It’s becoming clearer and clearer that the Obama Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder is not just politicized and biased – it’s a hit squad for Obama’s enemies.
Remember when President Obama’s Department of Justice shut down investigation of the New Black Panther Party in the aftermath of their taped voter intimidation in 2008? J. Christian Adams, author of the book Injustice: Exposing the Racial Agenda of the Obama Justice Department and former DOJ attorney, exposed the DOJ’s corruption in dropping the case altogether. Or how about when the DOJ stonewalled investigations into Fast and Furious, the gunwalking operation that ended with weapons in the hands of the Mexican drug cartels – weapons used to kill American citizens?
Well, the DOJ is on the warpath again. Not against the New Black Panthers or the Mexican drug cartels – against Rupert Murdoch. According to Reuters, “U.S. authorities are stepping up investigations, including an FBI criminal inquiry, into possible violations by employees of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire of a U.S. law banning corrupt payments to foreign officials such as police, law enforcement and corporate sources said.” What’s the evidence on which they’re basing the investigation? Says Reuters, “U.S. investigators have found little to substantiate allegations of phone hacking inside the United States by Murdoch journalists, the sources added.”
So why, then, is the DOJ so intent on finding wrongdoing about Murdoch? It couldn’t have something to do with Murdoch’s ownership of Fox News – the same network the Obama White House tried to exclude from inside administration interviews, according to papers uncovered by Judicial Watch – could it? (more…)
Attorney General Eric Holder needs to send Charlie Savage at The New York Times a huge box of chocolates for Valentine’s Day. The NYT is the biggest cheerleader for Mr. Holder and this entire administration.
We all know how well I get along with Mr. Savage. His articles are notorious for being incredibly pro-Holder. This one is no different. Actually, it’s very anti-Darrell Issa. There isn’t anything negative about Mr. Holder or the Democrats on the committee. The more I read it I realize it’s not really about the hearing: It’s almost as if Mr. Savage and the Times used it as an excuse to write an article to prop up Mr. Holder. Mr. Savage completely glosses over anything the Republicans brought up.
First off, Mr. Savage, Operation Fast and Furious was not botched. Katie Pavlich at Townhall wrote about it here. It worked exactly the way it was suppose to. It was not botched. It did not fail. If anything, Operation Fast and Furious worked out the exact way it should.
Mr. Savage is right: The Republicans did rip into Mr. Holder, but for good reason. He forgets to mention the reason why the Republicans are so mad. They gave Mr. Holder and the DOJ a subpoena on October 12, 2011 and the department has given them the bare minimum. The department is stonewalling them. They’re mad because the documents were dumped on a Friday night. Again. Mr. Savage only brings up a quote from Representative Burton about Mr. Holder stonewalling them. He could have talked about Mr. Issa’s opening statement about the DOJ not cooperating.
On Monday Representative Darrell Issa threatened Attorney General Eric Holder with a contempt of Congress if he does not fulfill Mr. Issa’s subpoena from October 12, 2011. Hardly anyone reported it. But then when I went to Google “Issa Eric Holder” this evening and a bunch of results came up. Unfortunately it was not about Mr. Issa’s statements. Instead it’s all about Mr. Holder and the Department of Justice’s remarks.
I’ve mentioned before it’s unusual for the Old Media to run any Fast and Furious news if the AP didn’t run something first. Same thing with this story. AP didn’t bother to post a story about Mr. Issa, but as soon as Mr. Holder says something they’re all over it. It’s quite pathetic and reminds me of Pavlov’s dog. This is the explanation of Mr. Issa’s letter:
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., made the accusation in a letter threatening to seek a contempt of Congress ruling against Attorney General Eric Holder for failing to turn over congressionally subpoenaed documents that were created after problems with Fast and Furious came to light. Holder was to testify Thursday before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which Issa chairs.
That’s it. No mention that this is a response to his subpoena on October 12, 2011. No mention of the emails sent Friday night. But the media goes crazy and reprints this article.
