As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Tag Archives: journalism

Clinton Peppered with Marshmallow Questions by Press

Hillary Clinton Tuesday swung at softballs pitched to her by a press corps no doubt relieved that she’d escaped Monday’s debate without having a bad night.

From the Washington Free Beacon:

One reporter asked her, “What do you think were the most critical moments last night?”

The follow-up question after that focused on how gender factored into the debate between her and Trump.

“What about the way he kept interrupting and the way he answered the question about gender. Do you think women would react to that?” MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell asked.

The last question she faced referenced a statement given by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani in which he suggested Trump should skip the next debate on Oct 9.

The press has been begging for more news conferences out of Clinton. For what, this? She might as well go back into hiding.

Media Bias Grows as Trump Gains

Gulp. Many in the media seem to be getting that horrible, sinking feeling that Donald Trump could actually win this. And they’re not going to let that happen!

I’m not one of those who think the mainstream media get together in some kind of cabal and plot the destruction of Republicans. I’ve been in the mainstream media, and I know they don’t. What I do know is that nearly all of them are moderate or liberal, often talk to each other as if conservatives are bad or crazy, and that their outlook affects their reporting. Usually, they don’t realize it or wouldn’t admit it to themselves. And sometimes liberal bias is done on purpose.

What I see happening now is reporters suddenly coming to the unthinkable conclusion that a Trump presidency could actually happen and, whether by design or not, they’re amping up the negative Trump coverage. Just look at this string of negative stories the other day from the Washington Post. washpost-anti-trump

The New York Times and others were so wound up they reported that Trump had made the “disproven” charge that the 2008 Clinton campaign originated the birther claim.

That’s false. It’s not disproven. You cannot prove a negative. You can’t say for certain that the Clinton campaign didn’t push it, especially since both the Washington Post and Politico have reported that Clinton “supporters” first put the story out there. And a reputable McClatchy editor has claimed that Clinton confidante Sidney Blumenthal told him to look into it. That’s actually prima facie evidence right there that the campaign may have had something to do with brithing birthirism.

News organization after news organization declared that Donald Trump Jr. had “compared” Syrian refugees to Skittles. He didn’t. What he did was, he issued a tweet showing a bowl of Skittles and asking if you would eat it if you knew three were poisonous, in order to illustrate the problem of letting in from dangerous areas refugees, a few of whom might be killers.

That’s called using a metaphor. Metaphors are not comparisons. They are images used to simplify or elucidate a point. But in today’s politically correct world, enforced by the language police, just the suggestion of ridicule or bias, whether present or not, is cause for conviction.

In an article today vilifying Trump Jr. with the headline that his tweet “fits a pattern,” the New York Times asserts:

This month, Donald Trump Jr. invoked the Holocaust when he argued to a Philadelphia radio station that the news media gave Mrs. Clinton a pass on “every indiscrepancy.” If Republicans had done what she had, he said, “they’d be warming up the gas chamber right now.” (He later claimed this was a reference to capital punishment.)

What kind of reporting is this? The Times declares his explanation false, stating flatly that he “invoked the Holocaust.” Trump Jr., whose sister Ivanka converted to Judaism, uses the singular, “gas chamber,” which sounds to me more like an execution. The gas chambers used during the Holocaust are normally referred to in the plural.

Donald Trump Sr. is climbing in the polls. You’d think the media would be celebrating, since he’ll give them copy to write about every day. But it appears their ideology comes before their work.

Obama Improperly Interferes with the Press

During his remarks Monday on the latest terror attacks occurring under his watch, President Obama decided he would deploy a little government interference against freedom of the press.

He said:

I would ask that the press try to refrain from getting out ahead of the investigation. I am extraordinarily happy with the cooperation that’s been taking place between the FBI and state and local law enforcement officials. They are moving smartly on this investigation. It does not help if false reports or incomplete information is out there. So try to, as much as possible, stick to what our investigators say, because they actually know what they’re talking about.

Obama has completely thrown into a trash bin any notion of separation of powers and limits on the reach of his office. “As much as possible, stick to what our investigators say,” Obama says. Seriously? Write what the government tells you to?

Big Brother has news for you. Now read it.

H/T Washington Examiner.

Video || How CBS Tried to Help Hillary By Editing Bill

This is pretty damning. I can think of no other reason to do this other than to help out the Democratic nominee.

Bill Clinton initially said that Hillary “frequently” passes out, then said he didn’t mean it. CBS decided to accept his explanation by deleting the whole moment. Because Bill Clinton would never try to deceive anyone.

I’d note that this is no random, isolated mistake. Several people in the newsroom, including Charlie Rose must have noticed that Clinton had said “frequently,” since it was a significant comment, and must have seen that it was edited out.

