Showing posts with label Washington Post. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Washington Post. Show all posts
Friday, September 01, 2023
Sunday, July 30, 2023
Saturday, November 20, 2021
Sunday, October 24, 2021
Monday, February 15, 2021
FISKING THE WAPO EDITOR WHO IS SAD HE DOESN’T GET TO ACT LIKE THE MAFIA ANYMORE
Long but worthwhile; read the whole thing.
When Musk can say whatever he wants to 40 million Twitter followers at any time with no filter, it is little surprise that he does not feel compelled to listen to unpleasant questions from some reporter who wants to know why he busts unions and wildly accuses people of pedophilia.
Jeff Bezos’ union busting is fine however, and the accusations of pedophilia don’t seem so wild when they keep coming true… Hmmm… How much glowing praise did the WaPo heap on the “principled conservatives” at the Lincoln Project back when they were useful for getting democrats elected? Oh wait, that was before the election. NOW they’re pedophiles!
As journalists, we all view this as a horrifying assault on the public’s right to know
-whatever we want them to
and on our own status as brave defenders of the public good.
This motherfucker is a self-licking ice cream cone.
There’s a lot of lies packed into that one line. Swap out “public good” for “DNC good”. Their defense is painfully lopsided in that it only protects the left. And the only time they’re brave is when they’re crushing the little guy. Oh look, that teenager smiled wrong. We’d better ruin his life.
Washington Post is not The Onion
Also Not The Onion pic.twitter.com/tyowprWkA3
— Benjamin Weingarten (@bhweingarten) February 15, 2021
Not The Onion pic.twitter.com/1RiU4qmYZj
— Benjamin Weingarten (@bhweingarten) February 15, 2021
Friday, December 11, 2020
The Washington Post’s Lies: Editorial board stands up for democracy dying in darkness.
The Washington Post accuses President Trump of lying and fomenting violence.
Let’s be clear. It isn’t the president who is “lying about the election.” It’s the Washington Post and its left-wing media pals. [and who's fomenting hate and violence?}
Where in the world would people like that get such hatred of Donald Trump?
Perhaps from reading articles like this one in August 2015 in … the Washington Post? Donald Trump: Spokesman for birthers, truthers, and Internet trolls
Or this one in February 2016:Donald Trump’s intolerable cruelty
Or this one in February 2016: Walking in David Duke’s shadow: Trump treads a well-worn path of bigotry
Or this one in May 2016: This is how fascism comes to America
Or this in July 2016: Donald Trump is a unique threat to American democracy
Or this in August 2016: Donald Trump makes his most dangerous comments yet
Or this in September 2016: Don’t compare Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler. It belittles Hitler.
Or this in October 2016: How much damage could a President Trump do? We can only begin to imagine.
And on January 20, 2017? At 12:27 p.m., a mere 27 minutes after Trump took the oath of office, there was this from the Post: The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun
And there are more — oh so many, many more pieces like this that have been vomited forth by the Washington Post. Depicting candidate Trump and President Trump as a bigot, Hitler, a fascist, dangerous, and a threat to democracy. He is the president they demanded be impeached — 27 minutes after he was sworn in....
Let’s be crystal clear. There is no place for violence in the American election process.
But the realization that to the degree that it may appear it is because the Washington Post and others in the liberal media have devoted five years to vilifying a good and decent man — and his supporters — while they themselves repeatedly — and dangerously — undermined democracy.
The Post’s motto is “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”
But the paper has absolutely no problem with demanding Americans accept the death of democracy that is the obvious result when elections appear to be stolen.
Like this one.
Monday, September 07, 2020
WaPo along with the NYT are supposed to be the Gold standard in journalism, when in reality they are the National Enquirer in a tuxedo.
Worth reading in full.
On Thursday the Washington Post published a 2300 word article about me on the front page of their sports section. The article, which was titled, “Clay Travis is Trump’s Secret Weapon in the Fight Over College Football,” featured just 94 words in quotes from me.
All of those quotes were taken out of context and one of them wasn’t accurate at all.
In reality, I spoke with the Washington Post for over an hour. The transcript of our conversation filled 28 single-spaced pages. This morning I published the audio file of the entire Washington Post interview on our Outkick the Show podcast so anyone who wants to listen to the audio of their questions and my responses can do so.
Almost nothing of what I said to them was included for their profile.
