williams’s ego still asserts itself from time to time. On Monday night he fed it by asking one of the sham historians on the panel an arcane, look-at-what-I-know style question about the USS Pueblo, a ship the North Koreans captured in 1968.

The utterly contemptible Nicole Wallace, whose smugness and nastiness are beyond caricature, drove much of the shrill coverage. She was at her whiny, know-it-all worst, droning on about Trump’s lack of “preparation” and so forth. But Trump seemed perfectly at ease, getting a stiff Kim Jong Un to crack a smile. Trump had said it would only take “a minute” for him to sense if the relationship between the two countries could improve. By that measure, the summit appeared to start promisingly. Normally such friendly gestures between an American leader and an adversary would warm the hearts of liberals. Not this time. The MSNBC panel looked on coldly and muttered suspiciously about Trump’s body language.

That’s weak tea, and they know it.

A TALE OF THREE MEDIA MOMENTS:

Épater la bourgeoisie or épater le (or les) bourgeois is a French phrase that became a rallying cry for the French Decadent poets of the late 19th century including Charles Baudelaire and Arthur Rimbaud. It means to shock the bourgeoisie.

Wikipedia.

● Shot:

But executives at ABC and its parent company, the Disney Corporation, never had any interest in being perceived as “the Trump-friendly network” and in fact probably resented that the success of the Roseanne revival was driven, at least in part, by the character’s support for Trump. If Roseanne Barr was rational — and she pretty obviously isn’t — she would be aware that the suits were looking for any excuse they could to cut ties. (By the way, it didn’t matter if the show was way less political than its reputation suggested; that was the big headline coming out of the show’s return.)

Barr may have felt she was irreplaceable, but she really wasn’t. Roseanne got higher ratings and attracted 10 to 18 million viewers, but also cost more than the average television show; John Goodman and Barr were each making reportedly $250,000 per episode. “Kantar Media has estimated the show’s initial run of nine episodes over eight nights netted $45 million in ad revenue.” That’s nice, but for Disney, it’s a drop in the bucket. A generic sitcom with no-name actors will get half the ratings and cost a quarter of the price.

Former President Barack Obama and Michelle are still revered and beloved in most corners of Hollywood; when Barr said one of their best friends, Valerie Jarrett, looks like a character from Planet of the Apes, just what did Barr think was going to happen? Did she think the Obamas and all of their allies were just going to shrug it off, let it pass without response? You might hate the Obamas but give them credit for standing up for one of their own — or for having cultivated a reputation to the point where they may not have even needed to pick up the phone. Everyone at ABC and Disney understood that there would likely be consequences if they tried to give Roseanne a pass.

You think the Disney corporation wants to take any grief for an extra $45 million in ad revenue? You think advertisers would be eager to go back to the show as Barr made herself radioactive?

Roseanne — and Roseanne — Was a Gamble from the Start, Jim Geraghty, NRO, May 30, 2018.

● Chaser:

This is how you understand corporate activism. This is how you understand media double standards. When conservatives cry foul and demand accountability for Samantha Bee or Joy Reid, they’re communicating with executives and colleagues who have known and liked “Samantha” and “Joy” for years.

When you see corporations launch into political activism, that’s not a market-tested response to the popular will. More often than not, it’s an expression of collective executive purpose, reinforced by the applause of spouses and friends — the people who matter most in any person’s life.

When you see a publication like The Atlantic jettison Kevin Williamson within days of a controversial revelation — and then watch its editor-in-chief declare that he’d “die” for writer Ta-Nehisi Coates, a man who’s written his share of heartless words — you’re watching a high-school-level morality play. We love our cliques. We have little patience for the out-group, and we can always reason backwards to justify our bias.

How Samantha Bee Survives, David French, NRO today.

● Hangover: To use the language of the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg when he justified firing Williamson and keeping Coates on board, Joy Reid is very much “in the family,” too: “MSNBC breaks silence on star Joy Reid’s ‘hateful’ blog posts: ‘She has grown and evolved.’”

Just like her fellow fabulists Al Sharpton and Brian Williams. So much growth and evolving going on with the MSNBC starting lineup.

ALL BETTER NOW? Samantha Bee apologizes to Ivanka Trump: ‘I crossed a line.’

