To anyone paying attention, the so-called Birther, or birth certificate controversy, surrounding those misguided rumors that questioned whether or not President Obama had been born in this country, was a controversy both Obama and his MSM allies loved and maliciously stoked to keep alive. For them, it was a beautiful issue that gave them a racial brush with which to tar all Republicans and, better still, it worked as the perfect distraction to keep conservatives off message and on defense. For example, NBC’s David Gregory demands Congressman Eric Cantor take a firm stand against Birthers, and when he isn’t harsh enough to please a leftist like Gregory, that becomes the only story that comes out of a full-length “Meet the Press” interview.

All part of the plan.

And for a number of years it worked, at least until Donald Trump finally slew the Birther Dragon by turning the issue into such a negative for Obama, he was forced to finally act. After the President produced the very same birth certificate the MSM had assured us he could never get, the scalded media then attempted to spin it into a win for Obama, when in reality both they and the White House had just lost a powerful weapon both were counting on to reelect Obama. Without the shiny toy of Birtherism, conservatives might actually be allowed to get their 2012 message out and the country might actually have a discussion about Obama’s dismal record.

Today, Obama’s Media’s Palace Guards are desperately searching for new methods of distraction. So desperate are they that Politico’s Ben Smith and Slate’s Dave Weigel (both former members of the infamous Journolist) now have a regular cottage industry in coming up with anti-GOP nonsense distractions (today’s journolisting provides two perfect examples). But as diligent as those two are (What Fast and Furious?), they obviously aren’t enough.

Which helps to explain this insipid nonsense:

Many Republicans, however, don’t regard government jobs as actual jobs, and are eager to see them disappear. Republican governors around the Midwest have aggressively tried to break the power of public unions while slashing their work forces, and Congressional Republicans have proposed paying for a payroll tax cut by reducing federal employment rolls by 10 percent through attrition. That’s 200,000 jobs, many of which would be filled by blacks and Hispanics and others who tend to vote Democratic, and thus are considered politically superfluous.

Believe it or not, that’s a Sunday New York Times’ editorial attempting to make the case that wanting smaller government is, yep, racist.

Does the New York Times really believe that?

Of course not. The Times’ editorial is an obvious political tactic, not a serious policy position. The Times is intentionally toying with us, hoping to make us angry and put us on defense. ’Racist’ is the new ‘Birther.’

(more…)

WARNING: This Image of Hate From Occupy LA May Have Been Placed in Our Minds by GOP Mind Control Operatives

Jews across the country who were frightened by those anti-Semites at the Occupy Wall Street protests can all relax now, because the Slate’s Dave Weigel says it’s all safe. According to Weigel OWS isn’t really anti-Semitic and/or anti-Israel it’s all just a Republican plot. Although he doesn’t say it, the implications are clear. The GOP has mind control experts who have the know-how to cause Americans to see things that aren’t there.

On Tuesday and Wednesday, the RNC and NRCC tried their damnedest to argue that Occupiers are inhabiting anti-Semites. The crown jewel of the effort is one of those videos that makes liberal use of shaky video and pounding music.

There is a problem: The movement isn’t anti-Semitic. It started in New York. Its ideological hero is Naomi Klein. This is a movement studded with liberal Jews! Here’s one video that’s gotten less play than the one of the irate anti-Semitic dipshit with the “Nazi bankers” sign: The Kol Nidre in New York, at the Occupy camp.

Is it just totally nuts to worry about anti-Semitism here? Well, no. This is a protest against the banking industry. The chairman of the Fed is Jewish. The president of Goldman Sachs is Jewish. The Secretary of the Treasury is Jewish. If “anti-Semitism is the socialism of fools,” there’s a hell of a risk that people could get foolish about this.

See? Dave Weigel who is Jewish, is so calming you wouldn’t know he is a bit off the mark on just a few key points.

• “It started in New York” What does that mean? Is that Dave’s version of Jesse Jackson’s calling the “Big Apple” Hymie Town? Sure, if it started in New York it must be pro-Jewish.  I guess Weigel forgot Al Sharpton got his start in NY, where he incited two anti-Semitic Pogroms, one in Crown Heights, the other in Harlem. “It started in NY” didn’t work in that case.

• “Its ideological hero is Naomi Klein” Oh thank God! She’s a Jew, that makes me feel so much better.  That Dave Weigel really knows how to calm people down.

