www.newsbusters.org
Washington Examiner’s ‘Liberal Media Scream’ With the MRC’s Assessment
Since late January of 2012, the Washington Examiner’s Paul Bedard has once a week featured a “Mainstream Media Scream” selection in his “Washington Secrets” column. For each pick, usually posted online on Monday, I provide an explanation and recommend a “scream” rating (scale of one to five).
This post contains the “Liberal Media Screams” starting in January 2023.
> For 2021 and 2022, for all of 2020. For all of 2019. For all of 2018. (Re-named “Liberal Media Scream” as of June 11, 2018.) “Mainstream Media Screams” for:
> July-December 2017 posts; January through June 2017; July to December 2016; for January to June 2016; for July to December 2015; for January to June 2015. (2012-2014 are featured on MRC.org: For 2014; for June 17, 2013 through the end of 2013. And for January 31, 2012 through June 11, 2013.)
Check Bedard’s “Washington Secrets” blog for the latest choice and his other Washington insider posts. Each week, this page will be updated with Bedard’s latest example of the worst bias of the week.
(For more of the worst liberal media bias, browse the Media Research Center's Notable Quotables with compilations of the latest outrageous, sometimes humorous, quotes in the liberal media.)
■ New on October 7: Liberal Media Scream: Andrea Mitchell whines men and business supporting Trump
See the posting on the Washington Examiner's site where you can watch the video and read Baker's assessment. A week later, Bedard's article will be posted here.
■ September 30: Liberal Media Scream: Latinos like Trump because they ‘want to be white’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features a key MSNBC Latina guest who smeared her fellow Latinos with a racist anti-Trump rant on Sunday.
On The Sunday Show with Jonathan Capehart, NPR’s Maria Hinojosa ripped Latinos for abandoning the Democratic Party.
Reacting to a new NBC News/Telemundo poll that found Vice President Kamala Harris losing support from Hispanic voters, Hinojosa said, “Latinos want to be white. They want to be with the cool kids.” The 63-year-old Hispanic journalist apparently isn’t up with what’s cool on social media.
From The Sunday Show With Jonathan Capehart on Sunday:
JONATHAN CAPEHART: So she has a 14-point lead, but it has been shrinking after each consecutive presidential election from 2016. Why is that? Why is the Democratic share of the Latino vote shrinking?
MARIA HINOJOSA: And what I said to you when we asked the question was, Latinos want to be white. They want to be with the cool kids. They want to be — I’m asking Latinos all the time, and they just say, ‘Well … he’s such a good businessman.’ It’s, like, no, he’s not. He had bankruptcies. But they don’t want to be identified with all of those other immigrants that Donald Trump speaks so badly of, including me, as a Mexican immigrant. So they’re, like, ‘We’d rather, let’s be with him.’
But those numbers? They could cost Kamala Harris the election. Everything that I’ve been saying that Latinos could push her over the top, these are the numbers that could also take her down.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Hinojosa reflects the very worst of identity politics. Vote only for liberal Democrats — or you are a race traitor. The fact a solid majority of Hispanics support Kamala Harris isn’t good enough for Hinojosa. Every Latino who dares stray from the party line must be shunned because such betrayal could cost the Democrat the election.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE Screams
■ September 23: Liberal Media Scream: PBS says Harris a ‘happy warrior’ ready to ‘slap’ Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the latest PBS effort to portray Vice President Kamala Harris as a joyful and happy warrior taking on evil in challenging former President Donald Trump for the presidency.
On PBS NewsHour, MSNBC and Washington Post lefty pundit Jonathan Capehart declared Harris as a part of the “culture” willing to fight Trump.
“She’s part of what’s driving this culture that I think you said will slap Donald Trump in the face. It’s slapping him in the face now,” Capehart said, adding, “She, in her entire career, has been the happy warrior about helping people and leaving aside the negativity. It just happens to hit at the right person at the right time.”
From Friday’s PBS NewsHour, picking up after anchor Geoff Bennett cited David Brooks’s column, “How a Cultural Shift Favors Harris.”
GEOFF BENNETT: Jonathan, that word joy, Kamala Harris, Vice President Harris, when she sat down with the three reporters from the National Association of Black Journalists today [actually on Tuesday], one of them asked her about how she views attacks on her joyful warrior approach. And she defended it. And she said people will try to sometimes use your best asset against you. What do you make of that and this notion that she’s benefitting from a cultural wave?
JONATHAN CAPEHART: I don’t think she’s benefitting from a cultural — yes, she is, and I read your column, David. It’s not so much that she’s riding — she’s — like see this wave coming and she’s riding. No, she is part of the culture. And that’s why I think when she became the top of the ticket, everyone marveled at how quickly the light switch flipped. That can — and it happened so organically in a very dramatic fashion.
That, to me, says you can’t manufacture that. And she was able to do that because she is the culture. She is part of the culture. She’s part of what’s driving this culture that I think you said will slap Donald Trump in the face. It’s slapping him in the face now, which is why I think he’s so discombobulated.
He doesn’t know how to deal with her. I think it’s why the polls are — the momentum is moving in her direction. And to your point about happy warrior, and David is right, this is the way the vice president has always been, which sort of reinforces what you’re saying. It’s not that she has met up with the culture. She, in her entire career, has been the happy warrior about helping people and leaving aside the negativity.
It just happens to hit at the right person, at the right time.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “What a joke. Harris ‘is the culture’ and has been the embodiment of ‘the happy warrior about helping people’ for her ‘entire career’? She changes her culture and accent with every crowd she addresses. It must be nice to be a liberal Democrat, where supposed journalists not only endorse the glowingly upbeat imagery you want but celebrate it without any critical thinking over whether it is phony and then promote it as a genuine compelling life story.”
Rating: Five out of FIVE screams
■ September 15: No Liberal Media Scream this week
■ September 9: Liberal Media Scream: Team Harris calls US ‘incredibly backwards’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features a key Team Harris supporter decrying America as “incredibly backwards” for electing only men as president.
Trump traitor Alyssa Farah Griffin, the “conservative” on The View, was discussing the debate between her ex-boss, former President Donald Trump, and Vice President Kamala Harris on CNN’s State of the Union when she blasted America.
“We’re incredibly backwards as a country that we’ve never had a female president,” she said.
The comment clashed with one of the key themes of the Harris campaign: criticizing Trump for claiming that America is in a shambles and spinning backward under the leadership of Harris and President Joe Biden.