I would like to sincerely apologize to Ivanka Trump and to my viewers for using an expletive on my show to describe her last night. It was inappropriate and inexcusable. I crossed a line, and I deeply regret it.

It was “inappropriate and inexcusable” and entirely scripted and prerecorded, and TBS’s standards & practices division (aka, the network censors) allowed the show to air, presumably after previewing it. As Sean Davis tweets, “If the Turner non-reaction so far is any guide, Roseanne’s big mistake was putting her comments on Twitter instead of in her show’s script. The fact that a whole network reviewed, approved, promoted, and aired Bee’s scripted slur is the best protection Bee could ever buy,” adding that “The Roseanne and Samantha Bee scandals aren’t comparable. Roseanne wrote something on Twitter and her show was immediately cancelled. In the case of Samantha Bee, an entire network’s legal and editorial team knew exactly what Bee would say, approved it, and broadcast it.”

So it’s very likely this check-the-box apology will be enough for her to keep her job amidst the destructive malevolence that is Time-Warner-CNN-HBO. And her own promise to the New York Times at the beginning of 2017 that “We’re facing a new reality after the election. These next four years are going to require a broad coalition of straight-up decency.”

Interesting word that. Back in January, while leftists were freaking out over Trump’s “shithole” comments, Glenn wrote, “I’m amused when people who’ve spent 50 years declaring the very concept of decency repressive and outdated suddenly start with the ‘have you no decency?’ shtick. When Joseph Welch used that phrase, it was pretty much Peak Decency, or as we’re now told, a horrible regressive time of racism, homophobia, transphobia and xenophobia.”

Update: Samantha Bee Apologized for Giving Her Audience What It Demands.

Consider this: The YouTube channel for “Full Frontal” posted just that final 50-second segment containing her Ivanka rant as its own video Wednesday night. It’s now deleted, but the show clearly thought it was a winner until the backlash began.

Of course, Bee will be right back at it next week, just with less salty language.

As for the backlash to her remarks, I suspect media figures were extra-sensitive to getting busted for the dreaded double standard attack, given the swift blowback to Roseanne Barr’s racist tweet about Valerie Jarrett.

Bee should remember comedy is all about timing.

And getting paid: Autotrader.com “suspended” their sponsorship of Bee’s show; likely the network feared a repeat of social media panicking Laura Ingraham’s sponsors.

More: State Farm has also suspended its sponsorship of Bee’s show, according to showbiz site The Wrap. 

DISPATCHES FROM THE NEW CIVILITY. Samantha Bee: Ivanka Trump certainly is a feckless c*nt.

But she’ll get a pass, of course. As Allahpundit writes:

Bee is “in the family,” to borrow a memorable phrase from liberal paterfamilias Jeffrey Goldberg. But Rutz is right that Kimmel or Colbert or any male host who’s also “in the family” would have taken some heat for saying this. It wouldn’t have been a firing offense a la Roseanne’s racist joke and an apology would have been duly offered, probably in the course of blaming Trump for letting their temper momentarily cloud their good judgment. (“It’s just this war and that lying son of a bitch Johnson!”) Family can always be forgiven but there are times when they need “correction.”

Even Bee probably would have had to apologize, though, if she had leveled this at a left-wing woman, as hard to imagine as that is. If she’d called Jill Stein a see-you-next-Tuesday for pulling key votes from Hillary in the Rust Belt, some perfunctory remorse might need to be arranged. The reason Bee dropped the C-bomb, which is rare even on pay TV, is because all the stars had aligned here and she knew it — she’s in the family, she’s a woman, the policy she’s describing is deeply loathed by Democrats, and her target was not just a woman affiliated with the right but Trump’s favorite child/advisor. Given a chance to utter one of the few remaining taboo words on television with impunity, knowing the sweet, sweet clapter it would produce, how could she resist?

As the Washington Examiner noted last year, after Bee described a young Democrat recovering from cancer as having “Nazi hair,” because he happened to have attended CPAC:

In January, just weeks before then-President-elect Trump was sworn into office, Bee made a call for decency.

“We’re facing a new reality after the election. These next four years are going to require a broad coalition of straight-up decency,” Bee said in a freewheeling interview with the New York Times.

“And we’re going to need to be able to talk to people who would normally feel alienated by my show,” she added.

Sounds like a good plan. When does she start?

When the next president has a (D) after his or her name.

