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

MSNBC’s Krystal Ball Tells Bill Maher the Network’s Trump Insanity Has Damaged the Democratic Party

Westlake Legal Group krystal-ball-real-time-SCREENSHOT-620x330 MSNBC’s Krystal Ball Tells Bill Maher the Network’s Trump Insanity Has Damaged the Democratic Party Uncategorized Russia MSNBC Media krystal ball Front Page Stories Featured Story fake news donald trump democrats collusion Bill Maher Allow Media Exception

 

 

On Friday’s installment of Real Time with Bill Maher, erstwhile MSNBC host Krystal Ball delivered a message that would’ve been at home on RedState: Her former network’s coverage of President Trump has only served to hurt Democrats.

Bill asked:

“Do you feel [that] networks like MSNBC, which you used to work for…help or hurt progressive causes?”

Krystal was crystal:

“Overall, I think MSNBC in the Trump era has done real damage to the Left, and I’ll tell you why.”



 

Yes! She’ll tell us why! Here we go:

“And I say that with love. I mean, these are my former colleagues, friends. Look, the Russia story and what happened there was important, but it was not all-important. And they went so far in the realm of conspiracy theorizing – I mean, they had Jonathan Chait on…”

Bill confirmed, “Well, it was a conspiracy.”

Krystal said it got downright absurd:

“They had Jonathan Chait on to talk about how Trump may have been a Russian plant since 1987. This is ridiculous, okay? This is way out from what journalistic facts said, and it’s to the exclusion of other stories that people actually care about – about health care, about trade, about the future of their lives, automation.

Hmmm…ridiculous? Does MSNBC partake in such? Let’s test her claim:



Yeah. Yeah, I’d say she’s good.

Krystal claimed her former employer overshot it:

“These things are real, and they don’t get focus when you only look at one thing. So yeah, they built up expectations so much that when the report came out, people were like, ‘Oh, it was no big deal,’ when it was a big deal.

Ya know how I said her message was RedState-ish? Cancel that. Krystal inferred Mueller was a giant cause of the whole Russian collusion disappointment — after all, the guy was a you-know-what:

“Why did we put our faith in a Republican? He’s a Republican; he’s a lifelong Republican. What [did] we think?”

Why indeed. Although, if I recall correctly, the mainstream media was willing to put its faith in anything and everything that opposed President Trump.

Just look to the video above, in which Nicolle Wallace schooled us all:

“People would be foolish to underestimate Michael Avenatti.”

Foolish indeed.

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

MSNBC Talks Trump Removal Due To His Mental State From Alzheimer’s, But I’ve Got Something More Serious For You

MSNBC: With His Dictator-Style Parade, Donald Trump Turned The 4th Of July Into Something Divisive & Vile

Michael Avenatti Touts Earth-Shattering Kavanaugh Accusation To Rachel Maddow, Backs Off On Twitter

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’s Krystal Ball Tells Bill Maher the Network’s Trump Insanity Has Damaged the Democratic Party appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group krystal-ball-real-time-SCREENSHOT-300x160 MSNBC’s Krystal Ball Tells Bill Maher the Network’s Trump Insanity Has Damaged the Democratic Party Uncategorized Russia MSNBC Media krystal ball Front Page Stories Featured Story fake news donald trump democrats collusion Bill Maher Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Beto O’Rourke: Police wouldn’t go door to door to confiscate guns under my plan

Westlake Legal Group bo-2 Beto O’Rourke: Police wouldn’t go door to door to confiscate guns under my plan The Blog police MSNBC mandatory Joy Reid gun confiscation buyback Beto O'Rourke ar-15 all in

The money quote: “Much like we don’t go door-to-door to enforce almost any law in the United States, in fact I don’t think we do that for any law in the United States, this would not be something that we would do.” Presumably he’d treat an assault rifle like any other form of contraband. No one will come looking for it, but if you’re caught with it in your possession, you’re cooked.

But I don’t know that he’s thought that far on the subject. He keeps coming back to the point that he has faith that Americans will comply with the law after it’s passed and surrender their AR-15s without a fuss, which is sweet and all but unrealistic. Some will comply. Most, perhaps. Not all. What happens one day when a cop pulls some guy over for speeding, sees that he has an AR-15 in the backseat, demands it, and the guy says no? If a shootout follows, how many cops nationwide will want to risk confronting people about their guns after that? Conversely, how many gun-control fans will begin demanding a more aggressive effort to seize contraband AR-15s than just waiting around and hoping owners hand them over?

