web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > media bias

This Trump-Ukraine “Whistle-Blower” Story Is Ridiculous and It’s Going to Blow Up In the Media’s Face Again

Westlake Legal Group squinty-joe-biden-620x317 This Trump-Ukraine “Whistle-Blower” Story Is Ridiculous and It’s Going to Blow Up In the Media’s Face Again Ukraine right wing ridiculous republicans Politics Obama Administration media bias Joe Biden Hypocrisy hunter biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats Corruption Probe 2016

Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks with reporters after a campaign stop at Lindy’s Diner in Keene N.H., Saturday, Aug. 24, 2019. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)

You want to know why conservatives hate the liberal media and have no faith in many commentators on their own side? All you have to do is look at the reactions to this stupid story.

Yesterday, a supposed “bombshell” dropped via numerous anonymous sources that the much ballyhooed “whistle-blower” complaint against Trump involved him encouraging Ukraine’s new president to continue it’s corruption investigation into Joe Biden. To this point, we actually have no specifics saying Trump promised him anything after that request and you’d be remiss to ask why it’s wrong to ask an ally to look into corruption involving U.S. citizens.

Let me quote myself responding to the most fleshed out account of what is claimed to have happened. This was posted late last night.

As per usual, the media are losing their minds. Trump was pressuring an ally to conduct an investigation! It’s unheard of and unprecedented! Who could ever do such a thing!?

Oh, I don’t know. Maybe the Obama administration when they were working with UK intelligence, including using foreign assets, to target Trump in 2016? That seems like much more of a big deal given the only real allegation here is that Trump asked Ukraine to keep an already occurring corruption probe going in which we have the target on tape admitting what he did. I was assured that what happened in 2016 was above board because the Obama administration had legitimate suspicions. You know who else has legitimate suspicions? President Trump, because again, its on freaking video.

But ask yourself this. Why is the corruption Trump was asking to be probed not the actual story here? Let me refresh your memory of exactly what we are dealing with.

Yes, that’s Joe Biden, on tape admitting he threatened to withhold $1B in loan guarantees from Ukraine if they didn’t fire a prosecutor that was close to taking down the company his son worked for. Seems pretty corrupt doesn’t it? Yet, the media yawned. They didn’t care at all. It was barely reported and the “fact-checkers” rushed to deliver half-true ratings, shilling for Biden as not being aware his son was a member of the board of the company. It was all predictable.

But Trump asks Ukraine to keep looking into the issue and amazingly, the media care. Not only do they care, they want him impeached for “treason” over it. Yes, that was an actual thing said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe this morning.

So to recap, being on video trying to extort Ukraine to protect your son is perfectly acceptable. Asking Ukraine to not drop their investigation into someone who tried to extort them to protect their son is impeachable. Does that make sense? No, it doesn’t.

And as to this “whistle-blower,” he’s not one at all.

No, what it means is that an intelligence official has no right to force declassification of presidential communications just because he disagrees with what was said. That’s not being a whistle-blower. It’s being a partisan. The constitution gives near total unanimity to the President in conducting foreign policy. That means if he wants to ask an ally to investigate corruption or risk straining cooperation, he’s entitled to do so. You can not like it and you can vote him out in 2020 in response. But the laws don’t suddenly change just because Donald Trump is president.

The hypocrisy being displayed in the mainstream reporting of this story is mind-blowing. But the hypocrisy is part of the grift.

Perhaps the only thing more frustrating though is seeing some on the right rush to Twitter to proclaim how terrible this all because that’s what a certain wing always does. And when this blows up in the media’s and their faces (again), they’ll insist it was all just an honest mistake. Rinse and repeat.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post This Trump-Ukraine “Whistle-Blower” Story Is Ridiculous and It’s Going to Blow Up In the Media’s Face Again appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-08-21-at-10.25.40-AM-300x161 This Trump-Ukraine “Whistle-Blower” Story Is Ridiculous and It’s Going to Blow Up In the Media’s Face Again Ukraine right wing ridiculous republicans Politics Obama Administration media bias Joe Biden Hypocrisy hunter biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats Corruption Probe 2016   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

MSNBC Panelist Says He Constantly Fantasizes About Crashing His Car into Trump Plaza. Maybe He’s Waiting for the 1,000-Year Reich

Westlake Legal Group car-accident-337764_1280-620x349 MSNBC Panelist Says He Constantly Fantasizes About Crashing His Car into Trump Plaza. Maybe He’s Waiting for the 1,000-Year Reich Uncategorized Trump Plaza New York MSNBC media bias Media Front Page Stories Featured Story fake news elie mystal donald trump democrats Culture crime Allow Media Exception

 

 

Everyone has a fantasy or two.

For an MSNBC panelist, it’s driving his car straight into Trump Plaza.

And that’s the news.