Related: “Tonight, Bee is scheduled to receive an award from the Television Academy for ‘advancing social change.’ Were it not for double standards…”

Increasingly, I’m convinced that we’re living in the Matrix — and the robots hired Tom Wolfe to write the source code.

ANDREW MCCARTHY: In Politicized Justice Department, Desperate Times Call for Disparate Measures.

It has now been confirmed that the Trump campaign was subjected to spying tactics under counterintelligence law — FISA surveillance, national-security letters, and covert intelligence operatives who work with the CIA and allied intelligence services. It made no difference, apparently, that there was an ongoing election campaign, which the FBI is supposed to avoid affecting; nor did it matter that the spy targets were American citizens, as to whom there is supposed to be evidence of purposeful, clandestine, criminal activity on behalf of a foreign power before counterintelligence powers are invoked.

But what was the rationale for using these spying authorities?

The fons et origo of the counterintelligence investigation was the suspicion — which our intelligence agencies assure us is a fact — that the Democratic National Committee’s server was hacked by covert Russian operatives. Without this cyber-espionage attack, there would be no investigation. But how do we know it really happened? The Obama Justice Department never took custody of the server — no subpoena, no search warrant. The server was thus never subjected to analysis by the FBI’s renowned forensics lab, and its evidentiary integrity was never preserved for courtroom presentation to a jury.

How come? Well, you see, there was an ongoing election campaign, so the Obama Justice Department figured it would be a terrible imposition to pry into the Democrats’ communications. So, yes, the entire “Russia hacked the election” narrative the nation has endured for nearly two years hinges on the say-so of CrowdStrike, a private DNC contractor with significant financial ties to the Clinton campaign.

In Investigations 101, using foreign-intelligence authorities to spy on Americans is extraordinary, while taking custody of essential physical evidence is basic. By the way, the government’s failure to ensure the evidentiary integrity of the DNC server by taking possession of it and performing its own rigorous testing on it makes it practically impossible to prosecute anyone for “colluding” in Russia’s cyber-espionage. It’s tough to prove that anyone conspired in something unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the something actually happened the way you say it happened. To do that in a courtroom, you need evidence — a confident probability analysis by your intelligence agencies won’t do.

They covered for Hillary. They spied on Trump, and then when he unexpectedly won they panicked. Now, you’ll notice, all the mad leaking to the NYT and the WaPo is defensive in nature: Smoke-blowing to try to cover their tracks. In fact a lot of people involved in this should be in jail, and I’m beginning to think some of them might actually wind up going to jail.

IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:   Hollywood Hypocrite: Alyssa Milano’s Disastrous NRA Video.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Heckled law prof: CUNY Law would have sicced cops on pro-life protest of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. But right-leaning students should act to heighten the contradictions here.

AND THERE’S THIS THING:  Hypocrisy and Double Standards.

RAISE THE CONE OF SILENCE: Watchdog finds EPA broke law by spending $43K on Scott Pruitt’s soundproof booth and not telling Congress.

In a report issued Monday, the Government Accountability Office said the agency violated the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act of 2017 when it failed to notify both House and Senate appropriations committees prior to obligating the money to install a soundproof privacy booth in Pruitt’s office.

Any office expenditure above $5,000 requires lawmakers be notified, according to the eight-page GAO report. The total cost of the soundproof booth and its installation amounted to $43,238.68.

The privacy booth cost $24,570, including delivery and assembly, according to the GAO. The remaining expenses included: “Concrete Floor Leveling” ($3,470); “Drop Ceiling Installation” ($3,360.97) “Prep and Wall Painting” ($3,350); “Removal of CCTV Equipment” ($7,978); and “Infrastructure Cabling and Wiring” ($509.71).

EPA Spokeswoman Liz Bowman said the agency would comply with the findings and alert lawmakers.

It’s important to cross all the I’s and dot all the T’s, especially when the press is out to get you.

WITHOUT DOUBLE STANDARDS, THE LEFT WOULD HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:  Obama’s illegal campaign contributions vs. Trump’s.

JEFF REYNOLDS: Leftist Double Standards: Bashing Scott Pruitt While Ignoring Obama’s EPA Scandals. “Pruitt’s transgressions pale in comparison.”

Double standards must be twice as good as regular standards, right?