Another hypothetical: There are so many assault rifles in circulation that it’s a fait accompli some will be used to carry out new mass shootings even after a buyback plan takes effect. What’s the political fallout from that when it happens? Gun-rights advocates will say, “See? We told you the buyback wouldn’t end mass murder.” Gun-grabbers will say, “See? We told you the policy of asking people nicely to give up their guns wouldn’t work.” What then?

To make the hypothetical extra zesty, imagine that a mass shooter turns out to hail from a rural area in a red state where local cops have effectively decided that they won’t enforce the buyback. Reporters sniff around and find out that no one caught with an AR-15 is being arrested by the sheriff’s office as a matter of policy. What’s the White House’s reaction to that? Does President Beto call for quadrupling the size of the ATF and sending agents out into those rural areas to compel compliance?

I think it’d end up like Prohibition, which is … not known as one of America’s shining policy successes.

Watch to the end of the clip below and you’ll see that he’s asked about Chris Coons’s criticism that Beto has set back the gun-control movement by pushing such a radical idea. I’m not a radical, O’Rourke insists, I’m where most Democrats are on this issue and it’s time our leaders in Congress caught up. Is he right? Some Dems agree with Coons that mainstreaming the idea of a buyback does the party more harm than good

By all accounts, Trump needs to run up the score in rural areas to win reelection next year. The 2020 outcome is expected to depend heavily on a trio of Rust Belt states — Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — that have large numbers of rural voters, many of whom are gun-owners or sympathetic to owners on this issue. And Democrats’ hope of winning control of the Senate rests on states with high rates of gun ownership, like Arizona and Texas…

“The lines like, ‘We’re gonna come and take your AR-15,’ just play into the fears that the NRA has been stoking, and a proposal like that is just going to make rural Iowa and I think probably rural areas elsewhere more red,” [Democrat Warren] Varley said. “I think that’s just a bridge too far for most rural folks, and it conjures up images of the government coming in and invading your home and images of big government trampling over the rights of individuals.”

…but then again, polls like this keep trickling out:

Westlake Legal Group y Beto O’Rourke: Police wouldn’t go door to door to confiscate guns under my plan The Blog police MSNBC mandatory Joy Reid gun confiscation buyback Beto O'Rourke ar-15 all in

Sixty-three percent of Democrats claim that it’s “mostly accurate” to describe the NRA as a domestic terrorist organization. Yesterday I flagged a WaPo poll from earlier this week that showed 74 percent of Democrats(!) favor a mandatory buyback. Last year after the Parkland massacre, one poll found 74 percent of Dems in favor of banning all semiautomatic rifles (not just “assault rifles”) while another found 82 percent support for banning all semiautomatics. Not just rifles — all semiautomatics.

They’re pretty farking radical. Which is not to say that Coons et al. are wrong: Getting crazy with the gun-control cheez whiz may play spectacularly well in California, say, while killing Democrats in Michigan. Guess which state is more important next fall.

Exit question via Drew McCoy: Isn’t Beto giving away the game here by stressing his belief that Americans will comply voluntarily with the law? People willing to surrender their weapons upon a lawful demand by the feds are by definition “law-abiding.” If you’re worried about mass shootings but unwilling to go door to door to look for assault rifles, it’s inevitable that virtually all of the people whom you end up disarming are people whom you didn’t need to worry about in the first place.

The post Beto O’Rourke: Police wouldn’t go door to door to confiscate guns under my plan appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group bo-2-300x159 Beto O’Rourke: Police wouldn’t go door to door to confiscate guns under my plan The Blog police MSNBC mandatory Joy Reid gun confiscation buyback Beto O'Rourke ar-15 all in   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Watch: Jim Mattis Leaves Andrew Mitchel at a Loss for Words After Torpedoing Her Anti-Trump Narrative

Westlake Legal Group 2b066136-6b8b-45e5-b62d-00b82c129d06-620x357 Watch: Jim Mattis Leaves Andrew Mitchel at a Loss for Words After Torpedoing Her Anti-Trump Narrative Politics NATO MSNBC Media James Mattis Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump Andrea Mitchell Allow Media Exception

And here it is, your moment of zen.