Here’s more about fantasies: Elie Mystal, executive editor of Above the Law, tweeted Wednesday morning about his dreamy would-be car crash, along with an article about an actual Trump Plaza auto accident that resulted in several people being injured Tuesday night.

It’s a fantasy, but the talk is real:

“Real talk: When you come out of the parking lot of this mall/movie theater, you have to sit a red light staring right into this lobby.
I’ve thought about driving my car through it EVERY TIME. Basic humanity keeps me from doing it, but JUST.”

Elie noted that the “the view in this picture is exactly the view you have from the stop light.”

And that light, according to the aspiring felon/potential vehicular manslaughterer, is “long.”

He also theorized that Tuesday’s crash — which was determined by police to be an accident — was intentional.

Or MAYBE that’s his own bias:

“Anyway, innocent until proven guilty but…’accident’ doesn’t seem likely to me. Maybe that’s my own bias.”

The guy ain’t your average schmo — he’s one of them people that knows a lot:

“Defense counsel should NOT put me on this guy’s jury, I know too much :).”

He knows so much that last October, he told America that Bret Kavanaugh’s confirmation may result in a Thousand-Year Reich.

I’ll say that once more: the confirmation of a conservative judge was possibly going to initialize a Thousand-Year Reich.

That, from the guy who knows stuff.

The guy who drives by Trump Tower every day.

The guy who’s dreaming of crashing his car into a building full of people.

The guy MSNBC believes is the right person to have on.

Want more? Presto–

From the Washington Examiner:

MSNBC guest Elie Mystal, who is the executive editor of AboveTheLaw.com, advocated for nonwhite voters to mobilize to defeat President Trump in the 2020 presidential election, saying “you do not negotiate with” with his white supporters.

Host Joy Reid had asked the panel on Sunday how someone talks to a person who is “drugged by” their support for Trump.

“You don’t communicate it to them — you beat them. You beat them,” Mystal said. “They are not a majority of this country. The majority of white people in this country are not a majority of the country. And all the people who are not fooled by this need to come together, go to the polls, go to the protests, do whatever you have to do. You do not negotiate with these people, you destroy them.”

And from RedState’s Elizabeth Vaughn:

In a Thursday night appearance on MSNBC’s “All In With Chris Hayes,” contributor and legal blog editor Elie Mystal had some fiery words for Equinox and SoulCycle chairman Stephen Ross.

Ross is hosting a fundraiser for President Trump at his home in Southampton, NY this weekend and Mystal has called for protestors to show up outside his home with “pitchforks and torches.”

Apparently, the recent boycotts of Ross’ businesses didn’t go far enough for Mystal. He said:

“People of color are already targets under this administration. I have no problem on shining the light back on the donors who fund this kind of racialized hate. I mean I go further. I want pitchforks and torches outside this man’s house in the Hamptons.

Nice job, Peacock.

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

If Global Warming Is Eating At You, A Swedish Professor Has A Recipe For Relief: Cannibalism

An American Airlines Mechanic Is Arrested For Dangerously Sabotaging A Flight, And His Given Reason Is Incredibly Small

Whoa – University Of Alabama Asst. VP And Dean Of Students Resigns Over Racial Tweets And Condemnation Of The U.S. Flag

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”

The post MSNBC Panelist Says He Constantly Fantasizes About Crashing His Car into Trump Plaza. Maybe He’s Waiting for the 1,000-Year Reich appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group car-accident-337764_1280-300x169 MSNBC Panelist Says He Constantly Fantasizes About Crashing His Car into Trump Plaza. Maybe He’s Waiting for the 1,000-Year Reich Uncategorized Trump Plaza New York MSNBC media bias Media Front Page Stories Featured Story fake news elie mystal donald trump democrats Culture crime Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Ilhan Omar’s Excuses for Her Latest Controversy Don’t Add Up

Westlake Legal Group ilhan-omar-stinkeye-620x317 Ilhan Omar’s Excuses for Her Latest Controversy Don’t Add Up scandal Politics Nur Said media bias Married Brother lying Luke Rosiak Jon Levine Ilhan Omar House Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Elmi democrats 2020

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., listens as Office of Management and Budget Acting Director Russell Vought testifies before the House Budget Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 12, 2019, during a hearing on the fiscal year 2020 budget. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Yesterday, it was noted that something strange happened on Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Twitter account. Namely, that she deleted a tweet from seven years ago in which she wished her father a happy Father’s Day. My colleague Elizabeth Vaughn wrote about the initial incident, which you can read here.

This would all seem inauspicious if not for the content involved.

The math is simple. Omar acknowledges in her old tweet that Nur Said was her father. Ahmed Nur Said Elmi was Omar’s mysterious, past husband. In Arabic, the father’s name is the middle name you see here, i.e. Nur Said. Are we really supposed to keep thinking all of this is coincidence?

Omar apparently thinks so, as she put out this statement in response.