IF IT WASN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THE LEFT WOULD HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: The UK Guardian’s been harvesting your data — while bashing Cambridge Analytica.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS …  Scott Pruitt slammed for spending less on travel than Obama’s EPA chiefs.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Twitter Refuses to Revoke Louis Farrakhan’s Blue Checkmark Despite Numerous Anti-Semitic Tweets.

IF IT WASN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THE HOUSE OF STEPHANOPOULOS WOULD HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Does ‘The View’ Think Pelosi Has ‘Mental Illness’ Since She Says She Hears Dead People?

The hosts of ABC’s “The View” said that Christians like Vice President Mike Pence have “mental illness” if they think Jesus talks to them – but, do they feel the same way about Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) repeated claims she’s heard dead peoples’ voices?

On the Feb. 13, 2018 episode of “The View,” the show’s hosts mocked Pence’s Christian faith, leading host Joy Behar to declare the vice president mentally ill.

* * * * * * *

But, the liberal media looked the other way when video surfaced of Democrat Pelosi describing her encounter with ghosts back in August of 2012. An Aug. 12, 2012 CNSNews.com story recounts Pelosi’s claim she not only heard – but also felt – dead women sitting in a chair with her:

Also getting a pass from the DNC-MSM on listening for voices from beyond: “God, if you think I’m supposed to run, you gotta tell me, and it has to be so clear that not even I can miss it.’ And I haven’t gotten that,” Oprah tells People magazine today.

BUT TRUMP IS LOWERING THE TONE OF OUR POLITICS: Democratic candidate Randy Bryce once used Bristol Palin’s pregnancy announcement to suggest she sell condoms.

Randy Bryce, the viral Democrat running to “repeal and replace” House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., in 2018, once used Bristol Palin’s pregnancy announcement as an opportunity to suggest she sell condoms.

After Palin announced her second unwed pregnancy in 2015, Bryce sent her a tweet that read, “I’d suggest a career selling condoms instead of abstinence. Looking for help @TrojanCondoms?”

Palin had previously advocated on behalf of abstinence.

Bryce has secured endorsements from a number of progressive politicians and organizations, including NARAL and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. He frequently lends support to women’s causes on Twitter, from the Women’s March to birth control mandates.

While Bryce’s tweet to Palin, flagged on Tuesday by Peter Hasson of the Daily Caller, does not amount to a major scandal, those sentiments would not be tolerated by his feminist supporters if there were an R next to his name rather than a D.

If it weren’t for double standards, they’d have no standards at all.

WITHOUT DOUBLE STANDARDS THEY WOULDN’T HAVE ANY STANDARDS AT ALL: Environmentalist Millionaire Candidate Heavily Invested in Fossil Fuels.

Millionaire congressional hopeful Dean Phillips invested as much as $2 million in energy companies even as he criticized Rep. Erik Paulsen (R., Minn.) for supporting fossil fuel development.

Phillips, a Minnesota liquor heir, is campaigning as an environmentalist in a bid to win a crowded Democratic primary and unseat Paulsen, a five-term congressman. He has supported a massive carbon tax as well as a shift away from automobiles to cut down on emissions.

“I care about the environment and I’d like to see fewer cars burning fossil fuels,” he said at a May townhall with voters. “Anybody who argues that a carbon tax would kill jobs is simply, fundamentally misguided.”

Phillips’s financial records show that the environmentally conscious candidate has no problem profiting off of automakers and fossil fuels. He has invested between $780,000 and $2 million in energy companies and major car companies. He held stocks valued between $65,000 and $150,000 in Energy Transfer Partners, owners of the Dakota Access Pipeline that has inspired numerous protests and arrests from radical environmental activists.

Well, what else is he supposed to do now that the “clean” energy crony bonanza is drying up?

THE DOUBLE STANDARD FOR TRUMP SPOKESWOMAN SARAH SANDERS:

Liberal male columnists have written about Sanders in terms that, if applied to a progressive woman, would be recognized as despicable and borderline misogynistic. In the most infamous example, Los Angeles Times writer David Horsey called her a “slightly chunky soccer mom” in a scathing column. It was so clearly offensive that he was forced to issue an apology: “I want to apologize to Times readers — and to Sarah Huckabee Sanders — for a description that was insensitive and failed to meet the standards of our newspaper. I’ve removed the offending description.”