Wednesday, August 05, 2020
Communist Stooges: WashPost Propaganda Cheers Chinese Regime
The leftist rag’s Beijing bureau chief Anna Fifield excitedly described how indoctrinated Chinese youth flocked to “the giant statue of a young Mao — China’s equivalent of Mount Rushmore — staring out over the Xiangjiang River.”She marveled at how one young university student “jostled on a recent day for the perfect selfie with the Great Helmsman.”Deciding that being an apologist for China’s brutal Communist regime was more important that being an actual journalist, Fiffield completely ignored the fact Zedong was responsible for the deaths of 65 million people as his heinous Great Cultural Revolution brought about widespread famine, imprisonment, and executions.Showing what a true embarrassment she is to her profession, Fifield actually touted benefits of toeing the Communist Party line: “Party membership means better education prospects and better jobs, more politically advantageous marriages and nicer apartments. For many, it is a ticket to a brighter future.”It’s really no surprise that the Post would publish this drivel, since for years it has included propaganda inserts in the paper titled ChinaWatch, prepared by state-run media, China Daily. Those publications routinely deliver rambling from the Communist regime and cheer “Comrade Mao.”In December, The Washington Free Beacon uncovered that China Daily repeatedly violated federal law by not disclosing to U.S. government the millions of dollars it has spent on such propaganda inserts in major American newspapers. Sadly, the Post’s Tuesday article was just the latest chapter in the long, pathetic history of American media outlets serving as cheerleaders for Communism.
Tuesday, April 21, 2020
Don’t Let The Washington Post Get Away With Memory-Holing Its Anti-Kavanaugh Campaign
Must read by Mollie Hemingway.
I wonder if, in the middle of the night, Ruth Marcus realizes that she is one of the baddies.
The Washington Post has a problem. The newspaper led the massive effort against the nomination of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh by publishing and relentlessly hyping a completely unsubstantiated allegation of sexual assault against him.Now, the paper is leading Democrats’ efforts to bury a similar, if stronger, allegation of sexual assault against Joe Biden. To accomplish this dramatic turnabout, the paper is collectively trying to rewrite history, pretending the allegation against Kavanaugh had more basis than it did while also pretending that the allegation against Biden has less basis than it does....Ruth Marcus and others at the Washington Post who led the effort to destroy Brett Kavanaugh’s life based on unsubstantiated allegations know that what they did was evil. They may try to rewrite history to make it seem that Blasey Ford had evidence in support of her claim. They may try to rewrite history to make themselves feel better. They can dig as furiously as they want, but there is no memory hole deep enough to forget their behavior.
I wonder if, in the middle of the night, Ruth Marcus realizes that she is one of the baddies.
Friday, March 27, 2020
If Media Don’t Want To Be Called Propagandists, They Need To Stop Publishing Chinese and Russian Propaganda
If you ever spend any time in the Washington D.C. area, there’s a good chance you’ll come across a publication known as China Daily. In appearance, it’s a newspaper. In reality, it is official propaganda from the Chinese government that Communist Party officials deem appropriate for influencing those inside the Beltway. You can find it all over downtown D.C. in newspaper boxes. Large stacks of free copies are also dropped off directly at offices all over the city.Even better, if you subscribe to the Washington Post, you can get communist propaganda delivered straight to your doorstep for a fee. A few times a year, the Post comes wrapped in a special advertising supplement called China Watch that, again, does its best to approximate a legitimate newspaper. But underneath the masthead in fine print, it reads: “This supplement, prepared by China Daily, People’s Republic of China, did not involve the news or editorial departments of the Washington Post.”Anyway, you may have recently heard about how two million people out of a population of seven million in Hong Kong recently protested in the streets against the Communist Party’s attempt to further snuff out their little pocket of freedom. Here’s how China Daily is reporting what happened:
Parents in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region took to the streets on Sunday to urge US politicians to not interfere with the SAR’s extradition amendments and its internal affairs.The protest, organized by several Hong Kong social groups, also condemned foreign entities for misleading young people in the city.Among these social groups was an alliance of more than 30 local political, business and legal dignitaries who support the proposed amendments to the SAR’s extradition law. They marched outside the US Consulate General in Hong Kong and Macao, calling on the US to stop interfering in Hong Kong affairs.
The whole article is a damnable lie, and yet, as far as I know, the brave truth-tellers at the Washington Post have been taking money to distribute this kind of bilge at least since 2011.
The major news outlets in the US are enemies of the people and allies of those who want us dead.
Tuesday, January 07, 2020
The Washington Post — message board for the Deep State
At Power Line, we sometimes refer to the Washington Post as an adjunct of the Democratic Party. To an even greater degree, the Post is an adjunct of official Washington — the cadre of career bureaucrats and former officials who consider it their God given right to set policy, regardless of what elected officials desire. (There is, of course, considerable overlap between official Washington and the Democratic Party).
Thus, it’s not surprising that a few minutes after I read Steve’s post called “Trump’s sin: Conducting foreign policy without permission,” I read this Washington Post story called “Trump is short on advisers, allies as he faces Iran crisis.” In this article, the Post argues, in essence, that Trump is committing the sin of conducting foreign policy without permission.