So she was calling her father Nur Said as a nickname? Let’s note that’s something that happens in Arabic households. You don’t call a father a completely different surname, especially not in traditional, more fundamentalist households, which Omar was a part of. What “doctored” images is she even talking about? I couldn’t find any proof of that. The threats angle is also weak. If she receives constant threats, why wait until someone points out the discrepancy involving her marrying her brother to run and delete it?

None of this makes any sense at all.

This isn’t going to just go away, nor should it. There’s not just smoke here, there’s fires burning out in the open. Omar has spent years deleting social media posts and purging her online presence. This was long before she even had a major public profile after 2018. She wasn’t doing that because of “death threats” or any other nonsensical excuses. She was covering something up and she continues to do so.

Even the naming conventions that Omar claims don’t add up. It’s is all very confusing (no doubt by design) but you can read about some of glaring red flags here going all the way back to 2016 investigative reporting. Why did her father change his name? Why did he go by Nur Said on Omar’s sister’s marriage certificate? Where’d the name Omar even come from? No one can seem to find any other relatives that go by that name.

Everything here is pointing to immigration fraud and more and more evidence is mounting that she married her brother. The mainstream press won’t touch this and it’s a testament to how useless they are. If a Republican were caught up in something like this, there would be a dozen reporters from The Washington Post alone assigned to digging deeper. Instead, Omar is allowed to obfuscate, refuse to answer questions, and pretend like nothing is suspect. Eventually the truth is going to come out though.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post Ilhan Omar’s Excuses for Her Latest Controversy Don’t Add Up appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ilhan-omar-pensive-300x153 Ilhan Omar’s Excuses for Her Latest Controversy Don’t Add Up scandal Politics Nur Said media bias Married Brother lying Luke Rosiak Jon Levine Ilhan Omar House Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Elmi democrats 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

That NYTs Claim That Seven People Corroborated the Ramirez Accusation Against Kavanaugh Turns Out to Be Nonsense

Westlake Legal Group AP_18259666660844-620x414 That NYTs Claim That Seven People Corroborated the Ramirez Accusation Against Kavanaugh Turns Out to Be Nonsense The Washington Examiner The New York Times The Education of Brett Kavanaugh Skewing Facts Seven People Politics media bias Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story fake news democrats Debra Ramirez Corroborated byron york Brett Kavanaugh book

President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 6, 2018, for the third day of his confirmation to replace retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

It’s amazing how this keeps happening.

As I wrote this morning, The New York Times has covered themselves in glory with their latest attempted hit on Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The original article in question was based on a new book written by Times reporters. Unlike Mollie Hemingway’s brilliant, well researched book, these “reporters” set out with an agenda and did everything they could to form the narrative they wanted to push. That means shifting and molding supposed evidence into what they desire vs. what reality is dictating.

Want proof? One of the claims made in the book is that the Ramirez incident was the “talk of the campus.” They also claimed seven instances of corroboration to prove this, but when you put them  under scrutiny, almost none of it holds up.

Credit to Byron York for researching this further.

Pogrebin and Kelly claim that extensive evidence supports the Ramirez allegation. “At least seven people, including Ms. Ramirez’s mother, heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge,” they write in the article. “Two of those people were classmates who learned of it just days after the party occurred, suggesting that it was discussed among students at the time.”

The article did not, however, discuss what any of those seven people actually said about the alleged incident. Nevertheless, partisans quickly seized on it to support their position on Kavanaugh. There was “substantial corroboration” for Ramirez’s story, tweeted Susan Hennessey, editor of the influential blog Lawfare. For their part, some Democratic presidential candidates — Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke, and Pete Buttigieg — cited the story as (additional) cause for Kavanaugh to be impeached.

So what’s the truth here? Who were these seven people and did they actually provide corroboration of the account? In a word, no.

None of the seven are able to tie Kavanaugh to the supposed event. Even the account of Ramirez’s own mother leaves more questions than answers.

Something happened at Yale.

That’s literally all she told her mother, who is now being used as corroborative evidence.

Let’s also remember this was 35 years ago on a college campus. There were likely no shortage of stories over the years involving drunk people exposing themselves. Let’s live in reality and admit that college students do stupid things. Some of these claims could be remembering totally different happenings. Regardless, none of this provides any corroboration that Kavanaugh himself did anything untoward.

Despite that, the book says the above is enough to make Ramirez’s claims “ring true.”

That is enough for Pogrebin and Kelly, who conclude, “The claims of Deborah Ramirez, while not proven by witnesses, also ring true.” Perhaps that will convince some readers. For others: When anti-Kavanaugh partisans cite “substantial corroboration” for Ramirez’s allegation, it’s good to keep in mind who really said what.