From Sunday’s State of the Union:
ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: And the reality is, you shouldn’t underestimate Donald Trump. He has now done more presidential race — debates, I should say — than anyone in history, and he’s somebody who came up on television. He’s a communicator. He’s somebody who is used to speaking to a mass audience. If he can stay focused and he stays to the core issues: economy, border, it’s a good night for him. But we’ve also seen the world in which he shouts out the Proud Boys, or he talks about Hannibal Lecter, or he gets into name calling. That could go against him. To Kamala Harris, she needs to look presidential. We’re incredibly backwards as a country that we’ve never had a female president. So, for a lot of people seeing somebody up there who’s a woman who might be our first female president, she needs to seem commanding. She cannot get too in the weeds on policy. She needs to talk about it but can’t get sidetracked. Big picture. How will you demonstrably make people’s lives better? How will you turn the economy around? If she can do that and not get rattled by Donald Trump, it’ll be a good night for her.
Jorge Bonilla, a news analyst with the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “One can very easily imagine Griffin uttering this same nonsensical hot take on ABC’s The View, with great care so as not to get yelled at by Sunny Hostin and before whatever box-wine-fueled nonsense sputtered by Ana Navarro. Given when a major party first nominated a woman to the top of the ballot, Griffin is calling America ‘backwards’ for committing the sin of electing Donald Trump to the presidency — a presidency that she served. This Trump-deranged nonsense is what passes for ‘analysis’ at CNN.”
Rating: Four out of Five SCREAMS.
■ September 2: No Liberal Media Scream this week
■ August 26: Liberal Media Scream: ‘CNN’ has become a laugh line
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features talker Bill Maher mocking CNN and its hosts for viewing the lefty cable network as politically centrist, citing unending “gushing” over Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential nomination acceptance speech the night before.
“I watched from 8:09 to 8:23. There was just gushing about how great a speech it was,” the talk show host and comedian told CNN host Kaitlan Collins. He said it wasn’t for 15 minutes until “Lonely Scott” Jennings, one of the few conservatives paid by CNN, got a word in.
“It was like 5-to-1. It always looks like 5-to-1,” Maher said of how CNN stacks liberals against conservatives.
Collins, who a week ago faced laughter from Stephen Colbert’s audience when he called CNN fair, tried to defend the network, but Maher wasn’t hearing it. “It’s, kind of, like, the same as The View. It’s like, it’s almost better to have nobody there like MSNBC,” he dissed.
From Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO on Friday:
BILL MAHER: You made press because you were on Stephen Colbert’s show, and he said something like you guys at CNN just report the news straight, and the crowd burst into laughter.
That tells you a lot, doesn’t it? How do you guys think you are doing in that arena of, like, this is a terribly divided country. We are not only politicized, a lot of people hate the other side. And CNN, in my view, should be the place where both sides can watch. How do you think you’re doing with that?
COLLINS: CNN is the place where both sides can watch. And I think, you know, my show is evidence of that. We have lawmakers on from both parties.
MAHER: I’m talking about the people on CNN, and I know what the conservative side of America thinks, and I don’t blame them. I watched Kamala’s speech last night. It ended at 8:09, or, I guess, 11:09 in the East. It wasn’t until 11:23 ‘till the one conservative guy, what’s his name?
COLLINS: Scott Jennings.
MAHER: ‘Lonely Scott,’ I call him.
COLLINS: David Urban was there too.
MAHER: Wait a second. Wait a second. I watched from 8:09 to 8:23. There was just gushing about how great a speech it was — and I think she did fine. I didn’t think it was as good as they were making it out to be, but if I’m a conservative in America, and I’m watching CNN, just for the straight middle-of-the-road, that’s what I hear for 15 minutes is “it’s great” and then Lonely Scott. When you see — it does look like tokenism. It’s, kind of, like, the same as The View, it’s like, it’s almost better to have nobody there like MSNBC.
COLLINS: I think it was a Democratic convention. They turned to Democrats, people like David Axelrod, who ran successful presidential Democratic campaigns first, for their analysis of this, and I don’t think that you can say that CNN is anything but fair.
I mean, look at, we covered President Biden’s exit from the race very closely, the pressure on him to get out, and I feel like I could speak with authority on this — I’m from Alabama. I’m from a very red state. I have very conservative family, a lot of them are Trump voters. They watch my show every night, and I think they know that they can trust me, that we call bulls*** on every side, not just whatever leaning our audience may be, and I think that’s something that people want more of is to hear from that.
I think Scott’s voice is really important, but I think other voices are important to hear from, and everyone who was speaking last night, it’s not like they were all Democrats. I mean, Dana Bash, Jake Tapper, Abby Philip, all my amazing colleagues giving analysis.
MAHER: They come across that way. They came across that way in a moment like that. It was like 5-to-1. It always looks like 5-to-1.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “It’s hard to believe Kaitlan Collins is really that clueless about the ingrained left-wing, anti-conservative agenda of CNN. That a traditionally left-of-center comedian recognizes that reality, to say nothing of an audience in Manhattan laughing at calling CNN objective, should give Collins pause. The fact that it doesn’t shows just how ideologically blind are Collins and her CNN colleagues are. To them, nothing is more important than keeping Donald Trump out of the White House.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE Screams
■ August 19: Liberal Media Scream: Media now correcting MAGA, not just Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the media’s latest line of attack on former President Donald Trump, MAGA, and anybody who voices support for the GOP presidential nominee.
It comes from the weekend public affairs show hosts who apparently feel compelled to have the last word when featuring Trump or a Trump supporter. One offensive pick came from Face the Nation moderator Margaret Brennan, who is also co-moderating the Oct. 1 vice presidential debate.
She gratuitously hit Trump after he called Vice President Kamala Harris’s plan for price controls “communist.” Brennan promised: “We’ll tell you why that is wrong.” But after a break, she never told her viewers what was false or wrong about the Trump quote or even prompted any guest to correct Trump.
Then there was Martha Raddatz, hosting ABC’s This Week. Not only did she open the show with a cheer for Harris, but in reporting shown later, she featured a black woman who said she was leaning toward voting for Trump. “Trump’s rhetoric has clearly had an effect on her in an astonishing way,” said Raddatz, whose fact-checking about race didn’t sit well with the black woman. “There was no convincing her otherwise,” she said.