While appearing on MSNBC with Andrea Mitchell, former Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis was asked about the damage President Donald Trump was doing to the NATO alliance.

“In the last two years we’ve seen our alliances weaken in NATO, specifically in Asia and in Europe,” said Mitchell.

Mattis responded by pointing out that what we always see is the tensions, “because that’s what always grabs your attention.”

“However, right now you see a NATO – I think we’re in the fourth or fifth straight year – of the nations…increasing their defense budgets,” said Mattis.

“I can say quantitatively NATO’s actually stronger today,” he continued.

Mattis said that the tensions seen between countries in NATO have always been there, and said he can trace every President back to Clinton saying that NATO allies need to pay more. What’s more, Mattis has told these nations personally that the American people will never care about the lives of their children more than they do, and that it’s up to them to provide more to their defense.

For a few seconds, Mitchell seemed rudderless. She began to speak as if to counter Mattis, but immediately pivoted to his resignation letter in order to change the subject.

It’s always fun to watch the mainstream media get its narrative’s teeth figuratively kicked in as we learn the truth. Mattis has never been one to shy away from reality, and the fact that he’s bringing it onto shows where they were hoping there’d be something damning to attack Trump with is just hilarious.

Mattis is currently making the rounds to promote his new book Call Sign Chaos: Learning to Lead. While many seemed to think it’d be an anti-Trump screed, Mattis is disappointing a lot of people.

 

The post Watch: Jim Mattis Leaves Andrew Mitchel at a Loss for Words After Torpedoing Her Anti-Trump Narrative appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group 2b066136-6b8b-45e5-b62d-00b82c129d06-300x173 Watch: Jim Mattis Leaves Andrew Mitchel at a Loss for Words After Torpedoing Her Anti-Trump Narrative Politics NATO MSNBC Media James Mattis Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump Andrea Mitchell Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump’s tawdry Twitter threesome: Legend, Teigen and feuding egos

Westlake Legal Group 1f7d27a2-45bf-4afb-bfdd-f54e6094a084 Trump’s tawdry Twitter threesome: Legend, Teigen and feuding egos twitter town hall The Blog Sing Sing President Trump nbc MSNBC Lester Holt John Legend FIRST STEP Act chrissy teigen

A town hall on criminal justice reform aired Sunday night on MSNBC hosted by NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt. It was filmed inside New York’s Sing Sing prison. Apparently President Trump was watching because he launched a Twitter war brought on by a bruised ego. Singer John Legend took fire and his wife Chrissy Teigen voluntarily enlisted in the battle.

Trump can rightfully claim criminal justice reform as a victory for his administration. The First Step Act he signed into law seeks to reform the federal prison system by reducing mandatory minimum sentences and reducing recidivism. During the town hall special, the First Step Act wasn’t included in the conversation. I didn’t see the show but I assume the legislation wasn’t included because the town hall centered around state and local incarceration issues. The First Step Act addresses federal prison reforms. The Washington Post reports that the legislation was acknowledged in a special re-aired before the town hall and showed Trump signing the bill into law.

Singer John Legend was a guest of Holt’s. He is often in the headlines for his political activism, usually criticizing President Trump and his administration. His wife, Chrissy Teigen is even more aggressive in her criticism of Trump. The two are egged on by Democrat Party leadership. I wrote about an appearance by the two celebrities at a Democrat retreat back in April at the invitation of Nancy Pelosi.

President Trump didn’t appreciate being left out of the conversation during the town hall and tweeted out his displeasure. He produced a tweetstorm.

“When all of the people pushing so hard for Criminal Justice Reform were unable to come even close to getting it done, they came to me as a group and asked for my help. I got it done with a group of Senators & others who would never have gone for it,” Trump wrote in a series of tweets on September 8.

“Obama couldn’t come close, and many others, were profusely grateful (at that time!). I SIGNED IT INTO LAW, no one else did, & Republicans deserve much credit.

“But now that it is passed, people that had virtually nothing to do with it are taking the praise. Guys like boring musician @johnlegend, and his filthy mouthed wife, are talking now about how great it is—but I didn’t see them around when we needed help getting it passed.”