Since when is “ringing true” a journalistic standard? It’s the same nonsense we heard all through the Russia-gate fiasco. In fact, “ringing true” is often based on one’s own partisan sensibilities. These writers wanted to believe Ramirez, so they carefully sought out evidence to confirm their biases with no thought for whether any of it was true or could be proven. That’s not journalism, it’s activism.

Honestly, and perhaps this will get me in trouble, but I think this entire ordeal is ridiculous. Even if Kavanaugh exposed himself at a party, that hardly disqualifies him for a Supreme Court position 35 years later. College campuses are not bastions of responsibility and morality. The Times trying to dredge this back up and presenting it as far more than it is follows a pattern of senseless, partisan hit jobs being perpetrated on Republicans. From what we’ve seen of this new book so far, it looks to be a dumpster fire of narrative pushing and misrepresentations. No one should take it seriously after how badly these two writers and their work have crashed and burned the last few days.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post That NYTs Claim That Seven People Corroborated the Ramirez Accusation Against Kavanaugh Turns Out to Be Nonsense appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AP_18270696540839-300x200 That NYTs Claim That Seven People Corroborated the Ramirez Accusation Against Kavanaugh Turns Out to Be Nonsense The Washington Examiner The New York Times The Education of Brett Kavanaugh Skewing Facts Seven People Politics media bias Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story fake news democrats Debra Ramirez Corroborated byron york Brett Kavanaugh book   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Maggie Haberman Admits the Times Had Bombshell Info that Nuked Blasey Ford’s Accusation Against Kavanaugh

Westlake Legal Group Kavanaugh-4 Maggie Haberman Admits the Times Had Bombshell Info that Nuked Blasey Ford’s Accusation Against Kavanaugh The New York Times Supreme Court Politics Omitted media bias maggie haberman Justice Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Exculpatory Evidence democrats Debra Ramirez corrupt christine blasey ford Buried the Lede Brett Kavanaugh book bombshell

The would be hit on Justice Kavanaugh over at The New York Times continues to implode without haste. We’ve already seen them make corrections after omitting key details about a supposed witness. They also reported an allegation without bothering to note that the alleged victim doesn’t even have memory of it happening. In other words, they ran a rehash of discredited accusations from Debra Ramirez while tacking on an even less credible, third hand claim from Bill Clinton’s former lawyer.

Seems legit.

Now, we are starting to find out just how biased the Times was being in their reporting of this story. CBS News went on record late last night with a major revelation that further destroys Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations against Kavanaugh. Note that Mollie Hemingway put this in her book way back in July as well. She deserves the primary credit.

That’s pretty big news as it turns Ford’s claim on its head. Not only did her “witness” not recall the incident, she didn’t feel it was believable. Worse, Ford’s allies stepped in to try to pressure her to change her story to help complete the take down of Kavanaugh.

Ford, her lawyers, and the Democrats who facilitated the smear were acting with no regards for truth or ethics. They had one goal and that was to blow up Kavanaugh’s nomination. It’s troubling to think of just how close they claim to succeeding.

But here’s the kicker. After CBS reported that, the Times’ Maggie Haberman decided to jump on Twitter and snark that they had the information too.

Well, ok then Maggie. Why wasn’t it reported?

Even though the information was in the book itself, which the article in question was based on, the “reporters” minimized it and presented a different picture anyway.

To summarize, the Times had information that Ford’s account was essentially nuked and discredited. Instead of running that as the lead story delved from this garbage book, they reran old allegations and included a new one which lacked any credibility at all, to the point where even the alleged victim has no recollection of it.

“Journalism.”

Are we supposed to believe that was just an honest editorial decision? Come on. The authors of this book were so partisan, so wrapped up in their own narrative that they did everything they could to frame things in a way to hurt Kavanaugh. It just so happens that they did such an awful job at it that their claims fell apart within hours.

The Times has no credibility left. I’m tired of some on the right insisting we can’t just dump these outlets wholesale. What have they done to earn anyone’s trust at this point? Let this also be a reminder of just how far the left and their enablers in the media are willing to go to take down Republican interests. There are no lines they won’t cross and this was just a preview of what we are going to see in 2020. You can bet they’ve got a whole (new) dossier cooked up to run against Trump and the press will be right there to dutifully regurgitate the talking points without questioning their validity.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post Maggie Haberman Admits the Times Had Bombshell Info that Nuked Blasey Ford’s Accusation Against Kavanaugh appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group christine-ford2-300x200 Maggie Haberman Admits the Times Had Bombshell Info that Nuked Blasey Ford’s Accusation Against Kavanaugh The New York Times Supreme Court Politics Omitted media bias maggie haberman Justice Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Exculpatory Evidence democrats Debra Ramirez corrupt christine blasey ford Buried the Lede Brett Kavanaugh book bombshell   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Women’s March Fires Anti-Semites, Immediately Hires More Anti-Semites

Westlake Legal Group linda-sarsour-620x414 Women’s March Fires Anti-Semites, Immediately Hires More Anti-Semites Women's March Tamika Mallory racists Politics New Anti-Semites media bias Louis Farrakhan Linda Sarsour Israel Hired Front Page Stories Front Page fired Featured Story democrats board members

It’s almost like the organization itself has issues and their connections to anti-Semitism haven’t just been mistakes?