From the top of Sunday’s Face the Nation on CBS:
MARGARET BRENNAN: I’m Margaret Brennan in Washington, and this week on Face the Nation, Democrats head to their convention in Chicago as inflation cools and the political back-and-forth over economic policies intensifies. With the presidential contest lineup set to be formally locked in this week, both sides turn their attention to issue No. 1 on the minds of the voters: the economy and inflation.
KAMALA HARRIS: I will go after the bad actors, and I will work to pass the first-ever federal ban on price-gauging [sic] on food.
DONALD TRUMP: A lot of people are very devastated by what’s happened with inflation and all of the other things. But they say it’s the most important subject. I’m not sure it is. But they say it’s the most important — inflation is the most important, but that’s part of economy.
BRENNAN: The former president’s prescription is twofold.
TRUMP: Vote Trump and your incomes will soar.
BRENNAN: And a new line of false attack on Vice President Harris.
TRUMP: Kamala went full communist. You heard that? She went full communist. She wants to destroy our country after causing catastrophic inflation.
BRENNAN: We’ll tell you why that’s wrong and how the voters see the candidates’ handling of the economy in our new CBS News poll.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Welcome to the world of establishment media playing speech police, deciding whose rhetoric is so over the line that their delicate viewers must be warned that it is ‘false’ and/or ‘wrong’ without any subsequent justification offered for the effort to discredit the candidate. I await her equal vigilance with Kamala Harris or Tim Walz claims about how the ‘fascist’ Trump will ‘end democracy,’ ‘destroy NATO’ or ‘cut’ Social Security.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE Screams
■ August 12: Liberal Media Scream: PBS anchor falsely claims ‘no evidence’ of Walz’s stolen valor
(Washington Examiner post)
Imagine if a Republican military hero, say, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), lied about the high points of his career in the U.S. Marine Corps while running for vice president.
The media would be looking at every word he spoke on his career and displaying his misstatements and lies on the front pages of every newspaper.
But with Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), the Democratic vice presidential pick, the media have decided to look past his long list of fake claims about serving in “war” and Afghanistan while in the National Guard.
What’s more, some even claim that there is no evidence of his fabrications.
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features PBS New Hour anchor Amna Nawaz in the no-evidence camp. On Friday, for example, she said Vance has “no evidence” of his claims against Walz despite nonstop postings by amateur fact-checkers on social media.
She said, “This is so reminiscent of that swiftboating attack on John Kerry back in 2004,” noting that former President Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Chris LaCivita, was behind the swiftboat attacks. She asked, “Why run with these attacks when there’s no evidence for what they’re saying right now?”
Guest Eliana Johnson, editor-in-chief of the Washington Free Beacon, countered, “There’s no question Tim Walz has padded and inflated his resume.” To which Nawaz demanded: “In what way specifically?”
From Friday’s PBS News Hour, in which Johnson was joined by Jonathan Capehart, associate editor of the Washington Post:
AMNA NAWAZ: While we’ve seen Mr. Trump continue with personal attacks and kind of veering way off message, we’ve also seen from Sen. Vance focusing now on Tim Walz’s military career. This is a new line of attack we’ve seen open up from Republicans. We know Mr. Walz served in the Army National Guard for 24 years before retiring. And we’ve heard Vance attack him in this way from time to time.
SEN. J.D. VANCE: I did it honorably, and I’m very proud of my service. When Tim Walz was asked by his country to go to Iraq, you know what he did? He dropped out of the Army and allowed his unit to go without him.
AMNA NAWAZ: Eliana, this is so reminiscent of that swiftboating attack on John Kerry back in 2004. We know the same man is behind it. He’s running the Trump campaign now, Chris LaCivita. Why run with these attacks when there’s no evidence for what they’re saying right now?
ELIANA JOHNSON: Well, I do think there’s some evidence for what they’re saying, but let’s look at it in two parts. One is the issue on the merits, where I think there’s no question Tim Walz has padded and inflated his resume. And the second is his military resume.
NAWAZ: In what way specifically?
JOHNSON: Well, J.D. Vance mentioned that the timing of his retirement is suspect, and I think it would take a little bit longer to talk about the timeline of that. But the —
NAWAZ: He’s alleging that he retired because his unit was being deployed.
JOHNSON: Right. He knew that they were going to be called up. He had gotten a warning that they were going to be called up, and he said in a press release for his campaign, if called up, I have a duty to serve. He didn’t do that.
It’s clear he has — he’s inflated this, and he’s made it a part of his biography. By the way, this has been an issue in every single one of Walz’s campaigns. But, separately, I think there’s a question of how significant is this going to be down the road? You mentioned the swiftboat veterans. Those attacks were effective, but they were levied against the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party, John Kerry, back in 2004 —
NAWAZ: They were also discredited.
JOHNSON: — which is, which is different.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Nawaz illustrates what is so wrong with the modern media in how they reflexively take sides at the very moment they think they are acting as tough journalists getting at the truth. Instead of pursuing those in the Harris-Walz camp to determine the truth about Walz’s military record, she presumes the Republicans are in the wrong and so their supposedly false claims must be discredited. It proves which side of the political divide she sits.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE Screams
■ August 5: Liberal Media Scream: ABC’s Rachel Scott doubles down on Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features ABC’s Rachel Scott, fresh from zinging former President Donald Trump at a black media convention, whacking him again while discussing campaign debates on the network’s Sunday public affairs show, This Week.
Participating in a panel discussion, Scott praised Vice President Kamala Harris’s “nuance” on her mixed-race heritage. “It has been really notable for us reporters who have picked up on the nuance about how she has responded to some of these attacks questioning her racial identity,” she said.
Scott was criticized by Trump when she opened a Q&A at the National Association of Black Journalists convention by questioning his past comments on black people and why they should support him. An irked Trump shot back, “I think it’s a very nasty question.”
On This Week, she channeled a Harris campaign talking point as she fancied a Harris-Trump debate: “And imagine that on the debate stage where you have a prosecutor possibly facing off against someone who has just been convicted.”
From Sunday’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on ABC:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: I was struck, Rachel, in the vice president’s response to what happened at your interview. She seemed to be aware of what Jonathan Martin is talking about. Don’t make this back about her after he gives those comments.