Trump also hit out at Holt for failing to “bring up the subject of President Trump or the Republicans” when discussing the passing of the Criminal Justice Reform and how all that people want to “talk about now is Impeaching President Trump!” instead of his achievements.

Shots fired. Legend responded. He even dragged Melania into the fray.

He also included a dumb tweet about the fuss made in the media over a kiss during a greeting between Melania and Justin Trudeau at the G7 summit.

Chrissy weighed in and a vulgar (even for her) hashtag was born.

Legend realized how foul-mouthed his wife truly is and the two sought to do a little gaslighting about it.

So, there we are. Just another Sunday night, right?

The post Trump’s tawdry Twitter threesome: Legend, Teigen and feuding egos appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group 1f7d27a2-45bf-4afb-bfdd-f54e6094a084-300x153 Trump’s tawdry Twitter threesome: Legend, Teigen and feuding egos twitter town hall The Blog Sing Sing President Trump nbc MSNBC Lester Holt John Legend FIRST STEP Act chrissy teigen   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Ratings for CNN’s “Climate Crisis” Town Hall Are In

Westlake Legal Group poll-crash-620x426 The Ratings for CNN’s “Climate Crisis” Town Hall Are In ratings Politics Pete Buttgieg MSNBC media bias Hysteria Front Page Stories Front Page fox news Featured Story Elizabeth Warren donald trump Don Lemon democrats Crazy crash CNN Climate Change Chris Cuomo Bernie Sanders

Last night, CNN subjected television viewers to the torturous exercise of listening to 2020 Democrat candidates riff on climate change for seven straight hours. We got all kinds of craziness, from Bernie promoting taxpayer funded abortions to cull the population and reduce emissions to Buttigieg lecturing on the morality of eating hamburgers. If you want the government to control every aspect of your life, these people are your ticket.

The question is, how many people were actually watching? If you guessed that Fox News, with just their regular lineup, would nearly triple CNN’s viewership, congrats.

Half of that probably came from airports and gyms. The numbers above are averages over the seven hour period and they aren’t particularly close to their competition. Even MSNBC’s raving conspiratorial lunacy almost doubled up CNN.

Perhaps the problem here isn’t content. Perhaps it’s just CNN? When Democrats go on Fox News or MSNBC for debates or “town halls,” they do much better in the ratings. When they go sit down with Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo, nobody watches. That’s not just a coincidence at this point. It really does seem as if the public have tuned out the gas-lighting, liberal network and certainly not without cause.

Or maybe it is content on some level? How many people really want to sit through even one hour (much less seven) of Democrats making wild claims and promising to destroy the economy? That’s not exactly riveting TV. It may also speak to the possibility that enthusiasm for this Democrat group is not nearly as high as the media would like you to believe.

There is one problem with some of the hot takes about last night’s town hall though. I’ve heard a lot of people saying Trump was the big winner. Can he really be the winner if no one was watching?

————————————————

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 The Ratings for CNN’s “Climate Crisis” Town Hall Are In appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-08-21-at-10.25.40-AM-300x161 The Ratings for CNN’s “Climate Crisis” Town Hall Are In ratings Politics Pete Buttgieg MSNBC media bias Hysteria Front Page Stories Front Page fox news Featured Story Elizabeth Warren donald trump Don Lemon democrats Crazy crash CNN Climate Change Chris Cuomo Bernie Sanders   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Video: Dan Crenshaw Smashes Anti-Electoral College Arguments Made by Chris Hayes and the NYT’s Jamelle Bouie

Westlake Legal Group RepDanCrenshaw-620x317 Video: Dan Crenshaw Smashes Anti-Electoral College Arguments Made by Chris Hayes and the NYT’s Jamelle Bouie Texas Social Media republicans Politics North Carolina New York Times New York MSNBC Media jamelle bouie Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post electoral college elections democrats Dan Crenshaw Congress Chris Hayes Campaigns AOC Allow Media Exception Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 2020 Elections 2020

Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, left, 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)

Red State’s Thomas LaDuke wrote last month about the left’s aggressive push to abolish the Electoral College on grounds that it somehow punishes minority voters. The movement was recently amplified in an Instagram Live video done by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) as well as tweets she posted claiming black, Latino, and Indian voters were being “disenfranchised” by the Electoral College.