Naomi Klein is the perfect person to be the OWS ideological hero, she has been attacking capitalism and corporations for her entire career.  Less known is the fact that, Klein has another ideological similarity to the OWS protests, she has been demonizing Israel for almost as long as she has been demonizing capitalism.

It’s not just that she disagrees with Israeli policy but she demonizes and tries to de-legitimize the Jewish state. She uses that age-old blood libel and invents Israeli atrocities.  “[Some Jews] even think we get one get-away-with-genocide-free-card.”

In her book The Shock Doctrine Klein explains that Israel is run by a vast military-industrial complex who purposely perpetuates war against the Palestinians so they can develop and more importantly sell, new weapons on the world-wide market.

(more…)

Dave Weigel acknowledges in his Journolist 2.0 analysis that as a member of the original Journolist, his take may not be well received.

I didn’t have a problem with his write up until I got to this:

Dave Weigel of Slate reports that Random House, publisher of The Rogue: Searching for the Real Sarah Palin, has released the following statement on allegations that Joe McGinniss’s book is a literary hoax:

Joe McGinniss’s book The Rogue is based on the author’s extensive on-the-ground reporting in Alaska, as well as in-depth interviews he conducted with approximately 200 people who have known Governor Palin at different stages of her life and career. After a thorough and careful examination of the book, including probing discussions with the author about his sources, we are confident that the reporting it contains is solid, reliable, and well-substantiated.

Yet McGinniss revealed in an e-mail in January 2011 that Random House lawyers had informed him–after all of that “extensive-on-the-ground reporting in Alaska, as well as in-depth interviews”–that his manuscript contained nothing beyond “tawdry gossip,” and that his most “salacious stories” lacked “factual evidence.”

Yesterday, McGinniss told Mediaite: “My reporting continued beyond the date of the email.” In an attempt to prove that claim, he has released e-mails to Weigel showing his correspondence with prostitute Shailey Tripp, as he attempted to substantiate his claim that “Todd had sex with a hooker.”

But the new emails only highlight McGinniss’s decision not to include allegations about a “hooker” in the published book. They do not show why McGinniss chose to include almost every other allegation in The Rogue about which he had admitted in January that there was no “factual evidence.” McGinniss omits any emails relating to those claims. (more…)

Dave Weigel seems to admit that the mainstream media is not very important at all. He does so in a post for Slate, wherein he is trying to spin the reasons why Sarah Palin’s knocked-out-of-park speech in Wisconsin went mostly ignored by the mainstream media. Says Weigel (emphasis mine):

For what it’s worth, I mentioned Palin’s speech yesterday and talked about it on… drum roll… MSNBC. But is it a mystery or sign of bias when an author and former vice presidential candidate gives a speech at a rally and it doesn’t get national news coverage?Mansour, Nolte et al know that conservatives have all the access they want to Palin’s speech, through live-streaming and other videos. It doesn’t matter whether the media covers it.

So, according to Weigel, there is no need for silly old news programs or news networks or newspapers. People can just find the news themselves. Good to know, Dave. You know that leaves you out of a job, right? Willing to throw yourself under the bus, simply to spin away any truth that is positive toward Palin, I suppose. You’re a giver!

(more…)

The other night, a funny thing happened on the way to an idea… With an absurd attack against Sarah Palin, the MSM proved a point I was going to make about the potent power of Twitter better than I ever could. But, first, a little background.

Let me see a show of hands. How many of you sit home frustrated by MSM bias, lies, misinformation and double standards?

Wow. That many.

So my idea was to write an article encouraging people (meaning, you) to sign up for a Twitter account and help us to smoke out MSM bias — to urge you to tweet about it and  sound the alarm online whenever you see it. It’s a ridiculously simple process and not only will you feel better, but word will spread and the culprits will know you’re spreading that word. The idea most certainly isn’t to get the hopelessly corrupt media to stop being hopelessly corrupt. If plummeting circulation rates and embarrassing ratings can’t get them to change their ways, nothing will. But more people policing the MSM and spreading the word on Twitter is a beautiful thing, good for America — and what better way to expose them than through the art of mockery? For example…

The MSM has set for themselves a Sarah Palin Standard whereas any perceived mistake the Governor makes becomes an instant part of the noisy MSM narrative. The idea, obviously, is to destroy her. And yet, when she hits a grand slam like she did with her speech in Madison Saturday, the coverage pales in comparison to, say, when the MSM spends 10 days blaming her for those heinous murders in Tucson.