Not every outlet used the AP story though. The Washington Post again had an original piece written by Sari Horwitz! Weird, isn’t it, that she writes original posts when the DOJ and Democrats are on the defense. Surprise surprise! The story is on the front page of the website.
Remember this? Yes, last Friday night the DOJ dumped documents on Congress about Fast and Furious. Anyone with an ounce of common sense & critical thinking skills would come to the conclusion based on the emails between Monty Wilkinson, Attorney General Eric Holder’s then deputy chief of staff, and then-US Attorney Dennis Burke, Mr. Holder and quite possible Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer knew about Operation Fast and Furious.
The majority of the media ignored the documents. They took the AP article and printed it, but buried it among other articles. Only NPR, The Daily Caller, and CBS had original articles. The New York Times really buried it: Even if you searched for it you wouldn’t find it. The AP article mentions the emails at the very end, but just repeats the talking points instead of using their common sense. “Mr. Wilkinson does not recall discussing this aspect with the attorney general.” Come on people let’s use our brains! Do you believe Mr. Wilkinson, Mr. Holder’s deputy chief of staff, did NOT tell his boss about this?
But Congressional Democrats and the media don’t think this way. Instead of investigating further they simply take someone’s word, even if it sounds suspicious. This morning I saw an alert from The New York Times. The Democrats on The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee cleared the Obama administration of any wrong doing. This is the same Times that ignored the Friday night document dump. This story appeared on the front page of their US section and is an original piece written by Charlie Savage. Ironically the article by Pete Yost at the AP is the most concise one he’s written about Fast and Furious. Gee, I wonder why. The Huffington Post put Mr. Yost’s article on the front page of their politics section. What’s this I see? The Washington Post actually didn’t publish the AP article, but had Sari Horwirz write an original piece? I believe that hasn’t happened since September.
The Washington Post reports that journalists are complaining of the White House’s heavy-handed rudeness towards them when they do anything but fawn over the administration, branding the correspondence “nastygrams.”
… this year, some reporters say, things have taken a decidedly frosty turn.
When a reporter gets something wrong or is perceived as being too aggressive, the response is often swift and sometimes at top volume, reporters say …
… In one of the e-mails that reporters have dubbed “nastygrams,” White House press secretary Jay Carney branded one of Mason’s stories “partisan, inflammatory and tendentious.” National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor, reacting to comments Mason made in a TV discussion, sent her an e-mail that included an animated picture of a crying mime — a visual suggestion that she was whining.
WaPo tries to offset this by reminding readers of how past press secretaries went to bat with media bosses over the heads of beat reporters, but this pales in comparison to what we’ve seen from the “most transparent” administration ever.
Although many praise Carney for improved access, they say the tone of private communication has become harsher under him.
You think? And it’s not just Jay Carney — it’s the entire administration:
Joe Biden’s office has complained to the Senate press gallery about a confrontation the vice president had with a conservative journalist last week on Capitol Hill.
Biden aides asked whether Senate rules were broken in the wake of the contentious exchange between the vice president and the reporter.
Fed up with the media attention, Eric Holder today lashed out at the Daily Caller for daring to ask him about the scandal, replete with finger-pointing.
Embattled Attorney General Eric Holder today demanded The Daily Caller stop publishing articles about the growing calls in Congress for his resignation because of the failed Operation Fast and Furious gun-walking program.
As Holder’s aide was escorting the attorney general offstage following his remarks Tuesday afternoon at the White House, a Daily Caller reporter introduced himself and shook Holder’s hand. The reporter asked him for a response to the growing chorus of federal legislators demanding his resignation.
Holder stepped towards the exit, then turned around, stepped back toward the reporter, and sternly said, “You guys need to — you need to stop this. It’s not an organic thing that’s just happening. You guys are behind it.”
The press is behind it? The Daily Caller reporter? Holder behaves as if this reporter walked guns across the border himself, only to return to the office and pen salacious stories about Holder’s knowledge and sanction of it.