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) had the audacity to respond to AOC’s claims at the time:

… which prompted Democrats like MSNBC’s Chris Hayes to make laughable arguments about how “if [the Electoral College] wasn’t specifically in the Constitution for the presidency, it would be unconstitutional”:

And in a lengthy piece were he absurdly argued AOC “understands democracy better than Republicans do” (which she retweeted), New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie asserted that arguments like Crenshaw’s in favor of the EC are “part and parcel of the drive to make American government a closed domain for a select, privileged few.”

In other words, racism, y’all. Because when all else fails, that is the card Democrats like to play.

In the middle of the Labor Day holiday weekend, Crenshaw clapped back in a video response in which he countered Hayes, Bouie, and other Democrats like AOC on abolishing the EC:

“A Republic is more stable,” Crenshaw said in the video. “It’s also more representative of the entirety of the country.”

He went on to note that a Republic has “institutional checks and balances between the three branches of government and an emphasis on state’s rights, so it’s really difficult to ram through sweeping policy that affects the entirety of the country.”

Crenshaw also stated that “because we have an equally apportioned Senate and Electoral College, it means smaller states have a voice. Smaller, more rural states actually have a voice both in the Congress and when electing our president.”

Watch his full video response below:

He also posted a series of tweets on this topic:

Well done.

Related –>> Boom: GOP Spokeswoman Drops A MOAB On Stacey Abrams’ Argument Against The Electoral College

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Video: Dan Crenshaw Smashes Anti-Electoral College Arguments Made by Chris Hayes and the NYT’s Jamelle Bouie appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group RepDanCrenshaw-300x153 Video: Dan Crenshaw Smashes Anti-Electoral College Arguments Made by Chris Hayes and the NYT’s Jamelle Bouie Texas Social Media republicans Politics North Carolina New York Times New York MSNBC Media jamelle bouie Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post electoral college elections democrats Dan Crenshaw Congress Chris Hayes Campaigns AOC Allow Media Exception Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 2020 Elections 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Shockingly Makes the Case For the Census Counting Citizens

Westlake Legal Group chris-hayes-620x317 MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Shockingly Makes the Case For the Census Counting Citizens reapportionment Politics MSNBC Media immigration Front Page Stories Featured Story electoral college democrats Citizenship Question Chris Hayes census Allow Media Exception

To the best of my knowledge and belief, no one has ever accused MSNBC’s Chris Hayes of being smart. I’m not saying that it hasn’t happened at sometime in the past but it certainly hasn’t happened recently. Yesterday, his own show released this clip of Hayes lecturing an audience on the constitutionality of the Electoral College. Here he is assuming his past persona as an adjunct professor (which is basically like being an Uber driver for unemployed pseudo-academics0.

I think there’s actually a deeper philosophical thing happening of what is American democracy is for. And the weirdest thing about the Electoral College is the fact if it wasn’t specifically in the Constitution [dramatic splayed finger gesture pointing towards the heavens] for the presidency, it would be unconstitutional.

Huh? Do you know what, if the 13th Amendment wasn’t in the Constitution, it would be unconstitutional as was the case before it was passed. What kind of faux insight is this. The sad thing is that Hayes is thinking he’s making a deep point and one must presume anyone stupid enough to want to be in Hayes’s studio audience was suitably impressed and went away muttering this nugget to themselves. I’ll probably see it on twitter a few hundred times today.

What he misses is the obvious: people don’t elect the president, states elect the president. The Electoral College was how small states, like Delaware and Connecticut, were convinced to join the union. Without it, the nation as it has existed since 1787 ceases to exist and becomes something entirely different.

Let’s move away from his jihad against the Electoral College and focus on the second part.

Here’s what I mean by that. Starting in the 1960s, 1961, specifically, the Supreme Court started developing a jurisprudence of [dramatic index finger gesture] “one person, one vote.” The idea is that each individual vote has to carry roughly the same amount of weight as each other individual vote. Which was a pretty intuitive concept but it was not a reality. There were all sorts of crazy representational systems that were created that would not give one person one vote and would disenfranchise certain minorities…you can guess which one [knowing titter from the studio audience…you are just so clever Chris].

Here’s an example. Let’s say you’ve got a city, it’s 60% black and it’s 40% white, okay. Here’s how you ensure white people stay in charge. Divide the city into four voting districts, right? But you put the entire black population in one district. Sixty percent of the people. And then each district elects one city council member. Voila. And now a city council for a majority black city is run by a majority white government.