As my colleague Brandon Morse shared earlier today, the Women’s March, famous for their delusional hatred of Trump and vaginal hats, finally cut ties with Linda Sarsour and Tamika Mallory (among others). The former board members had carried with them a long history of anti-Semitism and support for radical ideologies. Sarsour is of course a “Palestinian activist,” which means she rails against Jews and shills for Hamas. Mallory’s ties centered on Louis Farrakhan, where as recently as this year she refused to condemn his vile, racist rhetoric.

So what’s the Women’s March do after kicking out a group of women famous for their anti-Semitism? Hire more anti-Semites of course.

Bonus points for supporting Hamas I guess.

And just to be safe, they also brought on Sarsour ally Samia Assed, who’s shilled for Palestinian terrorists and doesn’t think Israel has a right to exist.

Oh, but it doesn’t stop there. The brilliant hires just kept on coming.

Apparently being a rabid anti-Semite and a fan of Louis Farahkan is a prerequisite for being on the board of the Women’s March. Clearly, they weren’t serious about reforming their dumpster fire of a movement. The best thing that could happen is for it shut down completely. The country is a better place given their loss of influence over the last few years.

Meanwhile, you won’t hear a peep about any of this in the major press despite the fact that they ran non-stop live coverage anytime there was a march by these people in the past. Imagine if a tea party group brought on a bunch of open white supremacists. You think CNN would mention it? You bet they would.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post Women’s March Fires Anti-Semites, Immediately Hires More Anti-Semites appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Untitled-1-19-300x163 Women’s March Fires Anti-Semites, Immediately Hires More Anti-Semites Women's March Tamika Mallory racists Politics New Anti-Semites media bias Louis Farrakhan Linda Sarsour Israel Hired Front Page Stories Front Page fired Featured Story democrats board members   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Here’s Just How Much of a Dumpster Fire That New Kavanaugh Hit Piece Is

Westlake Legal Group AP_18270600549853-620x414 Here’s Just How Much of a Dumpster Fire That New Kavanaugh Hit Piece Is The New York Times The Federalist Supreme Court Sexual Assault Sean Davis Politics Mollie Hemingway media bias Max Stier journalisming Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story dumpster fire democrats christine blasey ford Brett Kavanaugh Bad Reporting

Christine Blasey Ford listens to her attorney Michael Bromwich as she testifies to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 27, 2018. (Saul Loeb/Pool Photo via AP)

As you’ve probably heard over the weekend, The New York Times covered itself in glory and released excerpts from a supposed well-researched book focused on destroying Brett Kavanaugh. The “revelations” have led to major Democrats rushing to social media to proclaim the current Supreme Court Justice should be impeached. On what grounds? There are none, but they just know it should be done.

The problem is that this hit piece is a dumpster fire of terrible journalism and partisan garbage.

First, The New York Times put this tweet out, embarrassing themselves and later having to delete it.

But the issues go beyond badly worded tweets for the media and Democrats pushing this.

The main “witness” of this new allegation is a man named Max Stier. The hit piece itself offers no background about who Stier is, and once you find out, it’s obvious why.

We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly. We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier; the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the episode.

So who is Stier? He just happens to be Bill Clinton’s former lawyer, who defended him from accusations of sexual misconduct in the Paula Jones case.

The idea that Stier is a reliable, unbiased source is laughable. Yet, the media are running with his accusation without even disclosing who he is. It’s extremely relevant that he has direct ties to the Clintons and that he’s ensconced in Democratic party politics. This would be like Trump’s personal lawyer coming out and saying he saw Joe Biden sexually assault someone. Anyone think the media wouldn’t question his motive and story? Of course they would.

Mollie Hemingway, who wrote a best selling book on the Kavanaugh attacks, takes this apart in a new piece at The Federalist.

The reporters, who describe Democrats in glowing terms and Republicans otherwise, say that Stier is a “respected thought leader” in the defense of the federal bureaucracy. They don’t mention his history of working for the Clintons.

Remember when Kavanaugh said the allegations against him were revenge on behalf of the Clintons? This was likely the allegation he was citing. It was actually known about at the time by Kavanaugh and the Congressional committee investigating. In the end, it was not pursued.

But if that’s all there was, perhaps you could brush it aside. Being partisan doesn’t necessarily mean you’re lying right?

Well, it actually gets much, much worse for the Times.

As for the victim? They say she “has refused to discuss the incident, though several of her friends said she does not recall it.”

To repeat: Several of her friends said she does not recall it.