Just when you think a media establishment that has lost its collective mind, credibility, and sense of decency since last November can’t go any lower, it does. These sexist, cruel taunts have little to do with Sanders’s job performance or making sure the American public gets the facts from a sometimes fact-averse White House. Viewed from a wider lens, the treatment of Sarah Sanders has little to do with Sanders at all. The vicious ridicule is directed at all conservative women — particularly women from the South — whom the Left will never forgive for helping elect Donald Trump. It’s on a continuum with attacks against conservative women such as Kellyanne Conway, Ivanka Trump, Melania Trump, and Betsy DeVos. The hatred is aimed at all female Trump voters — Sanders is simply a proxy. A year that began with faux feminists participating in the Women’s March, where aggrieved women loudly pledged to defend their sisterhood against sexist bullying or attacks, is ending with a whimper.

As all the best people who hold themselves out as progressive intellectuals believing in hope, tolerance and diversity told me about Sarah Palin in 2008, “She’s not a woman, she’s a Republican.”

SOME ARE UNHAPPY ABOUT THE LACK OF A DOUBLE STANDARD: Under New Civility Rules, Facebook Is Banning Women For Calling Men ‘Scum.’ “When asked why a statement such as ‘men are scum’ would violate community standards, a Facebook spokesperson said that the statement was a threat and hate speech toward a protected group and so it would rightfully be taken down.”

Related: “I don’t support what Facebook is doing, but I do think the use of the word ‘scum’ warrants a historical note on ‘SCUM’ — The Society for Cutting Up Men. The author of ‘The SCUM Manifesto,’ Valerie Solanas wasn’t joking. . . . I wrote ‘Valerie Solanas wasn’t joking,’ because she did go out and shoot Andy Warhol.”

DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY HAVE THEM:  Celebrities Love Free Speech! (If It Hurts Trump).

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Adriana Cohen: Diversity, inclusiveness fraud in academia.

INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY: The Left Tries To Politicize Charlottesville, And Exposes Its Own Double Standards. “When a violent event fits a liberal narrative it sparks wails of outrage, makes the front page news, gets talked about 24/7 on cable news. But if it doesn’t fit that narrative — for example, the targeting of Republicans by a deranged liberal, or vicious attacks by leftists on Trump supporters, death threats to conservatives, etc. — the left can barely muster any reaction at all. Obama never mentioned the anti-cop sentiment fomented by Black Lives Matter — with an assist from Obama himself — in his brief statement after five police officers were assassinated in Dallas. Obama did find room in those remarks to mention racist cops. Did anyone on the left complain?”

THOUGHTS FROM THE INSTA-WIFE ON DOUBLE STANDARDS.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Elizabeth Warren Again Calls for ‘Equal Pay,’ Ignores Pay Gap in Own Office: Warren’s women staffers earned 71 cents for each dollar earned by men in 2016.

YES, THESE ARE THE STAKES:

But our childish and entitled political class continues to play with fire. Because it’s childish and entitled.

Related: Peter Berkowitz: The People vs. The Political Professionals. “A satisfactory argument for transferring more power to today’s elites would require addressing the people’s legitimate anxieties about the professional class. These include policy incompetence ranging from mismanagement of the economy and immigration to botching diplomacy and the conduct of war; politicization of the administrative state as illustrated by IRS targeting of conservatives during Obama’s first term; and the elite media’s use of double standards in reporting and opining about left and right. Underlying it all is the corruption of liberal education, which has become boot camp for progressivism, and of graduate and professional schools, which provide advance training in the progressive exercise of power. To play the vital role contemplated for them by our constitutional system, intellectual and political elites have a long way to go in regaining the people’s trust.”

Indeed they do. Remember, Hitler didn’t happen because of Hitler. Hitler happened because of Weimar, which was the failure of the people in charge of the liberal political order to maintain a liberal political order because they were weak, entitled, corrupt, and incompetent.

UPDATE: The Guardian, of all places, has something useful on this:

Even as their world came apart, the bankers clung to denial. By August 2007, the flagship hedge fund of Wall Street’s most prestigious firm was tanking fast – and what explanation came from the man at Goldman Sachs? “We were seeing things that were 25-standard deviation moves, several days in a row.” The bank was getting hit by events that were only meant to happen once every 100,000 years – and they were happening every day of the week. Given a choice between blaming their models or reality, Goldman’s bosses held the world at fault.