Let’s take a look at that statement about the weight of votes. He’s right. And where, right now, do you find Americans being disenfranchised in much the same way that he uses in his city council example? Anywhere there are large numbers of illegals. Because if you live in a district that is 100% citizen your vote is literally worth half as much as a vote of someone living in a district where half the voters are illegals. That is how an illegal-heavy metropolis like Los Angeles or Dallas or Chicago or Miami can dominate state politics because their electoral power is exaggerated by having congressional districts formed based on total people, not total voters.

In other words, by counting bodies and not citizens what happens is that citizens become the black voters in Hayes’s example. They are all packed into one district. Three other districts, composed of mostly non-citizens have representatives elected with only about 13% of the total voting population. To get an idea of what that looks like nationwide, take a look at this map.

Westlake Legal Group non-citizen-voting-map-620x356 MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Shockingly Makes the Case For the Census Counting Citizens reapportionment Politics MSNBC Media immigration Front Page Stories Featured Story electoral college democrats Citizenship Question Chris Hayes census Allow Media Exception

CREDIT: https://www.socialexplorer.com/blog/post/social-explorer-tool-demonstrates-the-potential-impact-of-the-census-citizenship-question-9546

Inadvertently, Chris Hayes made the case for why the US government should count citizens and why congressional seats should be apportioned based on them.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========

The post MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Shockingly Makes the Case For the Census Counting Citizens appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group chris-hayes-300x153 MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Shockingly Makes the Case For the Census Counting Citizens reapportionment Politics MSNBC Media immigration Front Page Stories Featured Story electoral college democrats Citizenship Question Chris Hayes census Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Media’s no good, very bad week (and what’s coming next)

Westlake Legal Group Lawrence-ODonnell The Media’s no good, very bad week (and what’s coming next) The Blog MSNBC media bias Lawrence O'Donnell

There have been plenty of media stories to write about this week. I’ve covered a couple of them myself. But I didn’t really step back and think about how spectacularly awful major media has been this week until I read Mark Hemingway’s piece titled “24 hours of Media Malpractice.” This really was a banner week for the media and I think I know why. What’s more, I think I know what’s coming next.

Sunday: The media’s no good, very bad week actually started Sunday when the NY Times published a story bemoaning the fact that conservative operatives had threatened to systematically embarrass professional journalists by—wait for it—digging up their public statements on social media. Allahpundit wrote about the absurdity of the Times or anyone else in the media complaining about behavior that has been standard operating procedure at Media Matters and elsewhere for years.

Monday: In fact, the NY Times panic was so absurd that writers for the Post and Politico wrote pieces saying so. Here’s Politico’s Jack Shafer:

Journalists don’t deserve a get-out-of-bigotry-jail free card just because they’re journalists. If their past tweets, however ancient, undercut their current journalistic work or make them sound hypocritical, they can’t blame their diminished prestige on Trump’s allies. It’s like blaming a cop for writing you a ticket for speeding in a school zone.

Tuesday: But the media was just getting started. Here’s Mark Hemingway:

Just before 10 a.m., someone else at the Washington Post made another outrageous and unsupported accusation of racism. The New York Times’ Jeremy Peters had written an article assessing the impact of the Tea Party protests 10 years later. Washington Post reporter Wesley Lowery, who is the paper’s “national correspondent covering law enforcement, justice and their intersection with politics and policy” — and ostensibly not an opinion journalist — took to Twitter to express his disapproval of the story. “How do you write a 10 years later piece on the Tea Party and not mention – not once, not even in passing – the fact that it was essentially a hysterical grassroots tantrum about the fact that a black guy was president? Journalistic malpractice,” he tweeted out to his 600,000 followers.