The Post’s article is silly. A president who lacks good foreign policy instincts can have all the advisers in the world. It won’t help. Similarly, a president with good instincts doesn’t need many advisers....
The Post attacks Trump for having criticized the CIA. But much of Trump’s criticism has been of its leadership, not of the rank and file employees who collect and analyze intelligence.
To be sure, Trump continues to remind the public of the CIA’s erroneous assessments regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He’s right to do so. This was an enormous mistake.
But this doesn’t mean, as the Post suggests, that Trump was wrong or hypocritical to rely on the CIA’s intelligence indicating that Soleimani was planning attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. Soleimani had been orchestrating such attacks for years. It’s who he was and what he did. The CIA’s intelligence was consistent with everything we know about the terrorist. (So even if the CIA was wrong in thinking that Soleimani was planning more attacks last week, we can think of the assault that took him out as a well-deserved lifetime achievement award.)
In any case, the Post’s article about Trump not having enough advisers is nothing more than an airing of grievances of official Washington — the Deep State, if you prefer. And that’s true of much of what one reads in the Post’s news and op-ed sections.
To an unhealthy degree, the paper is the Deep State’s message board.
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Washington Post To Run All Headlines By In-House ISIS Marketing Rep
WASHINGTON, D.C.—In order to ensure all headlines about Islamic terrorism are culturally sensitive and do not offend any brave freedom fighters in the Middle East, The Washington Post has retained an ISIS marketing representative.
All headlines published about terrorism will be run by the marketing rep. The PR rep was immediately put to work as headline writers worked to come up with a sensitive take on the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
"Do you think we should call him an extremist terrorist leader or is that considered offensive?" one intern asked the representative, Aarif al-Samarrai, in a brainstorming session Sunday.
An angered Samarrai began firing his AK-47 into the air and screamed, "ALLAHU AKBAR!" at this suggestion, apparently not happy with the angle. Post writers frantically tried to come up with different headlines to appease him, such as the following:
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, mischevious rapscallion, passes away of entirely natural causes and definitely not a raid ordered by Trump. Also Trump is bad.
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, noted firearm and explosive enthusiast, dies at 48.
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, prophet of God and all-around swell guy, rewarded with 72 virgins.
Evil Americans kill innocent Middle Eastern farmer.
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State, dies at 48
He was finally appeased with the last suggestion, and the Post was able to run it. "This should make everybody on the internet happy," said one writer, excited to see what Twitter's reaction would be.
Tuesday, September 24, 2019
The Washington Post accuses Hillary of a crime.
From an article in the Washington Post by Philip Rucker, Robert Costa, Rachael Bade
The authors may have forgotten that Hillary actually paid a foreign spy to collect dirt on Trump from the Russians to help her election campaign. So while they attribute potential criminal activity to Trump, they describe actual criminal activity to Hillary. Unless it's legal if Democrats do it.
I don't think it's illegal to accept information from anyone about your political opponents.
Trump said in June that he would accept help with his 2020 reelection campaign from another country, which would be against the law.
“There’s nothing wrong with listening,” he told ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos. “If somebody called from a country, Norway — ‘We have information on your opponent’ — oh, I think I’d want to hear it.”
The authors may have forgotten that Hillary actually paid a foreign spy to collect dirt on Trump from the Russians to help her election campaign. So while they attribute potential criminal activity to Trump, they describe actual criminal activity to Hillary. Unless it's legal if Democrats do it.
I don't think it's illegal to accept information from anyone about your political opponents.
Sunday, September 22, 2019
Washington Post mocked for comparing Elizabeth Warren selfies to Frederick Douglass photos
“Just when you think @washingtonpost can’t get anymore absurd in their campaign to prop up @ewarren (and defeat @BernieSanders), they are now comparing Warren taking selfies with people to……Frederick Douglass,”
Social media pundits scorched The Washington Post for a piece comparing Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s selfies to Frederick Douglass stately portraits.
Warren’s penchant for posing for thousands of photographs with fans around the country had “smashed stereotypes” in a similar way to Douglass during the 19th century, the paper claimed.
“Have to say that this is totally nuts,” said Bridget Read, a writer for The Cut.
“Remember, the idea there is a bias in our media is a pernicious falsehood. Also, Elizabeth Warren = Frederick Douglass because they are both in photographs,” snarked David Rutz, managing editor of the Washington Free Beacon.
Tuesday, March 19, 2019
Sunday, September 16, 2018
EX-NSA DIRECTOR DISPUTES REPORT THAT TRUMP ASKED HIM TO PUSH BACK ON COLLUSION PROBE
The Washsington Post lied ... but then, you knew that.