So to summarize, the only new claim in the new book is that a Democratic attorney told two senators that he saw an incident where a third party allegedly did something to Kavanaugh and the young woman. In their book, the authors are upset that this claim didn’t lead to a massive FBI investigation, although they don’t explain why they think it should have.

Pogebrin and Kelly left the victim’s denial out of their New York Times story. It is unclear why the reporters and editors allowed the story to be published without this salient fact that they conceded, albeit briefly, in their own book.

The supposed victim herself hasn’t gone on record to confirm this happened. Her friends say she doesn’t even recall the incident. In short, what we have here is a highly partisan actor in Stier making a claim which holds up to no scrutiny at all.

Despite all that, The New York Times published a piece from a biased, unreliable book which left out key details, including who Stier was and the position of the actual alleged victim, who appears to have not been a victim at all.

Let’s get a hand clap for journalism.

Let the clean up begin.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post Here’s Just How Much of a Dumpster Fire That New Kavanaugh Hit Piece Is appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AP_18270696540839-300x200 Here’s Just How Much of a Dumpster Fire That New Kavanaugh Hit Piece Is The New York Times The Federalist Supreme Court Sexual Assault Sean Davis Politics Mollie Hemingway media bias Max Stier journalisming Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story dumpster fire democrats christine blasey ford Brett Kavanaugh Bad Reporting   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Here’s Why Banning Vaping Is a Big Mistake and Trump Should Reverse Course

Westlake Legal Group vaping-620x413 Here’s Why Banning Vaping Is a Big Mistake and Trump Should Reverse Course Vaping Ban Tobacco Products THC Politics Melania Trump media bias Lung Disease illness Front Page Stories Front Page Flavored Vape Featured Story donald trump deaths CNN Bad Decision

If you’ve been following the news this week, you probably heard about the Trump administration adopting a ban on flavored vape. This came in response to hundreds of reports (and six deaths) related to vaping. There’s also been a concerted effort to paint vape as uniquely harmful to kids.

The ensuing outcry has mainly been the result of articles and press stories like this.

The problem is that almost none of what we are hearing is actually true. Remember, vaping is not new. Yet, out of nowhere, we all the sudden saw several people die from illness caused by vaping. What could actually be causing this? CNN tells us in the article while running with such a misleading headline.

Eventually, Adam said that he went from vaping over-the-counter e-liquids to vaping THC or tetrahydrocannabinol, which is the main psychoactive component of marijuana. Adam would get the THC from “a friend” or dealer.

Over time, Adam said that he developed shivers and couldn’t control them. Then, the vomiting began.

“I was just nonstop throwing up every day for three days,” he said. “Finally I went to the pediatrician.”

At first, doctors did not connect Adam’s symptoms to his vaping. He was given anti-nausea medication, but he said that his vomiting did not stop. After visiting various physicians, he finally saw someone who asked if he was “Juul-ing” and using THC.

Nearly every current case that’s being looked in this rash of new vaping illnesses involves the use of THC. This actually has nothing to do with vaping itself. There is no actual link between lung disease and inhaling water vapor mixed with nicotine.

There’s also not even much evidence that kids vaping is somehow more prevalent than tobacco use was before vaping was an option. Yes, we’ve seen a drop in smoking among teenagers. It’s not a coincidence though that it has tracked with a rise in vaping. In other words, kids are trading a deadly habit for one that’s largely harmless unless you mix it with illicit substances.

Sure, we’d all love them to not use nicotine products at all, but isn’t it preferable they vape and not die of lung disease?

Given the actual facts of these cases, why is Trump acting rashly on this? It could have something to do with Melania Trump’s opinion on the matter, as she’s been waging this fight for a while.

This is why many of us opposed Hillary Clinton and Michele Obama’s interjections into public policy. First Ladies are not elected. They shouldn’t be shaping government decisions. Melania Trump seems like a perfectly lovely woman. She’s not the President though.

The biggest issue here is what the alternatives are. Banning flavored vaping (leaving only tobacco flavored) means a lot of people are going to end up back on cigarettes. 480,000 people die every year from illnesses related to smoking. That’s not even counting chewing tobacco. Banning the majority of vaping products because six people died doing it wrong will ultimately end up in hundreds of thousands of more deaths over the next decade.

How does that make any sense at all? It simply doesn’t.

This was pointed out in an exchange on MSNBC earlier this week.

You can’t run a country based on emotion and even the best intentions often have far worse unintended consequences. I don’t vape or smoke. This doesn’t affect me at all. But everyone should be able to recognize the stupidity of these latest policy change.

There’s also the aspect of freedom of choice here as well. We are supposed to be conservatives. Banning things over illogical moral panic is not conservative. Trump needs to reverse course on this. It’s a mistake and will only make things far worse.