You know the rest because, a decade later, you and I are still paying for it. How the banks died, the world economy collapsed and most of us got poorer. How the financiers, mainstream economists and regulators were so detached from reality that they swore blind that such a catastrophe was impossible – even while it was under way.

Their reputation has never recovered. And as an economics journalist, I look across at politics and see the same process at work. Brexit, Donald Trump, Jeremy Corbyn: time after time, the political class has completely failed to understand the world they were governing, policing and analysing. Allow me to be blunt: our political crisis is also a crisis for our political class. And it is one from which I doubt they can recover.

At each major fork in the road, they have sped off down the wrong turning, while decrying the other as unimaginable. Each time, they have crashed.

We need to take a serious look at how we select these people. Our current method is not working.

IF THE MEDIA DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY WOULDN’T HAVE STANDARDS AT ALL: Questions about Trump’s alleged “I fired Comey the nut job” remark.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Silence from Hill, Liz on Maher speaks volumes.

We just had a vivid, striking example of what Zoob and King were talking about, courtesy of two faux feminists who shamelessly masquerade as heroines of their gender and guardians of our culture.

Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren would have us see them as they see themselves, towering women whose values and principles cannot be compromised.

So it was not surprising that neither could contain her horror when Donald Trump was heard making vulgar, sexist comments in a private conversation.

Both had bully pulpits and wasted no time using them to clobber him.

Then HBO’s foul-mouthed Bill Maher, looking for new ways to tear down the president, reached to the bottom of the barrel to imply he was having an incestuous relationship with his daughter Ivanka.

Anyone with a modicum of decency understood Maher had crossed a line; ideologies notwithstanding, nothing could justify such depravity.

But because it was aimed at Trump, not a peep was heard from Hillary or Liz, suggesting Maher’s smuttiness didn’t ruffle their feathers a bit.

It also suggested they assume their constituents are too superficial to connect the dots and see them for who and what they really are.

Here’s hoping they’re wrong.

We’ll see.

HEY, DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE STILL STANDARDS YOU GUYS: Democrats Are Applying Litmus Tests To Gorsuch Their Favorite Justices Wouldn’t Pass.

CBS’S SCOTT PELLEY LOSES A FIGHT RIGGED IN HIS FAVOR: Ever since it was created by Don Hewitt in 1968, CBS’s Sixty Minutes has functioned as a sort of ritual kabuki for its audiences: it made stars of its left-leaning investigative journalists, who would grill the offending conservative politician or businessman of the week. By the mid-’80s, the show’s formula was summed up brilliantly in the classic parodies by Martin Short’s Nathan Thurm character on Saturday Night Live, who would be drenched in sweat and chain-smoking Marlboro 100s by the time he was done attempting to survive the hammering from the crusading journalist on the other side of the desk.

But CBS made its bones during the days when, as Rob Long wrote of NBC’s Johnny Carson, “There were three big channels—and maybe an old movie on one of those fuzzy UHF stations—so if you didn’t like what was on, you were out of luck. Network television didn’t compete with cable channels or Hulu or Amazon Prime. It competed with silence.”

And such lack of competition allowed the networks’ news divisions to create self-contained worlds where they could absolutely control the dialogue, as Walter Cronkite did throughout his career at CBS, while signing off each night “And that’s the way it is.” His successor’s career at CBS ended there with a Sixty Minutes segment…well, we all know how it ended there, right?

Which brings us to CBS’s Scott Pelley and his recent interview with Mike Cernovich, whom Breitbart.com’s Ezra Dulis describes as “a lawyer, independent blogger/author/filmmaker, and a dominant voice on Twitter,” and whom BuzzFeed describes as “a troll.” The latter Website of course is home of the infamous Trump golden showers with Russian hookers story and an editor who believes covering Trump “sometimes…means publishing unverified information in a transparent way that informs our users of its provenance, its impact and why we trust or distrust it.”

Whatever Cernovich’s excesses, assuming this transcript of the full unedited interview is accurate, it’s fascinating much more for what it reveals about Pelley, watched by six and a half million viewers on the CBS Evening News, than for Cernovich. Here’s how the transcript begins:

Scott Pelley: How would you describe what you do?