(more…)

Early yesterday morning, the Daily Caller published an interview with Andrew Breitbart where the Big Journalism publisher had some choice words on Color of Change founder, former Green Jobs Czar, and HuffPo blogger Van Jones.

“Van Jones is a cop killer-supporting, racist, demagogic freak. And a commie. And an eco-fraudster,” Breitbart said. A few kind words were volunteered for Jones: praise for being “spectacularly well-dressed.”

Mario Ruiz, The Huffington Post’s senior vice president for media relations, told TheDC that Breitbart will not be censored in response to the campaign.

Later in the day, HuffPo caved to Color of Change pressure to blacklist Breitbart.  Color of Change is famous for leading an advertising boycott against Glenn Beck’s show and took credit for Breitbart’s ouster from ABC News’s election night coverage.  HuffPo SVP Mario Ruiz issued the following statement; pay attention to their specific reasoning, emphasis mine:

The Huffington Post is committed to fostering a lively and often provocative debate about the issues of the day and encourages a wide range of voices from all perspectives to participate. Andrew Brietbart’s ad hominem attack on Van Jones in The Daily Caller — right down to calling him a “commie punk” and “a cop killer-supporting, racist, demagogic freak” — violates the tenets of debate and civil discourse we have strived for since the day we launched. As a result, we will no longer feature his posts on the front page.

He is welcome to continue publishing his work on HuffPost provided it adheres to our editorial guidelines, as the two posts he published on HuffPost did — guidelines that include a strict prohibition on ad hominem attacks. Our decision today recognizes that placing posts on the front page is an editorial call that elevates some posts over others, and is an indication of how seriously we take these judgment calls.

So Breitbart is no longer allowed to publish on the front page of HuffPo because he made an ad hominem attack?  By this logic, the same standard will be applied to all AOL/HuffPo writers going forward.  If Breitbart is being thrown under the bus for making ad hominem remarks off the site, then that means… no other AOL/HuffPo bloggers can make them either.

We’ve never seen the Huffington Post make an effort like this to suppress the speech of any of their other (mostly left-wing) personalities.  The hypocrisy is laughably obvious, and it was left-of-center bloggers Mickey Kaus of the Daily Caller, Alex Pareene of Salon, and Dave Weigel of Slate who were quickest to point it out.  Pareene sums it up this way: (more…)

Brent Bozell has a great piece on the irony surrounding the media reaction to Planned Parenthood.

The same gaggle of broadcast TV watchdogs which has mustered endless outrage over the notion that the Catholic Church would fail to alert authorities about sexual abuse of minors is utterly uninterested in the sexual abuse of minors when someone more pleasing to secular progressives – like that abortion factory Planned Parenthood — is caught on camera.

Live Action has been exposing Planned Parenthood since 2007. You would think that by 2011, their clinic personnel would be more careful. It is just the opposite. Their disinterest toward statutory rape and child sexual abuse is shocking.

[...]

This woman has now been fired. But lying and squashing information is apparently Planned Parenthood policy. Another video broke, this time from Falls Church, Virginia, where a clinic worker told the man “We don’t necessarily look at the legal status, like I said. Abortion appointments do require photo ID. It’s nothing as far as records. It’s just photo ID that’s ever going to be required.”

[...]

The networks refused to acknowledge these stings. But it’s not a matter of journalistic principle, objecting to hidden cameras. It’s all about politics.

Twenty years ago, on the night of Halloween, 1991, ABC’s “Prime Time Live” aired a story based on its own investigation, complete with hidden cameras, of…crisis pregnancy centers. They were out to expose the allegedly awful practice of pro-lifers advising pregnant women against abortions. Within days of the ABC story, CBS and NBC also aired reports with hidden cameras and female producers lying about being pregnant.

Bozell’s response is some much-needed sense in a conversation that has sorely lacked it.

Big Time Feminist Amanda Marcotte, most notable for embarrassing herself while working for the John Edwards campaign, prizes her outdated snark (is there a more annoying term for this word?) more than the issue which she claims to care for in order to make bank: women’s causes.

Because if complicity in whoring out underage girls to satisfy money a pimp doesn’t scream GIRL POWER, I don’t know what does.

No, the worst thing is someone who makes a living off of being some feminist messiah refusing to speak out against child sex-trafficking because they would rather defend a company than kids.