I’ll end with this video from Steven Crowder, where he takes down the ban in typical comedic fashion.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post Here’s Why Banning Vaping Is a Big Mistake and Trump Should Reverse Course appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group DonaldTrumpAPphoto-300x153 Here’s Why Banning Vaping Is a Big Mistake and Trump Should Reverse Course Vaping Ban Tobacco Products THC Politics Melania Trump media bias Lung Disease illness Front Page Stories Front Page Flavored Vape Featured Story donald trump deaths CNN Bad Decision   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Booker: You’re darned right we should be talking about Biden’s cognitive issues — as long as we’re respectful

Westlake Legal Group booker-bash-burnett Booker: You’re darned right we should be talking about Biden’s cognitive issues — as long as we’re respectful The Blog media bias Julian Castro Joe Biden Cory Booker age 2020 Democrat debates

That’s a poser; what’s the respectful way to attack someone for being too senile to run for president? Cory Booker tried dancing his way through this thicket when challenged by CNN’s Erin Burnett and Dana Bash after last night’s debate. While most of the rest of the Democratic contenders clucked their tongues at Julián Castro’s dig at Biden’s memory, Booker tried to salvage Castro’s attack:

BOOKER: Look, I think we are at a tough point right now, because there are a lot of people who are concerned about Joe Biden’s ability to carry the ball all the way across the end line, and without fumbling. And I think that Castro has some really legitimate concerns about, ‘can he be someone in a long grueling campaign that can get the ball over the line,’ and he has every right to call that out. I do think that tone and tenor is really important, and we can respect President Biden [sic] and disagree with him. I tried to show that in the CNN debate where he and I have strong different — disagreements. But we shouldn’t do things that at the end of this — when you demonize somebody, create bad blood, it’s hard to unify afterwards. …

BOOKER: I think there was a lot of moments where a number of us were looking at us on stage when he tends to go on sometimes. At one point, he’s talking about people in communities like mine listening to record players. I don’t remember the last time I saw a record player in my community —

BASH: They’re back in, you know.

BOOKER: They’re back in — the vinyl is hot!

BASH: It is hot, I just want to let you know. [crosstalk]

BOOKER: Maybe he’s cooler than I am, but there are definitely moments where you listen to Joe Biden and you just wonder. But, I don’t know, look …

I don’t think Booker’s “just wonder[ing]” about Biden’s policy choices here. When Burnett asks him the sixty-four dollar question about Biden’s age being a disqualifier, however, Booker backpedals … by saying Biden’s always been a little incoherent:

BURNETT: Senator, are you saying that he’s just too old to be president?

BOOKER: No, I’m definitely not saying that, because I’ve listened to Joe Biden over the years and often felt like there were times that he, ah, is going on or meandering in his speech. Look, I want someone who can excite and energize and call us to campaign like we saw back in ’08 and ’12 where we had record turnouts, and somebody who can speak to the fullness of the Democratic Party.

The record turnouts had a lot more to do with organization than rhetoric, a point both parties seem determined to ignore in yet another election cycle. Besides, if that’s the criterion on which Booker makes his decision, why is he still in the race at all? Where are his crowds, his turnout, his own organization?

Back to being respectful about age: Booker’s right about Biden’s meanderings being less about age and more about Biden’s consistent style of campaigning and speaking. So why bring up age at all? Because, in all fairness, Booker’s not the only person to “listen to Joe Biden and just wonder.” Bernie Sanders is older, but Biden’s frailty is starting to poke out from the edges, especially in that moment where his eye filled up with blood in the middle of a sit-down live interview on CNN. Hardly any major media outlet even bothered to note it, including CNN. Booker should have challenged Burnett and Bash on that point — why not?

Maybe it shouldn’t be used as a gotcha as Castro did last night, but Biden’s age and health is not an unfair issue. The better question is why the media has avoided it.

The post Booker: You’re darned right we should be talking about Biden’s cognitive issues — as long as we’re respectful appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group booker-bash-burnett-300x163 Booker: You’re darned right we should be talking about Biden’s cognitive issues — as long as we’re respectful The Blog media bias Julian Castro Joe Biden Cory Booker age 2020 Democrat debates   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Say what? Fairfax files defamation lawsuit against CBS for … interviewing his accusers

Westlake Legal Group Fairfax Say what? Fairfax files defamation lawsuit against CBS for … interviewing his accusers The Blog sullivan media bias Justin Fairfax Defamation CBS News CBS

Sullivan be damned, it seems, along with common sense. Justin Fairfax, the embattled lieutenant governor of Virginia, has decided to fight back against allegations of sexual assault by suing CBS for defamation. Fairfax wants $400 million because its news division interviewed his accusers and didn’t do “due diligence” in preparing its questions, which is … not exactly defamation even outside of Sullivan:

Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax on Thursday filed a lawsuit against CBS, alleging the network defamed him when it aired interviews earlier this year with two women who accused him of sexual assault.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia, demands $400 million for alleged defamation and “severe emotional distress” caused by the reporting. …

The lawsuit contended that King “failed to ask basic questions” of the two women, and “failed to separately investigate the allegations in advance of the airing date, and instead only spoke to Watson, Tyson and their representatives.”