It’s true that there were a few racially charged signs that popped up at Tea Party rallies, but there are always fringe characters in every large crowd, especially at political protests. I covered multiple Tea Party rallies at the time – Lowery was still a teenager in 2009, so I presume he doesn’t have a lot of first-hand experience talking to Tea Party protesters – and I saw and heard nothing to indicate widespread racial animus. If the media covered the nearly concurrent Occupy Wall Street protests by highlighting the same fringe extremism, we’d unfairly dismiss the left’s sincerity out of hand and conclude that they were engaged in a hysterical tantrum in support of rape and defecating on cop cars…

Still, Lowery’s objections – and those of lots of other journalists and angry social media activists – to the Times piece won the day. Tuesday afternoon, just after 2 p.m., the Times’ official Twitter account made it, well, official: “We have updated this story assessing the policy failures of the Tea Party movement 10 years after its rise to include context about attacks on President Barack Obama and racist displays at some Tea Party rallies.”

Also Tuesday, the Washington Post published a piece in its Post Everything section which strongly suggested author JD Vance was promoting white supremacy in a public speech. That was clearly false as even a cursory reading of the speech demonstrated. After getting pushback the Post removed the accusation and added a correction which clarified that Vance was not channeling white supremacy. However, the author of the piece refused to apologize and claimed on Twitter that the idea to target Vance came from her editor at the Post.

Tuesday night MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell looked at the media landscape and cried out hold my beer. O’Donnell went on his nightly MSNBC show and claimed that President Trump’s Deutsche Bank loan documents had been co-signed by Russian oligarchs. Throughout, his show, O’Donnell kept repeating that “if true” this was a devastating story but admitted he hadn’t seen the documents.

Wednesday: In the early afternoon, O’Donnell announced on Twitter that he’d made a mistake.

Wednesday night, O’Donnell admitted “I did not go through the rigorous verification and standards process here at MSNBC before repeating what I heard from my source. (This was such a blatant failure that Erik Wemple at the Post is wondering aloud today whether O’Donnell should even have a show.)

There was also a social media freakout Wednesday suggesting that a policy change meant the children of US servicepeople who were born abroad would no longer be citizens. That was false.

Thursday: The Washington Post has more conservatives to smear. In another piece for the Post Everything section, the Post allows a writer to claim that “reasonable conservatives” sound suspiciously like antebellum racists. Her entire argument boils down to cherry-picking a few lines from various authors and claiming the tone is the same. The author compares the ideas of “reasonable conservatives” to a virus being spread through—get this—free speech.

Today is Friday and it’s still early so I’m not sure if we’ll be adding more items to this list today. But to sum up: Monday it was dastardly conservatives threatening journalists (with public accountability for public comments). Tuesday it was the Tea Party, plus conservative-friendly author JD Vance as a white supremacist, plus President Trump as a Russian stooge. Wednesday it was another immigration freakout with people claiming the Trump administration was up to no good. Thursday it was “reasonable conservatives” sounding like racists.

Some of the stories (O’Donnell, the Post’s JD Vance claim) got corrected internally and some got corrected externally (the NY Times whinging about accountability, the immigration freakout). But all of the errors involve conservatives as villains (though I guess the “error” in the Tea Party piece was that it didn’t call the Tea Party racist, the correction did that).

I think this week is a harbinger of things to come. Why? Because the Mueller report didn’t work out as Democrats and the media hoped. There’s no public appetite for impeachment. Progressives are getting nervous and the NY Times has signaled privately and publicly, through its 1619 Project, that the 2020 election will be all about racism because that’s the best chance Democrats have to activate their base.

So what’s coming next? A lot more careless mistakes by the usual suspects looking to drag Trump and the GOP down. What this week demonstrates is that many of them care less about their credibility than ensuring the desired outcome. This isn’t really new of course. In fact, some version of this happens every four years. See dog-abusing-vampire-capitalist-with-80s-foreign-policy Mitt Romney for a previous example.

The post The Media’s no good, very bad week (and what’s coming next) appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group Lawrence-ODonnell-300x159 The Media’s no good, very bad week (and what’s coming next) The Blog MSNBC media bias Lawrence O'Donnell   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Boom: GOP Spokeswoman Drops a MOAB on Stacey Abrams’ Argument Against the Electoral College

Westlake Legal Group media.townhall-620x317 Boom: GOP Spokeswoman Drops a MOAB on Stacey Abrams’ Argument Against the Electoral College Stacey Abrams republicans Politics North Carolina MSNBC liz harrington gop Georgia Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post electoral college elections democrats Culture Chris Hayes Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020

It’s no big secret that Democrat Stacey Abrams refuses to concede last year’s Georgia gubernatorial race. She has spent the entirety of her time since telling anyone who will listen that the election was “stolen.”