“Let’s ri-i-i-i-i-ide …”

(more…)

David Weigel’s recent Slate piece on Jim DeMint (R, SC) is a perfect example of a gentle leftwing undertone sprinkled into a story like seasoning salt in order to gently spin a story to negatively effect conservatives, or at the very least to artificially heighten tensions in order to make it seem as if conservatives are at each other’s throats.

Weigel’s piece was a report on the first ever meeting of the Senate’s Tea Party Caucus headed up by Senator Jim DeMint and Weigel was bound and determined to make the meeting into some sort of conservative slugfest where all parties were taking each other on in a cage match to top even the World Wrestling Federation’s best brawls.

Mr. Weigel started out with an account of DeMint’s encounter with Tea Party activist Lisa Miller from Alexandria, Virginia. Miller was insisting that DeMint balance the budget but opposed any constitutional amendment to require it. DeMint, on the other hand, was adamant that it would take a constitutional amendment to balance the budget because regardless that congress always has had the tools to balance the budget anytime they wish — as Miller pointed out – he maintains that congress does not have the “institutional discipline” to do so.

DeMint kept walking her back. “The reason a lot of us are supporting a constitutional amendment,” he said, “is that they’ve done things before and made laws like pay-go–you can’t pass anything without paying for it. But every time it came up they’d waive it, with 51 votes. It was like a joke. The Social Security lockbox was supposed to keep us from spending Social Security funds. We kept spending them. There’s no institutional discipline.”

Weigel presented this as a contentious exchange, most especially by insisting that, “DeMint kept trying to convince her that he–Jim DeMint!–was not a squish.” But there is no real indication that it was ever that contentious. Sure Miller and DeMint had a small disagreement over policy direction, but no one was calling DeMint a squish. Especially Miller because even Weigel was forced to admit at the end of his piece that Miller thought the whole meeting “had gone brilliantly.”

(more…)

Big sites publisher Andrew Breitbart, on the continuing scandal of the JournoList:

(more…)

One of the nastiest episodes in American journalism occurred in the immediate aftermath of John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate during the 2008 election. It was a potential game-changer and, for a moment, it rocked the leftist media back on its heels. Who can ever forget Andrea Mitchell’s gaping-fish-out-of-water reaction to Palin’s electrifying acceptance speech? For one brief, horrible moment, the Marxist Media saw its dream of a People’s Republic dying, shot through the heart by the moose-hunting mom from Nowhere, Alaska.

Soon enough, though, the counter-attack began… almost as if it was co-ordinated.  And you know what? It was! From the Daily Caller:

In the hours after Sen. John McCain announced his choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate in the last presidential race, members of an online forum called Journolist struggled to make sense of the pick. Many of them were liberal reporters, and in some cases their comments reflected a journalist’s instinct to figure out the meaning of a story.

Joe Conason, JournoList member

(more…)

Writing at Politico, Keach Hagey tries to sum up one possible lesson of Dave Weigel’s recent firing from the Washington Post. Hagey’s argument is that, in the new media environment, public disgrace may actually be good for your career. To bolster her point she offers several examples:

Or how about Christopher Buckley? … Buckley wrote a column for National Review until he wrote a piece for the Daily Beast titled, “Sorry, Dad, I’m Voting For Obama.”  Soon after the piece was published National Review received a flurry of criticism and Buckley was forced out as damage control. Buckley continued writing books and at the Daily Beast, his credentials, with liberals at least, greatly enhanced.

David Frum provides one of the most recent examples…During the healthcare reform debates, he wrote a post called “Waterloo” in which he criticized the Republican Party’s obstruction of passing a healthcare bill. The post garnered a lot of criticism from the right and soon after “Waterloo,” AEI fired Frum. Since then, FrumForum’s traffic has continued to grow and the site has increasingly become one of the primary destinations for conservative news and analysis.

David Frum

What do all these individuals have in common with one another and with Dave Weigel? They all moved very publicly to the left. (more…)

The David Weigel saga continues to stagger on, becoming ever more intellectually incoherent. Not only has Weigel written yet another story about himself, this time for Esquire, but Ezra Klein of the Washington Post — the man who recommended Weigel for his short-lived job there — has also come out with another piece, largely argued along juvenile tu quoque lines that wouldn’t pass muster in a first-year logic class. If Weigel and Klein are the best young talent the Post can find, then things are even worse with MSM journalism than we thought.