Specifically, the lawsuit alleged that CBS “failed to interview other individuals who may have been able to confirm or contradict the allegations.”

In the lawsuit, Fairfax names one specific witness that CBS allegedly ignored — one of its own attorneys, whom Fairfax claims was a witness to one of the two alleged incidents. The lawsuit alleges that the attorney “has stated to multiple people” that Fairfax’s encounter with Meredith Watson was consensual, not “rape or sexual[] assault.” By not including that in its report, Fairfax alleges that CBS cooked their reports in an attempt to rehabilitate itself in the midst of its own sexual harassment scandals:

The lawsuit suggests CBS was trying to “align itself on the side of perceived victims” in light of sexual misconduct allegations against several high-profile CBS employees, including former CEO Leslie Moonves, who was ousted last September.

“In light of its need to improve its public image and put these incidents in its rearview mirror by currying favor as a media outlet for accusations against public figures, the network sought to visibly align itself with alleged victims of sexual misconduct and, therefore, had a strong incentive to hype and air the false allegations by Watson and Tyson against Fairfax,” the lawsuit says.

That’s certainly a fun allegation, but it’s essentially meaningless when suing a media outlet for defamation. Even if they gave Fairfax’s accusers more coverage than one might have predicted for these reasons, it means nothing if CBS didn’t defame Fairfax. It does mean, however, that the “severe emotional distress” discovery process should be beautiful, man, on both sides.

Let’s start with the basics. CBS did not report the original allegations; those were made public by Fairfax’s accusers. CBS did what news organizations do — conduct interviews with both women to allow them to tell their side of the story. They are not under any obligation to cross-examine their interview subjects, although they certainly have that option if they (and their subjects) so choose. The actual defamation did not start with CBS, however, which means they didn’t create whatever unfair damage Fairfax claims. Fairfax would have to sue Vanessa Tyson and Meredith Watson for damages, but they don’t have $400 million.

Second point: in order to win a defamation case under any circumstances, one has to have been defamed — accused of something that wasn’t true. No one has proven these allegations either true or false to any degree of certainty. Fairfax’s lawsuit has to be predicated on being able to prove both of the claims false. So far, all Fairfax has done is insist on his innocence, while his accusers insist on his guilt. This lawsuit would require Fairfax to prove his innocence by proving a negative, and to make the case that his innocence was so obvious that merely interviewing the accusers was malpractice. That first task is so Herculean that the American criminal justice system is designed to prevent defendants from having to do that very thing. For some reason, Fairfax has decided to take on the near-impossible — against a corporation with its own massive legal department.

Furthermore, under Sullivan, Fairfax would have to prove actual malice on the part of CBS to win a defamation case. He’s a public person, an elected official, which falls directly into the Supreme Court’s intent for the higher burden of proof — to allow the media to report on allegations of wrongdoing by those in power. Even if Fairfax can somehow prove that the allegations are false — which he has yet to do publicly, other than his own denials — he’d have to show that CBS knew at the time that (a) both allegations were false, and (b) they acted recklessly and outside their normal processes in airing the interviews. That’s a high bar to clear even when media outlets publish provably false information, and it’s far from clear that these allegations are provably false, or even false at all.

Finally, it’s beyond comprehension why Fairfax would do this now. The scandal had died down in Virginia (along with Ralph Northam’s blackface scandal). Fairfax could have quietly gone back into private practice at some point and dealt with the Google searches as they came up. A splashy trial against CBS will dredge this all back up and then some as CBS’ lawyers will dig further and further into Fairfax’s background — and his accusers line up to tell their stories. And right now, they’re pretty darned stoked to tell their stories under oath:

Attorneys for one of the women accusing Virginia’s lieutenant governor of sexual assault say Justin Fairfax’s defamation lawsuit against CBS over an interview she gave is a “ploy” to preserve his political career.

The attorneys for Vanessa Tyson say the college professor stands by statements she made during the CBS interview earlier this year. …

Nancy Erika Smith is an attorney for Watson. Smith says, “We look forward to everyone testifying under oath, now that this matter is in court.”

CBS also says they plan to “vigorously” defend their actions in court, which seems not just reasonable but obvious. If this is a PR stunt by Fairfax, he might want to end it soon. This can end in a number of ways, but almost all of them are bad news for Fairfax.

The post Say what? Fairfax files defamation lawsuit against CBS for … interviewing his accusers appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group Fairfax-300x159 Say what? Fairfax files defamation lawsuit against CBS for … interviewing his accusers The Blog sullivan media bias Justin Fairfax Defamation CBS News CBS   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com