McCarthy Makes AP Reporter Eat Her Phony Narrative Words

If “unexpected” was the left-wing media’s favorite expression during the Obama years, then “without evidence” is their current go-to.

In the Obama days, whenever something negative happened that anyone who wasn’t under the spell of the Lightbringer could see coming a mile away, Big Media would say it was “unexpected.” Headlines commonly said things like “Employment Numbers Drop Unexpectedly” or “Gas Prices Increase Unexpectedly.”

Then the Big Unexpected happened and Donald Trump won the 2016 election. Worse, the outsider began revealing the secret truths about the Swamp. Suddenly, every claim Orange Man Bad made was “without evidence.” Don’t believe me? Type “Trump claims” and “without evidence'” into your favorite browser and see how many stories come up. (For bonus points, look at how many times Trump turned out to be right.)

It got so commonplace that back in 2020, NPR published an explainer for its audience members who had apparently been commenting on how often the outlet attached the derogatory phrase to everything Trump said:

Over the last week, NPR listeners and readers noted the shorthand use of “without evidence,” a number of times, as well as several other stories where a fact check lacked force or was altogether missing.

“Without evidence” shows up a lot in conjunction with things Trump says. I’ve previously pointed out that it’s insufficient when reporting on the administration’s claims that mail-in ballots are vulnerable to counterfeiting. NPR reported in July, “the president took a softer stance on [masks], saying without evidence: ‘In theory, you don’t need the mask,’ but acknowledging that he was growing more comfortable with wearing them.”

The article goes on to analyze different circumstances before concluding that “without evidence” was appropriate when quoting “politicians and the pundits.” Of course, we all know which politicians and pundits would get the doubt hammer brought down on their comments.

Flash forward to today, and the media has been going into overdrive to slap the “without evidence” repudiation on the growing cloud of smog surrounding the Biden Crime Family. Just yesterday, I exposed how CNN was among the media lapdogs who reported on a “leaked” directive from the White House, telling them how to delegitimize Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy’s explosive impeachment inquiry announcement.

NOTE: You can read that report here: AYFKM? CNN Breaks Story About Secret White House Media Directive to Bash Impeachment — to Bash Impeachment

I don’t know who needs to hear this, but sworn testimony is evidence. So it’s great to see Republicans grow a spine and push back on the Left-wing media’s relentless application of loaded, inaccurate labels to their efforts. Today’s moment of zen occurred when McCarthy politely challenged an AP reporterette on her claims that the inquiry was being conducted for no real reason. Enjoy the video (two angles are available below; the transcript follows.)

Kevin McCarthy calls out a reporter for nonchalantly dismissing concerns about Joe Biden's involvement in Hunter Biden's foreign business dealings.

"Do you have any concern?"

"Have you asked the White House ANY questions?!"

"You can't answer that?" pic.twitter.com/qWEJRjym7X

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) September 14, 2023

A second angle shows the reporter:

AP reported that McCarthy's impeachment inquiry was launched "without evidence.” Here’s McCarthy forcing an AP reporter to admit that there was lots of evidence to support an impeachment inquiry. pic.twitter.com/lgzU1BNNlE

— Arthur Schwartz (@ArthurSchwartz) September 14, 2023

Here’s the transcript:

REPORTER: Congressman Issa came out and said that both Chairman Jordan and Comer were not able to present anything that is an impeachable offense at this point. Is that an assessment that you share?

MCCARTHY: You know, an impeachment inquiry is not impeachment. So, what an impeachment inquiry is to do is to get answers to questions. Are you concerned about all the stuff that was just recently learned? Do you have any concern? Have you asked the White House any questions?

REPORTER: Yes.

MCCARTHY: Okay. Do you agree that, do you believe the president lied to the American public when he said he had never talked to his son about business dealings? Yes or not? It’s alright.

REPORTER: I can’t answer that.

MCCARTHY: You can’t answer that? Do you believe when they said the president went on conference calls? Do you believe that happened?

REPORTER: That’s what the testimony says.

MCCARTHY: Okay, do you believe the president went to Café Milano and had dinner with the clients of Hunter Biden, who believes he got those clients because he was selling the brand?

REPORTER: That’s what the testimony says.

MCCARTHY: Okay, do you believe Hunter Biden, when you saw the video of him driving a Porsche, that he got $143,000 to buy that Porsche the next day? Do you believe the $3 million from the Russian oligarch that was transferred to the shell companies that the Bidens controlled after the dinner from Cafe Milano took place?

REPORTER: That’s what the testimony says.

MCCARTHY: Okay, then I go back: do you think the president lied?

REPORTER: But is that an impeachable, is lying an impeachable offense?

MCCARTHY: Well, you want to know — I’m not saying impeachment. All I’m saying is, I would like to know the answers to these questions. The American public would like to know, and that’s what an impeachment inquiry provides.