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…)

From J. Christian Adams at Pajamas Media:

Dana Loesch is their latest target for a simple reason — thugs like Eric Boehlert at Media Matters only attack the most effective critics of the government, and particularly those who cannot be easily cowed.  They don’t waste energy smearing conservatives at some websites who ponder topics as scintillating as how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.  They don’t waste time on conservative news outlets that either don’t understand the modern Left, or have never effectively opposed it.

Loesch, on the other hand, lands blows in her defense of liberty.  Both on her syndicated radio show, and at BigJournalism, her appeal is her courage and her uncompromising message.  She is precisely what the Soros-funded drones are tasked with snuffing out.

(more…)

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.

Meanwhile, a former MMfA Director of External Affairs, Xochitl Hinojosa, who had actually joined the Department of Justice in July of 2009 as a Public Affairs Specialist, took an active role in pushing back against the story from witin DOJ.

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:

(more…)

I’ve become fascinated by the methods that Media Matters for America uses, especially since I’ve seen work that I’ve done on Pigford fall victim to them.  This is part one of an occasional series I’ll do pointing out the weird little fallacies and mind tricks they play.

Today’s Method : Heavy Self-Selective Editing

This one defies any sense to the point that it becomes something Obi-Wan would be impressed by. Basically, MMfA posts something that contains information that would make any impartial observer ask a question or two. You don’t hide the information in any way. No editing is involved, no
apparent trickery.

Then — abracadabra! — watch as nearly every comment ignores the information. Ignores, as in acts like it never even existed. This works even if the video is 99% suprising or shocking information. Poof! Huh?

My example is this video.

Watch as J. Christian Adams explains in detail a disturbing trend at DOJ of ignoring FOIA requests from right-leaning groups. He explains this at great length.

Shazzamm! Comment after comment and no mention of this.

(more…)

I’ve said before that the media is so invested in this administration because their very survival depends upon its success. The only people who consume mainstream media anymore are the people who are part of the ideology that the MSM blatantly supports. They’ve bet all their chips on the success of the Progressocrats, the new amalgam of socialists and Democrats which saw the progressive caucus bubble up within the DNC before eating it away from the inside.

You won’t see the stories below in the pages of the NYT or on the screens of NBC. You won’t hear them discussed at the water cooler. They’re the stories that show without any doubt the cards held by those who wish to enslave the masses to the god of government. A theocracy, to be sure, but one that holds up the state above all else.

Each of these stories have been chronicled across the Bigs sites over the past year. These stories are what progressives are trying desperately to erase from the annals of history, an effort that the new penny press, new media, refuses to allow.

1. The Pigford Case

You have a finite number of black farmers discriminated against by the USDA. They are awarded a settlement. You have over 73,000 more applicants, more than the number of actual farmers or people related to farming, all claiming a piece of the settlement. The settlement is billions of dollars of taxpayer money. Over 36% of the claims were already rejected due to fraud. Instead of vetting the claims and awarding to those who were truly wronged, elected officials decide to increase the size of the settlement so everyone can get a check. People who farmed their whole lives got the same size check as someone who never farmed.

If you think that sounds wonky, then you may be someone who doesn’t believe that the Pigford case was on the up-and-up. Also, you are probably a racist, since this case involves black Americans and even the original black farmers who are raising concern about this case are also racists, according to INSERT SOROS OUTLET HERE.

Related:

Pigford Investigation Resources

Credit Where It’s Due: HuffPo Blogger On Pigford Fraud

2. Journolist

Long story short: a bunch of editorial geniuses decided to gather in an email distro and share ideas about how to inject their socialist narrative into mainstream media. They also talked smack about conservative political leaders because takes balls to talk cruelly about people with whom you disagree in a private email thread full of glee club members. These people all still write for the same publications that they did before, with the exception of the whistleblower, and these are the folks who tell you that media is not progressively biased.

(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:

Last week, I found myself in the crosshairs of conservative ire because a news analysis I wrote didn’t take the allegations of voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party story as seriously as conservatives felt it should.

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…)

As the mainstream media trips over itself to analyze and re-analyze the Shirley Sherrod controversy, Andrew Breitbart is under fire for ostensibly unethical behavior. Andrew is more than capable of defending himself, but I wanted to offer a few quick thoughts on this imbroglio:

(1) This President often decries the 24-hour, hyper-reactionary media cycle, yet his administration responded with warp-speed to toss Sherrod overboard. Can it now safely be asserted that the Obama administration “acted stupidly”?

(2) The administration’s thoughtless abandonment of Sherrod indicates a hair-trigger climate of paranoia about all issues racial within the West Wing. It seems J. Christian Adams’ whistle-blowing has taken its toll, and Team Obama is nervous about the degree of scrutiny its racially-tinged political machinations have received. On the heels of the New Black Panther kerfuffle, another major race flap just wouldn’t do–thus, a low-level African American female was deemed expendable, and was unceremoniously dumped. The White House now claims they didn’t press for Sherrod’s dismissal, yet is apologizing to her. Hmm.