RACHEL SCOTT: And it has been really notable for us reporters who have picked up on the nuance about how she has responded to some of these attacks questioning her racial identity. She is not going there, and Democrats say, “Look, she knows who she is.” She identifies as a black and Asian woman. Why does she have to go out there and respond in that sort of way? What she is doing is putting it back on Donald Trump and Republicans, saying they’re dividing, and then pivoting back to the issues.
….
SUSAN PAGE, USA TODAY: I moderated the last debate she did in 2020, the vice presidential debate. She is a good debater. She is confident. She uses a little humor. She made Mike Pence be quiet, which is something I struggled to do, and she came across as a prosecutor, and that is a good message for her.
STEPHANOPOULOS: That seems to be her sweet spot.
SCOTT: And imagine that on the debate stage where you have a prosecutor possibly facing off against someone who has just been convicted, right? And that’s the sort of image that, of course, Democrats are hoping that they can actually have on the debate stage. But yes, and thinking back to her taking on President Biden when they were running against each other in the Democratic primary, Democrats see her as someone who can thrive potentially on the debate stage. The question is, does it actually happen?
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Scott seems near-giddy over Harris, acting more as a Kamala Whisperer than as any kind of independent journalist. She may couch her ‘reporting’ by citing ‘what Democrats are hoping,’ but it’s clear she’s hoping for the same thing: eagerly anticipating ‘the prosecutor versus the felon’ debate followed by a Harris election victory.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS
■ July 29: Liberal Media Scream: CNN spins Biden as martyr for stopping Trump
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the latest spin from CNN that President Joe Biden’s decision to drop out of his reelection race guarantees the end of President Donald Trump too.
Fareed Zakaria offered this Sunday on his “My Take” commentary:
“The final legacy of Biden is that he has returned the presidency to an office of sanity, decency, and dignity, ushering out the dangerous demagoguery and anti-democratic rhetoric and behavior that preceded him. But for that legacy to endure, and for Biden’s term not to simply be a moment in time, he needed to ensure that the United States actually closes the chapter on Donald Trump.”
Perspective didn’t matter. In fact, Biden’s “friends” pushed him out because of his poor polling, and while Vice President Kamala Harris has seen a jump in interest in her, she is leading Trump in only two of eight national polls taken after Biden’s July 21 announcement, and those leads are of 1% and 2%.
Zakaria on Sunday’s Fareed Zakaria GPS on CNN:
“The final legacy of Biden is that he has returned the presidency to an office of sanity, decency, and dignity, ushering out the dangerous demagoguery and anti-democratic rhetoric and behavior that preceded him. But for that legacy to endure, and for Biden’s term not to simply be a moment in time, he needed to ensure that the United States actually closes the chapter on Donald Trump.
“And to help make this more likely, he made the painful decision not to run for the presidency, which will also earn him a special place in the history books. Joe Biden has felt that he has been underestimated all his life. Judging by his tenure in the White House, he’s right.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “So much for jaded journalists holding to account those in power. When it comes to keeping Trump from returning to the White House, much of the media eagerly buy into advancing the party line on how Biden made a ‘painful decision’ to put the nation ahead of himself when, in fact, a skeptical journalist would realize it was nothing more than Biden applying grandiose spin, which Zakaria ate up, to cover for an impending humiliating defeat.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 22: Liberal Media Scream: NBC insider says Biden as ‘great’ as Washington
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the race among Washington journalists to erase their coverage of President Joe Biden as a senile loser and raise him to sainthood status.
The best example came from a former Newsweek reporter and NBC News contributor who not only compared Biden to former President George Washington but also to the Roman statesman Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, considered the figure of virtue for leaving his position of power to return to farming.
“I also was thinking of Joe Biden’s legacy,” Jonathan Alter said. “He will be remembered as a great president. He will be mentioned in the same sentence as George Washington. Why? Because selflessly leaving power, and the circumstances of him clinging to it in the last three weeks will be forgotten, the basic decision to leave power, which started with Cincinnatus in 439 B.C.,” he added.
From Monday’s Morning News NOW on the NBC News NOW streaming channel:
CO-ANCHOR JOE FRYER: You love history so much. What was going through your mind yesterday when this decision came down? How do you rank this in the 21st century as far as important stories?
JONATHAN ALTER: Extremely important, extremely unusual in American politics. The last time it happened was in 1968 when incumbent President Lyndon Johnson stepped away.
I also was thinking of Joe Biden’s legacy. He will be remembered as a great president. He will be mentioned in the same sentence as George Washington. Why? Because selflessly leaving power, and the circumstances of him clinging to it in the last three weeks will be forgotten, the basic decision to leave power, which started with Cincinnatus in 439 B.C.
And then George Washington picks up from Cincinnatus. The city, of course, is named for this. Why Cincinnatus? Why is he still so well known? Because this selfless act — of leaving power, which in human history is an extremely rare thing to do — elevates you. And in combination with a record of genuine achievement, it will put Joe Biden in very, very good stead in terms of history.”
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “What’s next? Comparing Biden to Jesus? Only a matter of time, I suspect, at least in the world of MSNBC and NBC News. Apparently, Alter is so enthralled with Biden that he can’t see a difference between the widely admired George Washington, who rejected the public groundswell urging him to become the king, and the unpopular Biden who only stepped away when faced with the near certainty of an embarrassing defeat bringing down him and much of his party.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 15: Liberal Media Scream: Anger over blood-splattered ‘fight, fight, fight’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the immediately iconic photos of a blood-splattered former President Donald Trump urging supporters to “fight, fight, fight” to restore him to the White House and the media’s queasiness with and misinterpretation of his message.
For the president and his supporters, the message was clear: Stand up to the attacks and build a unified base to win. But to many in the media, they saw it as a disturbing, angry message of revenge.
At CNN, for example, Jamie Gangel took offense to Trump, who survived the assassination attempt by millimeters. “I think what we’re hearing from people is that’s not the message that we want to be sending right now. We want to tamp it down,” she said.
This is what Gangel said on CNN Saturday night, about four hours after the shooting:
“I do want to say there was one thing that, when I watched the tape, I found odd because of all of the heated rhetoric. And that is that after he was hit, former President Trump got up and said, ‘Fight, fight, fight.’ I think what we’re hearing from people is that’s not the message that we want to be sending right now. We want to tamp it down.”