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Kimberly Strassel Fact-checks Washington Post Fact-Checker about Bruce Ohr
1) It is never fun to tackle fact checkers, but this one is a case study in that modern art of omitting details, stating unsupportable assertions as fact, slipping things in, manipulating a narrative. Opinion as "fact." So let's go through it. washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/…
2)"Ohr exists in a netherworld — a subject of fascination in right-leaning media". Right, though piece fails to note that is because mainstream media is more "fascinated" by Omarosa than it is the news that a high ranking DOJ official--
3)--whose wife worked for Clinton oppo-research group Fusion GPS--was feeding said oppo research to the FBI. And that the FBI was taking it even after having officially terminated Fusion employee Christopher Steele as a source, for breaking FBI rules.
4)"Ohr is less of a central player." The guy was among highest ranking DOJ officials. And anybody who works for one central player in this drama (DOJ) and has dozens of contacts with all the other central players (Fusion, FBI, Steele) is by definition pretty central.
5) "Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community." Noble Steele, right? Only fails to note he looks also been working for/helping a Russian oligarch, even as he wrote dossier hyping Trump-Russia. Goes to credibility, no?
6)"the dossier is actually several memos, based on conversations with Russian sources" Well, so says Steele and Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS cofounder). fact checker just takes their word for it. But some suspect a few non Russians might have had some input.
7)"the probe into the Trump campaign originally was sparked by a separate matter that Steele never wrote about." So says the FBI. But it notably won't provide any docs to back this up, and only came up with the Papadopoulos story after dossier was exposed.
8) (I thought fact checkers existed to question unsupported claims?)
9) "(Bruce Ohr’s 278e financial disclosure form lists her as an “independent contractor.”)" This bland statement (i am assuming purposely) omits the key point: That this description masked where she really worked--Fusion--which Ohr should have disclosed, but didn't.
10) "Bruce Ohr and Steele knew each other, apparently because of organized-crime issues." Maybe. But their relationship in early 2016 was Steele lobbying Ohr on behalf of Russian oligarch, about visas and sanctions. Important "fact," right? (gets slipped in at end of piece)
11) "Simpson said Steele suggested he speak to Ohr after the “very surprising” victory by Trump." This statement, and quote that follows, make it sounds like Simpson's outreach was just a casual, "let me do the right thing" moment AFTER the election. But it omits...
12) that Simpson was in touch with Ohr months earlier, at start of Trump-Russia probe. Specifically, an email to Ohr from Simpson in August reads: "Can u ring." Which is a pretty familiar way to email someone you rarely talk to.
13)"But Steele and Simpson did not know that" Really? How can Fact Checker make such a claim? Steele was in continuous contact with high ranking DOJ official, who could easily have apprised him on probe. Steele also had contacts in FBI and in State Dept.
14) "Steele and Ohr had been in contact before the election, though it’s unclear how much Ohr knew about Steele’s work for Fusion." Um, maybe a fair amount, given all the summer contact between Steele, Simpson and Ohr? Why downplay it?
15)"The two men had had a continuing discussion about Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska in 2016" Again, that "discussion" involved a foreign national (Steele) lobbying DOJ official. At end we hear only that Steele was "concerned" re Deripaska. no description of his requests.
16) "And Bruce Ohr apparently spoke to Simpson on Aug. 22, according to phone logs reviewed by York." Doesn't note it was Simpson that demanded a call. Also slipped in late in piece, like no big deal, rather than back in main timeline describing Simpson outreach to Ohr.
17) "He appears to be only a messenger." Wow. So DOJ official passes along Clinton oppo to FBI, from a discredited source. Doesn't tell that his wife is profiting from this venture. No big deal. Just a "messenger." Imagine if official in Bush DOJ had done this to Obama team.
18) "At this point, it’s unclear what Ohr even told his friend at the FBI about Steele’s information" Wow again. Where does this "friend" come from? why put it that way? Ohr was debriefed by FBI agents at least 12 times, contents in official 302s. This isn't water cooler talk
19) "There is also, as yet, no evidence that senior Justice Department officials were even aware of Ohr’s sideline communications with Steele about the Russian probe." Wow times three. That some in DOJ didn't know is one of the problems. Who set this up? Who was kept in dark?
20) "Trump’s mention of Ohr’s wife appears gratuitous. Her role in the matter, as yet, appears minimal." She worked for the main player in this drama, Fusion. And Fact Checker has zero ability to make that claim, since we still don't know her role. Bizarre.
21. THE PINOCCHIO TEST: There are no facts wrong here, so no pinocchios based on WaPo's preferred pinocchio standard. But fact checkers are also more than capable of rearranging words and details to create a misleading narrative. so, pinocchios galore on that front.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)