“That is a complete distortion of the attorney general’s comment. His comments both in the article and elsewhere made clear that he believes much of the criticism is launched against him are unfortunately the typical Washington gotcha game. A simple reading of those comments show he was referring to how he is identified with the president given their close relationship and all they share in common including their ideology. The position of the attorney general has been a target for partisan attacks, and given the critical work that this attorney general he is doing at the Department of Justice, it’s no surprise that some are engaging in such tactics. His critics rightly view the attorney general is a progressive force, and given our current political environment, there will those who use any opportunity to score political points.”
Here’s what we supposedly confused [bold my emphasis]:
Of that group of critics, Mr. Holder said he believed that a few — the “more extreme segment” — were motivated by animus against Mr. Obama and that he served as a stand-in for him. “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” he said, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”
So exactly what did we distort? There’s a key word in Mr. Savage’s sentence: animus. This is Merriam-Webster’s definition:
2: a usually prejudiced and often spiteful or malevolent ill will
3: an inner masculine part of the female personality in the analytic psychology of C. G. Jung — compare anima
I’m going with definition 2. Those of the “most extreme segment” which, let’s be honest here, include Sharyl Attkisson, Cam Edwards, Matthew Boyle, Katie Pavlich, and myself, have a spiteful or malevolent ill will towards President Obama and Mr. Holder because of their relationship and they’re African American. Could the DOJ please explain to us how that doesn’t mean he played the race card? Mr. Holder said we have a prejudiced and often spiteful or malevolent ill will against him and President Obama because of their skin color. That’s calling us a racist. RACIST. Yes Mr. Holder played the race card. He said we are attacking him because he is African American.
I need to start off all my posts about Operation Fast and Furious with this statement: Thank goodness we have Sharyl Attkisson, Katie Pavlich, Matthew Boyle, and Cam Edwards. Seriously, without them Operation Fast and Furious would stay hidden. So please thank them and support them as much as you can.
December is only 14 days old and so much has happened in the Operation Fast and Furious story. However if you don’t pay attention to those reporters I mentioned earlier you wouldn’t know because the Old Media is still doing their best to ignore or bury the story. Here’s some of the developments:
I am not shocked at all the media ignored Ms. Attkisson’s breaking story about the ATF using Fast and Furious to enforce more gun regulations. After all, it would be admitting all along that we were right and they were wrong. They thought we were crazy because we knew Fast and Furious was a way to put restrictions on guns, but now they’re eating their words and I bet they’re delicious! I searched the Old Media’s websites and couldn’t find anything on it. If I am wrong please let me know.
This one cannot be blamed on new media. Senator Grassley didn’t tell this to Mr. Boyle or even pen an op-ed for The Washington Times. No, he said this on the Senate floor for everyone to hear. However, the media buried the story. Only The Washington Times had it on their front page. The other major outlets posted a story about it, but you had to search for it. It wasn’t on the front page or the front page of the US and politics sections. While ABC World News and NBC Nightly News did not talk about it on their programs, the ABC and MSNBC websites did post the AP story.
Sharyl Attkisson, Matthew Boyle, Katie Pavlich, and Cam Edwards did a great job covering all of these stories. Other Old Media outlets covered them but buried them deep in their websites and newspapers. Two news organizations didn’t report on any of these. One of them is NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams. Cam Edwards appears to be right. NBC will do anything to avoid mentioning Operation Fast and Furious. Then again, they haven’t mentioned Fast and Furious ONCE all year, but this past week would have been the best time.
This is no surprise, though. I’ve already written about Mr. Williams completely ignoring Operation Fast and Furious. I thought maybe, just maybe, the program would finally mention it. All the calls for resignation didn’t do it, so maybe this testimony would, especially due to the heated exchanges between Mr. Holder and Mr. Issa. But just because it isn’t a surprise doesn’t mean we shouldn’t call them out. Too many people have died, including Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, because of this operation. (more…)
ABC World News is no better than NBC Nightly News. Last week was the time to do it: Department of Justice dumping 1,400 pages on Congress, Sharyl Attkisson releasing information showing they wanted to use Fast and Furious to mandate new gun laws, and, of course, Eric Holder’s testimony. Then again ABC World News has never mentioned Operation Fast and Furious all year. Why start now?