Along the way, she’s continued to undermine the election process in Georgia by telling voters there that they “don’t have the right to vote.” She also launched an organization she feels will combat alleged “voter suppression” efforts in her home state and elsewhere.

As far as her plans for higher office go, she recently announced she has no plans to run for president and no plans to run for Senate in Georgia. But she did throw her hat in the ring for possible vice presidential consideration after telling reporters several months ago she didn’t want to play second fiddle.

But for Democrats with aspirations for the vice presidency come the questions about the electoral college, which leftists like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY) have come out in favor of abolishing on grounds that it’s “racist.”

Abrams took a similar position on MSNBC’s “All in with Chris Hayes” program Tuesday after being asked about it:

HAYES: Briefly. Final policy question. There have been some calls to abolish the electoral college. There`s been some controversy over this week of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calling for it. The president emailing his supporters about how terrible an idea that was. Do you favor that?

ABRAMS: Absolutely. The electoral college was not designed to make sure people in small states weren’t subject to the tyranny of people in urban areas, that wasn’t the conversation at the time, it was because those in power did not believe that working people that the intellectual capacity to directly elect the leader of the free world. We have long passed that time and it’s time for direct election and popular vote.

GOP spokeswoman Liz Harrington got wind of Abrams’ argument and dropped a MOAB on it:

Seriously! I mean we all know at this point the only way Stacey Abrams will accept the results of any election in which she’s the Democratic nominee is if she wins it.

Related –>> Their Rules: Stacey Abrams Shouldn’t Be Considered a VP Candidate Because She Can’t Get Over 2018 (Video)

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Boom: GOP Spokeswoman Drops a MOAB on Stacey Abrams’ Argument Against the Electoral College appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group media.townhall-300x153 Boom: GOP Spokeswoman Drops a MOAB on Stacey Abrams’ Argument Against the Electoral College Stacey Abrams republicans Politics North Carolina MSNBC liz harrington gop Georgia Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post electoral college elections democrats Culture Chris Hayes Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

O’Donnell retracts, sorta: “We don’t know if the information is inaccurate”

Westlake Legal Group odonnell-retract O’Donnell retracts, sorta: “We don’t know if the information is inaccurate” The Blog retraction NBC News MSNBC Lawrence O'Donnell fake news donald trump Deutsche Bank

MSNBC called it a retraction. Lawrence O’Donnell called it a retraction too. Yet nowhere in this apology does O’Donnell actually retract his claim that Russian oligarchs co-signed Donald Trump’s loans from Deutsche Bank. Instead, O’Donnell apologizes for not vetting the story more thoroughly before it went on the air (via Twitchy):

When you state that “we don’t know if the information is inaccurate,” that’s not really a retraction. That’s a rather telling hedge, too, as MSNBC producer Michael DelMoro admitted yesterday that O’Donnell’s source hadn’t even seen the bank records to confirm the claim for him/herself, let alone produce the documents for NBC’s review. At best the claim was secondhand hearsay with no evidentiary value at all. It’s closer to a chatroom rumor that O’Donnell chose to amplify on a national broadcast.

Besides, if it was a retraction, wouldn’t O’Donnell have deleted this tweet?

As of 8 am ET this morning, that tweet is still live on O’Donnell’s Twitter thread, and has over 37,700 retweets and almost 90,000 likes. A lie — excuse me, a potential inaccuracy, according to O’Donnell — may get around the world before the truth gets its boots on, but usually a responsible journalist won’t keep the lie on world tour after offering a supposed “retraction.”

Trump’s complaints about “fake news” often get tiresome and are almost always self serving. Hard to complain about it here, though:

One might even chalk up this claimed “retraction” as fake news. The original report was a black eye for NBC News and MSNBC, but at least that was mostly O’Donnell’s doing. The ongoing attempt to keep the rumor alive even while claiming a “retraction” is perhaps even worse, and even more indicative of the values of NBC/MSNBC than the original offense.

The post O’Donnell retracts, sorta: “We don’t know if the information is inaccurate” appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group odonnell-retract-300x162 O’Donnell retracts, sorta: “We don’t know if the information is inaccurate” The Blog retraction NBC News MSNBC Lawrence O'Donnell fake news donald trump Deutsche Bank   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com