WH Correspondents’ Assn. Presidents Rip Trump and Clinton

The outgoing and incoming presidents of the White House Correspondents’ Association, respectively Carol Lee of the Wall Street Journal and Jeff Mason of Reuters, have written an op-ed in USA Today criticizing the treatment of the press by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

From the piece:

The White House Correspondents’ Association is alarmed by the treatment of the press in the 2016 presidential campaign.

The public’s right to know is infringed if certain reporters are banned from a candidate’s events because the candidate doesn’t like a story they have written or broadcast, as Donald Trump has done.

Similarly, refusing to regularly answer questions from reporters in a press conference, as Hillary Clinton has, deprives the American people of hearing from their potential commander-in-chief in a format that is critical to ensuring he or she is accountable for policy positions and official acts . . .

The United States will not have a free press if its president gets to choose which journalists and which media organizations are allowed access to the executive branch. We will not have a truly free press and an informed electorate if the president doesn’t believe he or she should be held accountable to inquiries from the media.

As a White House reporter, I am a member of the White House Correspondents’ Association. I know this won’t be popular with some of you, but I completely agree with the conclusions in the piece, and I applaud Lee and Mason for taking an aggressive stance.

Hillary Clinton’s failure to answer questions is reprehensible. She has a lot to hide, and she’s hiding it. Though I haven’t experienced it myself, her lackeys no doubt try to intimidate the press when negative stories that are written, just like the Obama people did.

Trump takes all press scrutiny personally and doesn’t seem to have any conception of the roll of reporters in performing accountability on politicians. His decision to ban many reporters from his press conferences stinks of the actions of a third-world despot. And his demagogic press bashing during his speeches is a play to the crowd that is unhealthy for our democracy.

To be sure, the press has undermined itself by failing to restrain its liberal bias. But most mainstream news reporters I know — not all, but most — do their best to keep their own agenda out of it and honestly report the news. Bias creeps in anyway, because we’re human. But the cause of accountability for politicians is so important that even if there is some bias, a potential president demonizing and banning the press is a danger to the republic.

Presidential candidates should allow access to all responsible journalists, even those with an opinion, whether from the left or the right. The Founders enshrined freedom of the press in the First Amendment, and for good reason.

Video || This is Why Trump’s Journo-Bashing Scores Points

Watch here as the three CBS This Morning anchors nod together in self-satisfied disgust at the failure to advance gun control. As if there wasn’t a conservative in their audience or another opinion in the land.

How smug, and ultimately, how dumb. To be so sure of one’s opinions that nobody could possibly disagree, and to be so blithely unaware that, as “mainstream” journalists, they have a responsibility to be nonpartisan.

And then in another segment, surely, they’ll profess to be astounded and outraged that Donald Trump is drawing excitement and applause by bashing the press.

Well, my fellow journalists, this is why Trump’s followers don’t care — and are even gleeful — when he bans certain news organizations from following him. Because you, in your ignorance, have opened the door to such hostility. And unfortunately, a lot of people think a comeuppance is a long time coming.

H/T for the video to Washington Free Beacon.

Frank Luntz Explains Why Trump’s Attacks on the Press Work

GOP pollster Frank Luntz this morning explained why Donald Trump’s denigration of the press is “so powerful.”

“The only people who have credibility ratings as unfavorable as members of Congress, are members of the press,” he said on Fox News. “The average voter thinks, finally, somebody is standing up to them, shouting them down, and putting them back in their place.” People are “tired of being told what to think, and how to think by the press.”

Luntz also said Bill Kristol’s apparent choice of writer and attorney David French to run for president is “meaningless.” French, whom nobody has ever heard of, is not a credible candidate, Luntz said.

Oops! CBS Anchor Says “We Were All Laughing” at GOP Travails

CBS The Morning anchor Gayle King accidentally said “we were all laughing” at Republicans when the Republican convention seemed threatened with disorder, clearly lamenting that the Democrats were now themselves a “hot mess” because their convention is where violence is threatened. That’s a good little window into the presumptions of Washington journalists. She’s there with her colleagues… Continue Reading

Obama and His Washington Press Patsies

I have a piece running in LifeZette today about National Security Council communications chief Ben Rhodes’ manipulation of the press and what it reveals about the cooperation between the White House and Washington reporters. Thought you might want to take a look. From the piece: The crazy world that is Inside-the-Beltway politics is agog this week over… Continue Reading

MSNBC-White House Revolving Door

Rachel Racusen, who just this past November left the White House to join MSNBC, will now return to the White House in a role close to the one she had left. According to Politico: Racusen, who joined MSNBC as vice president of communications in November, will be a White House strategic communications adviser, White House communications… Continue Reading

Stephanopolous Apologizes, Sort Of

ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos apologized on air Monday morning for . . . well, for something. He mentions two faux pas, contributing money – $75,000, though he doesn’t talk sums – to the Clinton Foundation and then not revealing it when he covered the issue. Here’s the apology: Over the last several years, I’ve… Continue Reading