The day of the document dump, Friday, December 2, ABC decided to do a segment on how the elderly are working well into their 90s and a story about a fallen soldier’s dog. But let’s just give them the benefit of the doubt and maybe they just ran out of time. They had the whole weekend to get a segment for it.
Come Monday did it appear on the show? No: Instead, Tiger Woods’s comeback is a much bigger story than the document dump from the previous Friday. Then they had to do a healthy living segment to tell us that too much sitting is bad for us. Yes didn’t you know to much sitting is bad for you? If you’re going to do a healthy living segment at least tell us something we don’t know.
Instead of talking about Mr. Holder’s testimony the next day or new documents revealing the intent to use Fast & Furious to mandate new gun laws, ABC talks about Alec Baldwin getting kicked off a plane. An entire segment was devoted to him. They actually did a study group to figure out which one was right: Baldwin or the flight attendant. They’re able to fit in a few sentences about Blago’s jail sentence too. Surprise! Another governor from my home state is going to prison! They couldn’t fit in one or two sentences about the attorney general testifying? No?
And it’s legal. Legal and the government doesn’t disclose the details. Mary Chastain has been all over Fast and Furious for the past several weeks. You’d think such a story as this would be headline news, considering we’re talking about thousands and thousands and thousands of firearms sold to Mexico over the past several years. The numbers keep going up, but the most Transparent Administration Ever stopped disclosing the number of sales. Sharyl Attkisson has been performing top-notch journalism in uncovering this and other stories similar to the Fast and Furious program.
Today, Media Matters for America has taken it upon itself to ask the question: “Who Is J. Christian Adams?” .
They say:
New Black Panthers Party fabulist J. Christian Adams is a long-time right-wing activist who began working for the U.S. Department of Justice during its notorious era of politicized hiring and now blogs for the right-wing media site Pajamas Media, often issuing false attacks on the Obama DOJ for its supposed politicization and “racial agenda.” His forthcoming book, Injustice: Exposing The Racial Agenda Of The Obama Justice Department, promises to cover similar territory.
In its attacks on Adams, Media Matters has even stooped to posting his home address and alleging that he is a Republican donor–without mentioning that he has also contributed to Democrats.
Media Matters also tries to dismiss Andrew Breitbart’s report this morning that Barack Obama spoke and marched with the New Black Panther Party while he was campaigning for president. They note that “several thousand people ‘appeared and marched’ with the New Black Panthers that day”–a point that Breitbart’s post itself made clear.
What Media Matters doesn’t want to tell you is what Adams’s book reveals: that the New Black Panthers were there to support Obama, and said so earlier that day while Obama listened and smiled; that the Panthers shadowed him, left the march with him, and raised black power salutes over his head; and that Shabazz claimed he spoke with Obama.
If there was a 4th of July event and the Ku Klux Klan were given a speaker’s slot, would any GOP candidate be stupid enough to speak there? Why, then, is it acceptable to Media Matters for Obama and other Democrats to have spoken and marched with the Panthers?
Media Matters refers to the ‘fable’ of the New Black Panther Party, but they don’t tell their readers anything at all about the New Black Panthers. In fact, they don’t seem to be critical of the New Black Panther Party in any way.
So, who is the New Black Panther Party?
I’ll do a short summary with a lot of video because, frankly, a tiny bit of research quickly brings up how awful this group is.
Let’s start with a video of Geraldo Rivera taking on New Black Panther Party leader Malik Zulu Shabazz over his statement after 9/11 that “Brother” Osama bin Laden deserved “respect” and applause:
That’s the reality of the New Black Panther Party. The fact that MMfA chooses to shield their readers from it in order to attack J. Christian Adams–who opposes this group–is repulsive. Apparently, attacking a conservative trumps telling the truth about a racist, homophonic, antisemitic hate group.