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “I’m sorry, not, that Trump didn’t display the correct decorum to satisfy Gangel a minute after getting shot and barely escaping alive in an assassination attempt. That Gangel’s first instinct was to attack the words of the victim shows the distorted worldview of CNN, where Trump and MAGA are the threats to democracy which must be suppressed.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 8: Liberal Media Scream: Welker pushes Meet the Press even further left
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the latest demonstration that NBC Meet the Press host Kristen Welker, in the anchor seat for less than a year, has pushed the show further left than Chuck Todd left it.
This Sunday, it was Welker using her trademark practice of beating her point into the ground in demanding another Republican to “accept the election results,” which she obviously believes will show President Joe Biden reelected.
Her target was Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), on former President Donald Trump’s short list of running mates.
“Can you say unequivocally, unequivocally here and now, that you will accept the results of the 2024 election no matter what they are?” she asked, ignoring warnings from the FBI about election hanky panky and some of the problems found in the 2020 ballot casting.
When Vance said he’s hoping for a clean election, Welker said he was signaling that the election won’t be fair. He fired back that it is the media’s blindness to problems that is the threat to the election outcome, not a candidate’s hope for problem-free elections.
“What I think actually undermines people’s confidence in the electoral system is when the media is incurious about obvious examples of problems in our electoral system,” Vance said.
From Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
KRISTEN WELKER: Well, here we are about a week before the Republican convention. Before I let you go, can you say unequivocally, unequivocally here and now, that you will accept the results of the 2024 election no matter what they are?
SEN. J.D. VANCE [R-OH]: So long as it’s a free and fair election, Kristen, of course we will. We will use constitutional processes to challenge issues if we think there are issues. But if it’s a free and fair election, we will do what the Constitution requires. We will respect the results. And I expect those results are going to be to reelect Donald Trump.
WELKER: It was a free and fair election in 2020. Donald Trump took his concerns to court. He lost in court. But he still has not conceded. Do you understand that when you refuse to commit unequivocally, that feeds into people’s concerns, skepticism about the nation’s electoral process?
VANCE: Well, Kristen, I don’t agree with that actually. I think that feeding into people’s concerns about our electoral process is that one-half of America’s political segment, they won’t support legislation that makes it harder for illegal aliens to vote. They won’t support universal voter ID in our elections even though you have to present ID to do almost anything in this country. I think taking people’s concerns seriously about election fraud is the way to reinforce security and confidence in our elections.
WELKER: Yes, senator, it’s already against the law for noncitizens to vote. But just on that very point, when you, when others refuse to say, “Yes, we will accept the election results,” do you understand how that undermines people’s confidence in the electoral system?
VANCE: But, Kristen, what I just said is I don’t agree with that. What I think actually undermines people’s confidence in the electoral system is when the media is incurious about obvious examples of problems in our electoral system. I think we’ve got great elections, but a lot of things could be better in certain states. I want to work to make that happen so the American people have greater confidence in their elections. That’s what I’ll keep doing.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Welker has managed to make Meet the Press more of a vehicle for the agenda of liberals than it was under Chuck Todd. Every week, it seems, she acts as a thought police operative, demanding Republican guests pay fealty to the Democratic media party line on how elections cannot be questioned, trying to undermine their very legitimacy as elected officials. In Vance’s case, she distorted his answer to appear the opposite of what it was so she could lecture him about his improper thinking.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ July 1: Liberal Media Scream: NBC’s Welker lies about ‘lies,’ can’t stand truthful Republicans
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features President Joe Biden’s media cheerleading squad trying to find some way to divert the public’s attention away from the fact that the president was out of it during last week’s debate with former President Donald Trump.
The top tactic of the liberal press was to say that Trump told more “lies” than the comatose president. And when Republicans pushed back, the media just ignored and pressed on.
Case in point was NBC’s Kristen Welker, the Meet the Press anchor. One of her featured guests was Gov. Doug Burgum (R-ND), who is on Trump’s short list of running mate candidates. Not only did she press him on whether he was a liar, she told lies about debate statements Trump made that have been fact-checked as truthful.
“As someone who is on Donald Trump’s short list to be his vice presidential nominee, do you think he should stop saying things that are not true?” She then recited his supposed lies: “Just to say a few: He said that Democrats want to kill infants after birth. That’s not true. He again lied about widespread fraud. Not true. He lied about his comments after Charlottesville. Should he be truthful with the American people if he wants to lead this country? Especially given what you just said that you never lie. That’s your standard, governor.”
But Democrats certainly do support allowing abortion up until birth and even death to newborns. That was clearly stated by former Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, himself a pediatric neurologist. And liberal reporters love misquoting Trump’s “good people on both sides” comment about the demonstrations in Charlottesville, Virginia, but it has been debunked, and he was not referring to Nazis as one of the “both” sides.
From Sunday’s Meet the Press on NBC:
GOV. DOUG BURGUM: Four years ago, when we ended up with the current ticket on the Democrat side, that was this grand devil’s bargain of “everybody drop out, we’re going with these two.” Then, the biggest lie that has been foisted on the American public was seen on Thursday night. People can’t un-see what they saw. What they saw was, we’ve been told by the White House, two weeks ago, the White House was attacking journalists, including your friends, saying that no, you can’t say these stories about that Joe Biden isn’t capable of serving right now. And then, all of America saw it. And you know who else saw it? Our adversaries saw it. Putin saw it. Xi saw it. The ayatollah saw it. I mean, the nation — we keep talking about elections. We are at a greater national security risk today than we were on Thursday because the commander in chief showed that he’s not capable of serving.
KRISTEN WELKER: Well, there’s not proof of that, but governor, let me just ask you about the debate and a little bit more of what we saw. By one count, Donald Trump made more than 30 false claims during that debate. I want to play something you told my colleague Chuck Todd on this broadcast last year. Take a look.
CHUCK TODD: You ever lied in politics?
BURGUM: No.
TODD: That you know of? You don’t believe you’ve ever lied?
BURGUM: No.
TODD: You feel like you’ve always told the truth as you understood it?
BURGUM: Absolutely. That’s how I was raised and how I’ve gone forward.
WELKER: As someone who is on Donald Trump’s short list to be his vice presidential nominee, do you think he should stop saying things that are not true?
BURGUM: I think the whole manufactured thing this morning of, that Donald Trump has said something that he hasn’t said before, I mean, everything that he said on Thursday night he’s been saying before. I mean, so this isn’t, this is not news.