More seriously, over the holiday, both the Washington Post, in the form of its ombudsman, Andrew Alexander, and the New York Times, in the person of media critic David Carr, both weighed in, with the result that the line between real journalism — in the form of straight reporting — and opinion journalism is now more blurred than ever. If ever readers deserved clarity on this increasingly important issue it’s now, and yet both establishment papers just fell on their faces.

Why? Because they don’t know what to say. Instead, these apologists manage to pretzel themselves in contortions worthy of the Cirque du Soleil while trying to explain to their readers the fine distinctions, the nuances, between a reporter acting as a reporter and a reporter acting as purveyor of opinion, i.e. either bien-pensant leftist conventional wisdom or the youthful exuberance that attends the re-invention of the wheel.

Let’s start with Alexander: (more…)

It’s been a pretty remarkable week, news-wise and media-wise, and to say the two are related would be an understatement. We’ve seen the lid finally blow off the long-simmering Al Gore sex scandal, which certainly serves to explain the otherwise mysterious Al Gore divorce. We’ve seen a group of alleged Russian spies, at least one journalist among them, rolled up by the FBI. We’ve seen the public revelation of the so-called “JournoList,” a listserv groupthink email chain compromising roughly 400 lefty journalists and bloggers, for which Andrew Breitbart has offered $100,000 for the complete contents. And we’ve seen yet another example of the revolving-door relationship between Democrat journalists and Democrat politics when a Washington Post blogger turned out to be an Obama Administration operative.

I think you know where we’re going with this.

Journalists — whether through action or inaction — are at the center of every one of these scandals. And the amazing thing is, they not only don’t care that they’ve lost the trust of the public, forfeited their claims of objectivity and destroyed the nature of the reporter-reader relationship — they’re proud of it!

The old Soviet Union used American journalists as willing accomplices: from John Reed to Walter Duranty to I.F. Stone, the Soviets knew that one path to the destruction of the Principal Enemy lay through the press, and they diligently pursued western reporters, dangling  ideological solidarity, blackmail or money. Heck, Warren Beatty even made a movie about Reed: (more…)

Ron Brynaert has a story over at his The Raw Story blog that reveals yet another denizen of the Old Media trying to be both a “journalist” and an operative of Barack Obama’s administration. She is Patricia McGinnis, an unpaid advisor at the White House and also one of the contributors to the Post’s “On Leadership” blog.

Once again we see the Old Media working hand-in-hand with the Obama administration and putting the lie to the idea of the “independent journalist” in traditional media outlets, this time with the Washington Post. Even worse than this collusion, though, is the fact that the Post somehow forgot to inform its readers of this little detail.

Is anybody surprised? From the “Cry Wolf” scandal, in which Big Journalism exposed an incipient pay-for-play “independent scholarship” racket that was designed to combat conservative ideas under the false flag of “academic research,” to the constant revolving door of “journalists” leaving their publications or networks for their first love, Democrat politics, to the existence of Ezra Klein’s “JournoList,” an email daisy chain of 400 leftist journalists, operating in secret to share policy ideas and hone talking points without letting either their readers or, in many cases, their employers know of their collusion, it’s clear that the leftist drones in academe and the media no longer feel the need even to pretend to be objective reporters of the political scene. They are operatives, plain and simple.

Think of them as an army of Walter Durantys, the Soviet fellow-traveler operating as a correspondent for the New York Times who won a Pulitzer Prize for whitewashing Stalin’s crimes for western public opinion. (more…)

The word of the week is “transparency.”  No, this isn’t the vapid hopey-changey wordage that the Obama campaign and administration has been using for the past two years, rather the transparency I’m speaking of here involves the literal process of revealing truths, exposing potentially negative material and providing a fair playground on which lovers of rational thought can explore and determine reality for themselves.  At the end of the day, transparency is all about providing access to information and ideas, while shifting power to the people to subsequently formulate conclusions.  This week, two transparency medals of honor should be given out – one to the Sunlight Foundation and the other to Andrew Breitbart (naturally).

First and foremost, in a bid to once again outdo itself in the categories of “way too cool” and “ultra useful,” The Sunlight Foundation has created a timely democracy tool that offers the American public a first-hand look into the opinions and past work of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan.  The new project, called “Elena’s Inbox” takes Kagan’s public e-mails from her Clinton administration years and organizes them in an easy-to-view format, thus providing unprecedented access and perspective.  In an e-blast from Sunlight yesterday afternoon, Jake Brewer wrote,

All of the emails sent and received by Supreme Court Justice nominee Elena Kagan during her time in the Clinton White House were recently put online… [We] built a site to take Elena Kagan’s emails and make them readable…While we’re in the middle of Kagan’s hearing for the Supreme Court, it’s fascinating to get a sense of her through her public emails.