Here are some more facts about the New Black Panther Party. (more…)
When news broke of alleged voter intimidation involving the New Black Panthers Party in the 2008 election, Media Matters for America (MMfA) launched a relentless push back against the charges, resulting in almost 8,000 MMfA site specific Google hits in which MMfA attacked virtually anyone who attempted to report on the controversy, while elevating any reporting that minimized it, or the Department of Justice’s decision to drop the case.
Apparently, the Justice Department is going by George Orwell’s famous Animal Farm ending:
“All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” “We can only take action where we have legal authority,” wrote DOJ spokeswoman Xochitl Hinojosa in a December 2010 e-mail to The Washington Times Water Cooler. She continues: “As stated in the website below, we are statutorily authorized to initiate suits under Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, and under Title III of the American with Disabilities Act.
It’s not unusual for D.C. professionals to move in and out of government positions. Yet given MMfA’s acute focus on the Panthers/DOJ story, Hinojosa’s involvement with and ties to MMfA invite speculation as to what extent MMfA and DOJ might have cooperated in pushing back against a potentially explosive story for the Obama administration.
Indeed, today, MMfA is already attacking J. Christian Adams and his forthcoming book on Obama’s beleaguered Department of Justice, which has shown itself, in the Panthers case and in others, as one of the most politicized DOJ’s in modern history. (For more on new evidence linking Obama directly to the New Black Panthers, see this exclusive at Big Government today: Shock Photos: Candidate Obama Appeared And Marched With New Black Panther Party in 2007.)
Hinojosa has at times been quoted by Media Matters on a variety of stories that pertain to the DOJ. Yet the organization does not mention that she used to work for it, nor is that information available on MMfA’s current website. This 2009 cached snapshot of the Media Matters website confirms her tenure there:
This news comes as no surprise, but as was the case with the ACORN video exposé, the target of Live Action’s investigation is not any specific branch manager.
PERTH AMBOY — The man and woman walked into the Planned Parenthood clinic in Perth Amboy sounding like the operators of a child sex ring looking for help with their business.
They told the manager they would bring in girls as young as 14 for tests, birth control and abortion referrals and wanted to know what kind of questions to expect from clinic employees.
The manager was helpful. She coached them to lie about the age of the girls’ sex partners. “If they are a minor, we are obligated if we hear certain information, to kind of report (it),” the manager said. “So as long as they just lie and say, ‘Oh, he’s 15, 16,’ ’’ no one should question them.
But the man and woman were actually members of Live Action, a California-based anti-abortion group that targeted Planned Parenthood clinics in five states and Washington, D.C., last month. The scenes were videotaped and posted on YouTube, and today created a national uproar.
Tonight, Central Jersey Planned Parenthood fired the manager, identified in the video as Amy Woodruff, and beefed up security around its clinics. (more…)
The footage corroborates a 2002 extensive study of Planned Parenthood clinics performed by Life Dynamics. Through a series of phone calls, the study documents over 90% of over 800 abortion clinics willing to cover up sexual abuse.
In ten Planned Parenthood clinics, Live Action videos depict investigators posing as underage girls, as young as 13-years-old, saying they were impregnated by men over twice their age. Planned Parenthood’s typical response? “Whatever you tell us stays within these walls” (Alabama). Or, “I didn’t hear the age, I don’t want to know the age” (Indiana). Or, “You don’t have to say anything” (Arizona). Or, “Just say he’s 15″ (Tennessee).
We have also chronicled Planned Parenthood workers giving outright medical misinformation and manipulating vulnerable young women to purchase abortions. We’ve shown Planned Parenthood willing to accept funds for race-based abortions of unborn Black children. And for those who are willing to face the ultimate abuse of a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic, we’ve released a video revealing what abortion does to the defenseless unborn child.
What will it take for Congress to stop funding this abusive and corrupt billion-dollar organization? What will it take for the Department of Justice to launch a thorough investigation of Planned Parenthood’s sexual abuse cover-up and medical misinformation? What will it take for us, the American public, to say, “Enough is enough!”
Hopefully this:
Our investigative team has taken things a step further. We have intensified the scenario. During the past three years of research, our team became aware of the horrific connection between human sex trafficking and “confidential” abortion clinics that refuse to report abuse. Read the testimonies of human trafficking victims. You’ll find heartbreaking stories of manipulation, rape, sexually contracted diseases, and coerced abortion.