WELKER: This is not manufactured. But this is not manufactured, governor. I mean, just to say a few: He said that Democrats want to kill infants after birth. That’s not true. He again lied about widespread fraud. Not true. He lied about his comments after Charlottesville. Should he be truthful with the American people if he wants to lead this country? Especially given what you just said that you never lie. That’s your standard, governor.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Welker is so sure of herself, so smugly superior that she can rattle off a list of supposed lies from Donald Trump without any self-awareness that she is passing on distortions of what Trump said while she demands Gov. Burgum criticize Trump for not being truthful. And then, when Burgum makes a perfectly reasonable observation, she corrects him with the ‘there’s not proof of that’ bromide. Pot, meet kettle.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 24: Liberal Media Scream: CNN proves anti-Trump bias days before debate
(Washington Examiner post)
And just like that, CNN showed its anti-Trump bias on Monday, just three days before hosting the first debate between former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden, proving Republicans correct in complaining that the debate would be an ambush.
It came early Monday morning when anchor Kasie Hunt was hosting Trump spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt. At the time, Secrets was considering the week’s choices for the Liberal Media Scream feature with Brent Baker of the Media Research Center.
Stories about the strong anti-Trump bias of co-debate moderators Dana Bash and Jake Tapper started to appear over the weekend, so it wasn’t unexpected that Leavitt would criticize them. Readers may recall that CNN and Trump have an antagonistic relationship, highlighted when CNN host Jim Acosta tussled with Trump during a press conference five years ago.
When Leavitt hit CNN’s bias, Hunt, who often includes Republicans on her show, wouldn’t hear of it, shut off her guest’s microphone, and kicked Trump’s spokeswoman off the air. The two traded tweets afterward, but the damage was done and led to a piling on by those upset with Hunt’s liberal bias, including Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-KY) wife, who noted that Hunt called the story about an attack on the senator one of her “favorite stories.”
So, for her actions, Hunt wins our Liberal Media Scream of the week with a rating of five out of five screams.
From Monday’s CNN This Morning:
KAROLINE LEAVITT: Well, President Trump is well prepared ahead of Thursday’s debates. Unlike Joe Biden, he doesn’t have to hide away and have his advisers tell him what to say. President Trump knows what he wants to say, and he’s going to relay his vision to the American people to make this country strong, safe, secure, and wealthy again. He’s been doing that across this great nation, to all corners of this country.
That’s why he was in Detroit, Michigan, last week. He was in Philadelphia for a big rally on Saturday night, and that’s why President Trump is knowingly going into a hostile environment on this very network, on CNN, with debate moderators who have made their opinions about him very well known over the past eight years in their biased coverage of him. So President Trump is willing to bring his message to every corner of this country, to voters, to ensure that he wins this election in November. He looks forward to doing that, and I know the American public looks forward to hearing from him.
KASIE HUNT: So, I’ll just say my colleagues, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, have acquitted themselves as professional as they have covered campaigns and interviewed candidates from all sides of the aisle. I’ll also say that if you talk to analysts at debates previous, that if you’re attacking the moderators, you’re usually losing. So, I really want to focus on what these two men are going to do and say when they stand on the stage. Now, we have a little bit of what Donald Trump, your boss, has said in trying to set expectations for this debate. I want to play some of a series of his comments, and then we’ll talk about it. Watch.
DONALD TRUMP CLIPS: Maybe I’m better off losing the debate. I’ll make sure he says I lose the debate on purpose. Maybe I’ll do something like that. … I assume he’s gonna be somebody that will be a worthy debater. … Should I be tough and nasty and just say you’re the worst president in history, or should I be nice and calm and let him speak?
HUNT: So he’s basically saying there, well, will I let Joe Biden win? It does seem as though many Republicans have set the bar very low in terms of arguing that Joe Biden is basically senile. Now, you have people like Doug Burgum coming out and saying, well, President Biden’s very accomplished, trying to set expectations in a different place. What do you expect from Joe Biden?
LEAVITT: Well, first of all, it takes someone five minutes to Google Jake Tapper, Donald Trump to see that Jake Tapper has consistently, frequently likened President Trump to Adolf Hitler —
HUNT: Ma’am, I’m going to stop this interview if you continue to attack my colleagues. I would like to talk about Joe Biden and Donald Trump, who you work for. If you are here to speak on his behalf, I am willing to have this conversation.
LEAVITT: I am stating facts that your colleagues have stated in the past. Now, as for this debate, the expectations for, the expectations for —
HUNT: Now, I’m sorry, guys. We’re going to come back out to the panel. Karoline, thank you very much for your time. You are welcome to come back at any point. She is welcome to come back and speak about Donald Trump, and Donald Trump will have equal time to Joe Biden when they both join us … later this week in Atlanta for this debate. Our thanks to Karoline.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Not a good sign for Donald Trump and his supporters ahead of CNN’s debate. If Hunt’s aggressiveness is any guide, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash won’t be reluctant to use their power to kill the podium microphones to silence the candidate who says things they have a long record of denouncing and condemning. Trump may well regret agreeing to allow CNN to host a debate.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 17: Liberal Media Scream: ‘What the f***?’: Celebrities baffled voters like Trump for sounding ‘normal’
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features world-class comics expressing shock that the public connects with former President Donald Trump because he sounds normal and even funny.
“What the f***?” yelped Charlamagne tha God, appearing on Friday’s Real Time with Bill Maher’s “Overtime” with liberal talker Ana Navarro.
The trio were talking about Trump and answering questions when Maher said, “Is Trump dangerous because he’s funny?”
When Maher said the fact is that people respond to Trump’s commoner way of talking, the black comic said, “Republicans are more sincere about their lies than Democrats are about their truth. Like when you listen to Donald Trump talk, you listen to Marjorie Taylor Greene, that’s what Waffle House sounds like at three in the morning. And sadly, people relate to that.”
From Friday’s Real Time with Bill Maher’s “Overtime” show posted on YouTube after the regular program aired on HBO, picking up as Maher posed questions from viewers:
BILL MAHER: Charlamagne, this is for you. “Is Trump dangerous because he’s funny?”
CHARLAMAGNE THA GOD [CTG]: What the f***? No, Trump is dangerous because at one point he was president of the United States of America and he’s running to be president of the United States of America again. If he wasn’t, you know, running to be in that position, he’d be the most hilarious person on the planet.
ANA NAVARRO: But, I mean, do you, do you actually — you’re a comedian — do you actually find him funny because people are laughing at him?