(3) MSM critics are pouncing on Breitbart & Co. for “smearing” Sherrod by exploiting out-of-context remarks. As others have noted, many of these same critics were remarkably mute as the ACORN videos were revealed, yet eagerly jumped into the fray to prematurely crucify James O’Keefe when he was arrested in Louisiana. These duplicitous observers were also conspicuously subdued as Andrew Breitbart beat back the “N-word” accusations invented by the Congressional Black Caucus. The story selection speaks for itself. (more…)

My name is Hippocritico and I’m here to help my friends in the mainstream media protect their journalistic legacies by making sure they don’t come off as brazen, biased, hypocrites by covering a particular story that hurts one political party and not covering another story that hurts another.

A tale of one “journalist” and two news stories:

On one hand, we have the story of J. Christian Adams, a Department of Justice whistleblower who testified on the record to ongoing and systemic discrimination at the DOJ. As of today, a good faith search of the Politico site fails to show the name of said whistleblower having ever appeared anywhere on Politico. This includes Ben Smith’s 1200-plus word spread about a single conservative he scraped up who believes the whole Black Panther story is silly (which appears to be the only coverage of the story Politico has bothered with). 

On the other hand, we have Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin mangling a word on Twitter. This very same Ben Smith not only found this Tweet worth mentioning, but worth mentioning in a headline where he linked to a blogger who accused Palin of “joining forces” with the “anti-Muslim Bigot Brigade.” (more…)

Obama’s Con-Man-in-Chief, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, has told a reporter, to say the least implausibly, that he has not “paid any attention” to former Department of Justice attorney J. Christian Adams’s shocking (and corroborated) revelations that the president’s appointees at DOJ…

• abandoned a slam-dunk voter intimidation case for racial reasons against the New Black Panther Party, a virulent hate group whose members have long been known for anti-white rants, death threats, and even praise of Osama Bin Laden;

• instructed lawyers in its civil rights division to disregard cases that involve black defendants and white victims;

• directed Voter Section employees not to ensure, as required by law, that no ineligible voters were on the rolls, even though there is evidence that illegal aliens and immigrants with green cards are committing rampant voter fraud in the U.S.; and

• is now considering a submission by Ike Brown, a Democratic Party Chairman in Mississippi, to run elections in Mississippi, even though a federal court already stripped him of that authority after he victimized minority white voters and otherwise prevented people from voting based on their party loyalties.

For the most part the progressive media, in step with Gibbs, have brushed off Adams’s momentous testimony – momentous because it suggests Obama’s DOJ to be infected with a monstrous black nationalist ideology not unlike that of Obama’s longtime mentor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright. (more…)

Today’s case study in Newsweek’s shameless bias disguised as news reporting comes via David A. Graham’s article “The New Black Panther Party Is the New ACORN” published yesterday. It begins with this: “As voter intimidation exercises go, it wasn’t much.” And it gets worse from there. The real story according to Graham is how a minor case of voter intimidation was overblown by conservatives media outlets to attack the White House.

Graham links to five stories at three different sites–Hot Air, Michelle Malkin, and Red State–as proof that conservative blogs “can’t get enough.” He mentions that the incident was caught on tape but, strangely, doesn’t include the footage on the page or even recommend that his readers view it. Could it be that the sight of a man brandishing a baton in front of a polling place is a bit too incriminating for the narrative he’s trying to spin?

Then, out of nowhere, Graham compares the incident to the ACORN investigation: (more…)

My name is Hippocritico and I’m here to help my friends in the mainstream media protect their journalistic legacies by making sure they don’t come off as brazen, biased, hypocrites by covering a particular story that hurts one political party and not covering a similar story that hurts a different one.

Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane of The Washington Post are obviously concerned with issues of discrimination in America. Here’s their coverage of an event that’s now famous for never really happening:

Black lawmakers said some protesters hurled racial epithets at them, and in one instance, spit upon them.

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) said that he was walking into the Capitol to vote when a protester spat on him. Police quickly responded and detained the protester, Cleaver said in a statement, but the lawmaker declined to press charges.

Others hurled epithets at Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a former civil rights leader, and Rep. Andre Carson (D-Ind.) as they left the Capitol after Obama’s speech.

“They were shouting the N-word,” Carson told reporters. “It was like a page out of a time machine.”

However, if Lorie and Paul  are looking for what could be a real story and scandal involving discrimination, I’ve laid it all out for them below. (more…)

So CBS shows up and does Face The Nation from the Aspen Ideas Festival. Great idea. Perfect chance to talk to Eric Holder about the whistleblower who this week said Holder refused to prosecute a New Black Panther member because of his race.

I guess Bob Schieffer didn’t have time to ask that question. The media normally loves racially charged stories, but in this case, they must not have had time in the half-hour show, or perhaps CBS didn’t want to do the story, or perhaps CBS doesn’t even know about the story. Like the rest of the LAMBS in the old media they have had a hard time doing anything that might be negative towards the Obama Administration.

Holder did get a few laughs during the show, which was taped in front of a live audience. He didn’t want the laughs, did not intend to get the laughs—but the crowd thought he was funny.

When he danced around the British Petroleum lawsuit question the crowd roared in laughter. Schieffer thought it was an “unusual” thing that the Obama Administration seemed more interested in filing suit against BP to further harm the company, instead of presumably focusing on stopping the leak. Holder said he filed the suit, but “did not say who the subject of the investigation was.”  (Insert laugh track here.) Calm down Holder, you’re cracking us up out here! (more…)