Think about it. Where is a pimp going to send his victims if they get pregnant on the “job”? An abortion clinic, and preferably one that won’t ask any questions. What if those victims are young girls, kidnapped or drafted in from the US, or trafficked in from other nations? Planned Parenthood has demonstrated that they do not report abuse. They are experts at turning a blind eye and asking for “as little information as possible.”
But would Planned Parenthood go as far as aiding and abetting the sex trafficking of underage girls?
This video reveals a top-level Planned Parenthood worker, the manager of Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey’s second largest clinic, making a secret deal with a pimp. Watch and listen as the Planned Parenthood manager, Amy Woodruff, advises the pimp how to make the trafficking of underage girls look “as legit as possible” (her words). Watch and listen as the manager advises the pimp how to ensure that his 14-year old victims of trafficking can still make money for him after secret abortions by performing sex acts “waist up” (her idea). Watch as she advises the pimp to instruct his girls to lie on the paper work about their ages, and identify themselves as “students” to get cheaper contraception and avoid mandatory reporting laws.
We are calling on Congress to immediately freeze all funding of Planned Parenthood. We request that the Department of Justice and FBI launch a full-scale investigation of Planned Parenthood and prosecute the aiding and abetting of human trafficking.
We are also calling on state authorities to immediately revoke the licenses of all Planned Parenthood clinics found covering up sex abuse. (more…)
Attorney General Eric Holder recently made statements to the New York Times so detached from reality that they could have been written by scheming Republican operatives for fun. In particular, Holder tells the Times that the lawless dismissal of voter intimidation charges against the New Black Panthers is “a made up controversy.” I have written about Holder’s accelerating detachment from reality in the interview, along with Jen Rubin.
Putting aside the fact video exists of the armed uniformed thugs in Philadelphia, Holder did something even worse than flirt with kooky conspiratorial characterizations of the fallout from the Black Panther dismissal. When Holder announced to the New York Times that there “is no there there,” he let the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) know what he believes the outcome of their ongoing investigation into the dismissal should be. In other words, he tampered with their investigation.
Holder’s close friend Deputy Attorney General James Cole will have the power to veto any critical conclusions by OPR.
Multiple attorneys, including me, have testified under oath that the Obama Civil Rights Division will not enforce civil rights laws in a race-neutral fashion. Numerous attorneys still at the Justice Department have confirmed the substance of our testimony to the Washington Post. Numerous other attorneys no longer at the Justice Department have also confirmed our testimony. (more…)
Last week, a post I wrote for Big Journalism which, unbeknownst to me, possibly inspired Bill O’Reilly’s Talking Points Memo later that evening. I’m embarrassed to say I didn’t notice it at the time. I watch Bill and the rest of the Fox guys when I can, but with three kids in the house it’s not every day. In any case, my post and Bill’s memo were strongly worded critiques of this David A. Graham piece for Newsweek in which he downplayed the New Black Panther story. Last Friday, Graham issued a somewhat belated response to Bill and me (okay, I admit, I like saying that). Here’s how his piece opens:
Right off the bat we’ve shifted the goalposts. My critique was based on Graham’s biased handling of the material, in particular his use of the hacks and non-entities at Media Matters as a primary source, as well as his failure to get even Media Matters’ highly spun version of the story straight. Here’s a bit of what I wrote:
That second link–the one about questionable testimony–goes right back to Media Matters. David A. Graham summarizes MM’s lengthy hit piece by saying, “there are doubts about whether he was actually present for the incidents he described.” Well, no, there are not doubts about that at all. In his interview with Megyn Kelly (which Media Matters transcribes), [J. Christian] Adams plainly states that he wasn’t there…
That’s not a critique of Graham’s news judgment; it’s a critique of his facts. Rather than address the problem directly or issue a correction, he simply revises his original claim in the new piece: (more…)
On Sunday the Washington Post ombudsman, Andrew Alexander, issued an interesting apology for his paper’s failure to write about the Department of Justice’s handling of the Philadelphia New Black Panther Party case.