MAHER: Yes, unintentionally?
CTG: Yes.
MAHER: He’s a scream? Oh, he’s so funny, but he doesn’t know it. No, really. I mean, there are people like that. He has no—
NAVARRO: When I, when I listen to him, when he’s talking in those rallies about the sharks and the batteries, I’m waiting for the men in white jackets to show up.
CTG: But it’s only because he’s running for president. If he wasn’t running for president, you’d be like, “This stand-up is amazing.”
MAHER: But he sounds — and I’ve heard you talk about this subject before — he sounds like more of a normal person.
CTG: Yes.
MAHER: And that you, I know you said that the Republicans have a big advantage because they communicate better.
CTG: Yeah, Republicans are more sincere about their lies than Democrats are about their truth. Like when you listen to Donald Trump talk, you listen to Marjorie Taylor Greene, that’s what Waffle House sounds like at three in the morning. And sadly, people relate to that.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “Charlamagne tha God seemingly reflects much of the bafflement of those on the Left as to why average, not-so-political people would be attracted by the messages delivered by Trump and other Republicans. So, aghast at the phenomenon, he must attribute it to how Trump and conservatives are better talkers and liars, not that their policy views better address the problems facing the country.”
Rating: THREE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 10: Liberal Media Scream: ‘The View’ says black people not allowed to leave the Democratic plantation
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features The View engaging in racial politics and suggesting that minority viewers should stay in their Democratic lane.
On the show, Sunny Hostin was discussing Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) giving his support to former President Donald Trump. He is one of Trump’s potential picks for a running mate.
Hostin, whose roots are Puerto Rican, accused Donalds of pandering to Trump, though several polls show black voters like the ex-president, especially men, and are moving to the Republican Party after decades of pandering by the Democratic Party.
She said that such black voters are ultra-rare. “These black men that he was speaking with, I’d love to see them. It would be like looking at unicorns,” Hostin said on Friday’s show.
From Friday’s The View, a show produced by ABC News:
JOY BEHAR: Florida congressman Byron Donalds hit a new low when he told a room full of black Republicans that he misses the quote, unquote, good old days. Watch.
BYRON DONALDS, on June 4: During Jim Crow, the black family was together. During Jim Crow, more black people were not just conservative — black people have always been conservative-minded — but more black people voted conservatively. And then, H.E.W., Lyndon Johnson, and then you go down that road, and now we are where we are.
….
SARA HAINES: What’s scary is when you hear the audio, there are a lot of people going, uh-huh, uh-huh. So it feels like a class needs to be taught to everyone in that room because segregation left you with no choice. Like, you weren’t picking the family. They were literally making you go to different places. They didn’t allow for — so, talking about a black person choosing to be with your family and then looking at the greater social scheme and the injustice of that, he must not know what it is? I mean, that seems like a far leap not to understand Jim Crow, segregation, and the separation of the race. I don’t understand.
ANA NAVARRO: If he doesn’t know, shame on him, because there is nothing worse, I think, than when people achieve certain status and certain rights and don’t appreciate, take for granted, the struggles, the deaths, the fights, the marches, everything it took to be able to give Byron Donalds the opportunity he has now because, under Jim Crow, he couldn’t vote. He wouldn’t have been in Congress. He couldn’t have married his wife. He’s married to a lovely woman named Erika, who’s white. Interracial marriage was illegal in Florida until 1969. He could have not gone to Florida State University — for over 100 years, black students were not admitted to that university. Over 250 blacks were lynched in Florida under Jim Crow.
For him to be waxing nostalgic about that era that elicits so much pain — that was such a dark period in the history of the United States — is offensive. And for him to be doing it as a black man, as a person of color, is even more offensive. What really drives me crazy, though, is that it’s, like, every three months, a Republican says something more stupid about black history and slavery, right? I mean, last year, we had Ron DeSantis saying — defending that there were good things about slavery, skills that were learned that could be put to good use. Then we had Nikki Haley, who couldn’t admit that slavery was the cause for the Civil War.
JOY BEHAR: So, my question to you, Sunny: Is it stupidity, like she says, or is it something else?
HAINES: I think it’s pandering. I don’t think it’s stupidity.
BEHAR: To whom?
HOSTIN: It’s pandering to Donald Trump. I thought it was interesting that the framing was a room of black Republicans. Where are they? Where are they? Because if you look at the stats, 77% of — 81%, I’m sorry, of black men are part of the Democratic Party. Black voters consistently align with the Democratic Party. Ninety, over 95% of black women are part of the Democratic Party. So these black men that he was speaking with, I’d love to see them. It would be like looking at unicorns.
And so, I think that the sad thing is, you know, I agree with you, Ana, is that this came from the mouth of a black man, right? And so, if you’re pandering yourself and your community and your history to a man like Donald Trump, who is a disgraced, one-term, twice impeached, convicted felon, we get to say now, is even more despicable in this country.
Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “What a disgusting display of left-wing elitism. To think that, in the name of calling out racism, you think it’s your place as white people to lecture a black man about his views of the status of the black family and how it has fared over the decades. Liberals just can’t allow anyone to deviate from the approved liberal perspective and, if they do, they must be ‘shamed’ and corrected so they get in line.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ June 3: Liberal Media Scream: Stephanopoulos anti-Trump spin, condescendingly Clintonesque
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream highlights the model of the media’s bias in the legal cases against former President Donald Trump — ABC’s George Stephanopoulos.
The former Clinton White House communications boss opened his Sunday show, This Week with George Stephanopoulos, with a lecture against Trump and then brought on Trump lawyer Will Scharf to face left-wing talking points.
Scharf didn’t take it and challenged the Democratic talker, especially when Stephanopoulos tried to silence him for making points he didn’t like.
The actions by Stephanopoulos were reminiscent of the way he used to try to shut down reporters during the 1992 presidential campaign when numerous Clinton scandals were raised, a practice he and other aides continued while in the White House when facing troublesome stories, especially the Travelgate affair.
From Sunday’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on ABC:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Good morning, and welcome to This Week. In 1774, John Adams said representative government and trial by jury are the heart and lungs of liberty. Two hundred and fifty years later, the heart and lungs of liberty are facing what may be the ultimate stress test. Twelve anonymous jurors rendered their verdict on Thursday, finding Donald Trump guilty on all counts. It’s the third time in the last two years that jurors have rendered verdicts against Trump.