Mike Cernovich: I’m a lawyer, author, documenter, filmmaker, and journalist.

Scott Pelley: And how would you describe your website?

Mike Cernovich: Edgy, controversial content that goes against the dominant narrative.

Scott Pelley: What’s the dominant narrative?

Mike Cernovich: The dominant narrative is that there are good guys and there are bad guys. The good guys are liberals. Everybody on the right is a bad guy. Let’s find a way to make everybody look bad. Let’s tie marginal figures who have no actual influence to anybody we cannot overwrite. That’s the narrative.

Scott Pelley: That’s not a narrative I’m familiar with. Who’s narrative is that?

In 2008, Pelley compared global warming skeptics to Holocaust deniers. Ben Rhodes, who until January was Obama’s deputy national security advisor, is the brother of CBS News president David Rhodes. 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.” Katie Couric, whom Pelley succeeded as Evening News host, read a poem on her broadcast to shill for the passing of Obamacare, and after leaving CBS had a Rathergate-like moment of her own, attempting to marginalize gun owners.

But back to the transcript of Pelley and Cernovich, where eventually, the hunter is captured by his prey:  

Scott Pelley: You wrote in August a story about Hillary Clinton’s medical condition the headlines said, “Hillary Clinton has Parkinson’s disease. Position confirms.” That’s quite a headline.

Mike Cernovich: Yeah, Dr. Ted Noel had se-sent a story to me anonymously, that I checked out, analyzing her medical condition. And –

Scott Pelley: It isn’t true.

Mike Cernovich: How do you know?

Scott Pelley: Well, she doesn’t seem to have any signs of Parkinson’s disease.

Mike Cernovich: She had a seizure and froze up walking into her motorcade that day caught by a citizen journalist.

Scott Pelley: Did you, well, she had pneumonia. I mean –

Mike Cernovich: How do you know?

Scott Pelley: Well, because that’s what was reported.

Mike Cernovich: By whom? Who told you that?

Scott Pelley: Well, the campaign told us that.

Mike Cernovich: Why would you trust a campaign?

To ask the question is to answer it. In a post headlined “‘Shamefully Stupid’: CBS’s Scott Pelley Loses a Fight Rigged in His Favor,” Breitbart.com’s Ezra Dulis adds in response, “Pelley has no answer for those six words — ‘Why would you trust the campaign’ — as his entire profession goes berserk with literal-minded fact checks for every tweet from President Trump. Pelley also seems to forget the fakery that Clinton World attempted hours before its pneumonia statement — with the candidate smiling and waving outside her daughter’s apartment, greeting a little girl, and assuring reporters everything was a-okay.”

More:

Mike Cernovich: So let’s be, let’s be honest with one another, which is that you are reporting that the Hillary Clinton campaign-

Scott Pelley: I didn’t report that she had Parkinson’s disease.

Mike Cernovich: You just told me she’s healthy though. Based on what was told to you by the campaign. See? That’s what I’m saying about the double standards which is I don’t take anything Hillary Clinton’s going to say at all as true. I’m not going to take her on her word. The media says we’re not going to take Donald Trump on his word. And that’ why we are on these different universes.

Scott Pelley: Why should anyone take you on your word?

Mike Cernovich: Oh, you should always double-check. You should always fact check. And if people don’t agree with me, people express that disagreement, and I’m completely, completely open to criticism.

Insert Glenn Reynolds’ Rathergate-era comments about the positive nature of the Internet being a low-trust environment here. Not to mention Michael Crichton’s Gell-Man Amnesia Effect.

Let’s give Pelley the exit quote: “Well, the benefit of intermediaries is having experienced editors check things out and research people. Check the facts before it goes out to the public. You don’t do any of that.”

Mary Mapes could not be reached for comment.

UPDATE: “Was Pelley not around in 2004?” John Hinderaker asks at Power Line. “Has he forgotten how stupid that refrain sounded then? (‘Layers and layers of fact-checkers’) Does he not realize how false it rings today? We have been here before: the liberal media are in a panic because their authority is being challenged. It must be worse now, though, than it was in 2004. Then, Time’s refrain was a relatively benign ‘Who owns the truth?’ Now, they ask, ‘Is truth dead?’ We can translate: ‘Is the liberal news media monopoly dead?’”