After summarizing the case and the controversy over it, Alexander admitted,
The Post didn’t cover it. Indeed, until Thursday’s story, The Post had written no news stories about the controversy this year. In 2009, there were passing references to it in only three stories.
That’s prompted many readers to accuse The Post of a double standard. Royal S. Dellinger of Olney [Maryland] said that if the controversy had involved Bush administration Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, “Lord, there’d have been editorials and stories, and it would go on for months.”
“To be sure,” Alexander said, “ideology and party politics are at play,” although he seemed to be referring only to liberal bloggers, “Fox News and right-wing bloggers,” “Congressional Republicans,” Sarah Palin, etc. No admission, that is, of ideology or party politics at the Post.
To his credit, Alexander chastises the Post for not covering the controversy and concludes by telling his colleagues, “Better late than never. There’s plenty left to explore.” He even suggests some topics: (more…)
The mainstream media isn’t biased. The mainstream media isn’t out of touch. The mainstream media isn’t living in some Manhattan/cocktail party bubble.
The mainstream media is corrupt.
Corrupt to its very core. Willingly, happily, consciously and giddily corrupt. From the day these left-wing propagandists exit whatever J-school taught them how to think, they are on a mission to support, defend, and uphold the Left. And as we’re seeing today, the whole sorry, wicked lot of them have just jumped in bed with the White House and the NAACP to get their lying, left-wing freak on.
Let’s use a little Matrix bullet-time to slow things down and watch how and why this NAACP condemnation of the Tea Party came about at this particular time:
1. After winning a case against The New Black Panther Party for the most obvious display of voter intimidation this side of Bull Connor, Obama’s Justice Department under Eric Holder inexplicably drops the charges against them.
2. A government whistleblower, J. Christian Adams, testifies there is ongoing discrimination at the DOJ — that they are refusing to take seriously any case where the defendants are black and the plaintiffs white.
3. This potentially explosive story begins to bubble in the alternative media.
4. The mainstream media wilfully ignores the story but pressure from the alternative media is starting to make this more and more difficult by the hour. (more…)
The cover-up continues. This past Sunday, Congressman Joe Sestak appeared on Meet the Press and continued to tap dance around the charge he made that he was offered a government job to drop out of the campaign. Here’s the exchange between Sestak and NBC’s David Gregory:
MR. GREGORY: Yes or no, straightforward question. Were you, were you offered a job, and what was the job?
REP. SESTAK: I was offered a job, and I answered that.
MR. GREGORY: You said no, you wouldn’t take the job. Was it the secretary of the Navy?
REP. SESTAK: Right. And I also said, “Look, I’m getting into this…
MR. GREGORY: Was it the secretary of the Navy job?
REP. SESTAK: Anything that go — goes beyond that is others — for others to talk about.
Well it’s not exactly “for others to talk about” Congressman Sestak. (more…)
There are only two choices: either Attorney General Eric Holder has nothing to hide, or he is trying to hide something. If the former is true, why does Holder refuse to put names to the seven anonymous Department of Justice attorneys whom he admits once represented terrorist detainees before joining the Obama administration? If the latter is the case, why is the old media ignoring the story?
Responding to an inquiry from Senator Charles Grassley, Holder admitted that nine DOJ attorneys had previously been involved defending detainees:
“To the best of our knowledge, during their employment prior to joining the government, only five of the lawyers who serve as political appointees in those components represented detainees,” Holder said in a letter dated Feb. 18. “Four others contributed to amicus briefs in detainee-related cases involved in advocacy on behalf of detainees.”
Who are these attorneys? How deeply were they committed to protecting the “rights” of irregular troops bent on destruction of western civilization? (more…)
On my Twitter account, I follow a few hundred mainstream media-types (keep the enemy closer, right?), and unless I've missed it (and I hope I have), not a single one has spoken out in defense of Roland Martin. Not one. How scary is that. The politically correct Groupthink...
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?