Jurors have yet to consider charges against Trump for even more serious crimes: blocking the peaceful transfer of power, concealing classified documents, encouraging the filing of false electors. But for now, the New York jurors have already presented their fellow citizens with a choice: Do we want to be represented, to be led, for the first time in history by a convicted felon? That answer will come in November….
STEPHANOPOULOS: The ethics panel for the state of New York said the judge was not required to recuse….
STEPHANOPOULOS: If appearance of impropriety is the standard for recusal, then why shouldn’t Justice Thomas and Justice Alito have to recuse from the cases before the Supreme Court?….
WILL SCHARF: The weaponization of our legal system, the politicization of prosecution, these are all things that President Trump absolutely has to comment on. I think the fact that he labored under a gag order for as long as he did was manifestly unjust. So, yes, absolutely, President Trump needs to be carrying his message to the American people. And I don’t see how anyone can really poke holes at that.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You talked about the weaponization of the legal system. Of course, it was former President Trump who threw out the 2016 campaign, led chants of “lock her up” about Hillary Clinton. But what do you expect from the sentencing process?
SCHARF: Well, but hold on a second, George, President Trump may have said that, but after he entered office, he certainly didn’t weaponize the Department of Justice to pursue his political opponents the way that we’ve seen … in the last couple years.
Remember, this case in New York, it was called the zombie case. It sat and sat and sat. It could have been brought at any point after 2020. And then suddenly, when President Trump announced his campaign for president, it was dusted off, rushed in front of a grand jury, and then rushed into court. You want to talk about the politicization of the legal system, I mean, this is Exhibit A. It’s absolutely unprecedented in American history. It’s not the way that our campaigns are supposed to be run. We contest elections at the ballot box, not in the courts, in this country.
STEPHANOPOULOS: That is true. But, of course, we’ve never had a former president or presidential candidate facing the kind of charges that the president faced because of his own activities. And, of course, the attorney general in Manhattan has nothing to do with the Department of Justice. Finally, what do you expect from the sentencing process?
SCHARF: I vehemently disagree that the district attorney in New York was not politically motivated here, and I vehemently disagree that President Biden and his political allies aren’t up their necks in this prosecution. I think the fact that the Biden campaign —
STEPHANOPOULOS: There’s no evidence here of that. Sir, there’s no — there’s not — I’m not going to let you continue to say that. There’s just zero evidence of that.
SCHARF: Well, how about the fact that Matthew Colangelo was standing over Alvin Bragg’s shoulder when he announced this verdict? I mean, Colangelo was the No. 3 official in the Biden Department of Justice who suddenly disappears and shows up as an assistant district attorney, right as Trump’s case in New York starts to proceed. You want to talk about political —
STEPHANOPOULOS: After the decision was made there —
SCHARF: You want to talk about political coordination, George, it’s right there in front of you.
STEPHANOPOULOS: This has nothing to do — this has nothing to do — no, it’s not. This has nothing to do with President Biden. Do you want to answer the question about the sentencing process or not?
SCHARF: I completely disagree that this has nothing to do with President Biden. With respect to sentencing, as I said before, we’re going to vigorously challenge this case on appeal. I don’t think President Trump is going to end up being subject to any sentence whatsoever. And we look forward to getting this case into the next court and taking this again all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary to vindicate President Trump’s rights.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Thanks for your time this morning.
SCHARF: Appreciate it, George.
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explains our weekly pick: “A Sunday sermon followed by aggressive left-wing talking points aimed at not allowing legitimacy for views which do not comport with ‘the facts’ as the very liberal and very partisan Stephanopoulos sees them. We’re in for five more months of this from the media and left-wing activists in it like Stephanopoulos: aggressive disdain for anyone making a point on behalf of Trump, imbued with condescending sneering about how there’s ‘no evidence’ for that point when there’s plenty of evidence for it.”
Rating: FIVE out of FIVE SCREAMS.
■ May 27: Liberal Media Scream: MSNBC regular cites Clarence Thomas’s white wife in racist rant
(Washington Examiner post)
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features the latest example of the Left’s hysteria over conservative judges on the Supreme Court.
MSNBC regular talker Elie Mystal said that Associate Justice Clarence Thomas not only wanted votes from black people to count less than white votes in elections, but he cited Thomas’s wife of 37 years, Virginia Thomas, who is white, as proof.
“Yeah, the through line between the Alito flag story, the Clarence Thomas coup story, and their wives, and what we saw today from the Supreme Court in this gerrymandering decision, the through line is that they don’t want black people’s votes to count equally,” Mystal said on All In with Chris Hayes on MSNBC Thursday.
“I mean, he ain’t married to Ginni Thomas for nothing, all right — like, that’s what the man thinks,” the black pundit said.
He was discussing a 6-3 Supreme Court decision last week to keep a South Carolina congressional map that a lower court had ruled included a racially drawn gerrymander. The court said the challengers had not proven their case. The decision was written by Associate Justice Samuel Alito, who has drawn fire for his wife’s flying of their American flag in the “distress” signal.
From Thursday’s All In with Chris Hayes on MSNBC:
CHRIS HAYES: I want to start on what we got from the court today and the fact it was an Alito-authored decision. It was an Alito-authored decision from the Trump majority, 6-3 majority, liberals in dissent, holding up a Republican gerrymander.
ELIE MYSTAL: Yeah, the through line between the Alito flag story, the Clarence Thomas coup story, and their wives and what we saw today from the Supreme Court in this gerrymandering decision, the through line between all of that is that they don’t want black people’s votes to count equally.
HAYES: Do you think that is true of Clarence Thomas?
MYSTAL: I know that it’s true of Clarence Thomas, all right. Their idea and Clarence Thomas, in his concurrence today, wrote straight up that he does not think the 14th Amendment and the equal protection clause of that amendment can be used to protect the voting rights of black people.
HAYES: Yes.
MYSTAL: I mean, he ain’t married to Ginni Thomas for nothing, all right — like, that’s what the man thinks. He wrote it today. The through line — understand this, Chris, when these people like Alito and Thomas support the insurrection, right, what are they really saying? They’re saying that Trump won — lost the election but won the white vote, which is true, he did, he won the white vote by a lot, white people should probably do something about that, but he won the white vote b
News Feed (Home)
Popular Posts 
Events 
Blog 
Market 
Forum 
Headline News
VidWatch
Game Zone
Top PodCasts