In the past, I’ve voiced concern over Kagan’s take on the first amendment, so I personally plan to sift through her e-mails to gain a better sense of her worldview and how she’ll function on the Supreme Court. This website couldn’t have come at a better time, as the American public (and Congress) learns about the woman who might very well partially shape American law for decades to come. (more…)

Leave it to Andrew Sullivan.  It’s been 24 hours since I offered $100,000 for the full list and contents of the Ezra Klein’s four-year experiment in political-journalist editorial collusion — the on line progressive jazz fusion station known as JournoList.  A natural free for all of death-wishing upon their political enemies and other such innocuous scribblings.

It took 24 hours for Sullivan to proclaim that all the rules now were broken.

When Andrew Breitbart offers $100,000 for a private email list-serv archive, essentially all bets are off. Every blogger or writer who has ever offered an opinion is now on warning: your opponents will not just argue against you, they will do all they can to ransack your private life, cull your email in-tray, and use whatever material they have to unleash the moronic hounds of today’s right-wing base.

Yes, the Economist was right. This is not about transparency, or hypocrisy. It’s about power. And when you are Andrew Breitbart, power is all that matters. There is not a whit of thoughtfulness about this, not an iota of pretense that it might actually advance the conversation about how to deal with, say, a world still perilously close to a second Great Depression, a government that is bankrupt, two wars that have been or are being lost, an energy crisis that is also threatening our planet’s ecosystem, and a media increasingly incapable of holding the powerful accountable.

In fact, when one of the progressives on this list outed Dave Weigel, the actual rules were broken.  That leaker who destroyed Weigel’s career had agreed to the off-the-record nature of the 400-strong list; the minute the leaker went public with the material the story was no longer about Weigel but about the JournoList itself. (more…)

Welcome to the Journolist Top Secret Progressive He-Man Wingnut Haters Club and L33t H4xoR Chat Room. Disclaimer: this is a private discussion forum intended solely for the benefit of JournoList members. Reproduction, transmission, redistribution, or description, in whole or in part, of any content (including, but not limited to, private insults, insider innuendo, political manifestos, hair styling tips and/or gossip) without the expressed written consent of the commissioner is strictly prohibited. Please read and agree to the User Consent Form. And, as always, remember the first rule of JournoList: there is no JournoList.

EZRA KLEIN has entered the room.
MATTHEW YGLESIAS has entered the room.
ERIC BOEHLERT has entered the room.
JOSH MARSHALL has entered the room.

EZRA KLEIN: wassup

MATTHEW YGLESIAS: my dick

JOSH MARSHALL: lolz!!!

EZRA KLEIN: hahahahahaha

MATTHEW YGLESIAS: whos got assignmt for 1st period talking points for tomorrow

JOSH MARSHALL: boehlert was supposed to get them from Mr Soros

JOSH MARSHALL: boehlert???

EZRA KLEIN: yo eric where r u

ERIC BOEHLERT: sorry went off to get a red bull

JOSH MARSHALL: ridin tha bull (more…)

This is a photo of Dave Weigel.

Dave Weigel is holding a “Teabag Them Before They Teabag You” doll.

Dave was hired as the “conservative writer” for The Washington Post despite his leftist leanings.

Dave is also a member of JournoList.

Leftist media hack and WaPo journalist Ezra Klein founded Journolist with far left crank Joe Klein from TIME magazine in February of 2007. Klein admitted that Journolist was an “insulated space where the lure of a smart, ongoing conversation would encourage journalists, policy experts and assorted other observers to share their insights with one another.” But, you had to be a leftist to join this group. It was an exclusive club. And, it grew to include 400 of the most prominent leftist American journalists who shared ideas and helped spin the far left narrative in the state-run media. This is where far left cranks colluded to spit out the DNC’s talking points and to defend President Barack Obama’s radical agenda.

Last week Dave Weigel was outed as a member of Journolist and resigned from his position as “conservative writer” for The Washington Post. The left was hoping this would be the end of the story. They were wrong. Yesterday, Andrew Breitbart announced that he would reward $100,000 to anyone who could provide the full “JournoList” archive, source fully protected. (more…)