| |
|
By Alex Xenos
 As CNN continues their crusade to bring down the Trump presidency, New Day spent 93 percent of their three-hour program Wednesday covering Donald Trump Jr. and the Trump campaign's supposed collusion with Russia. The other seven percent was spent on baseball (~1.5%) and negative coverage of the GOP's healthcare bill (~5.5%).
No one is arguing that this revelation should not be covered, but when you spend 93 percent of your time talking about it, it shows an obsession, not an objective news judgment. The same liberal media spent virtually no time seriously covering the supposed collusion between Bill Clinton and the Red Chinese in Clinton's '96 re-election bid. They ignored the potentially corrupt behavior by the Clinton Foundation for years. Yet, when there is even a sniff of scandal surrounding a Republican, they pounce with hysterical outrage.
Here is the actual time allocation, after commercials are excluded:
2 Hours 15 Minutes 46 Seconds on Russia
7 Minutes 45 Seconds on GOP Health Care
2 Minutes 20 Seconds on Sports
Additionally, CNN Newsroom the following hour (9 AM) spent 100 percent of the airtime they had prior to their coverage of Christopher Wray's confirmation hearing on the Russia story (31 min 43 sec).
|
|
By Kristine Marsh
 On MSNBC Wednesday morning, two of MSNBC’s most prominent anchors admitted they had no idea what Trump was referring to, when he tweeted out that the Clinton campaign also sought out information from foreign government officials to help boost her campaign, during the 2016 election. After reading the tweet, Brian Williams asked Andrea Mitchell if she knew what he was talking about. “I’m hoping you can help me decipher this,” he asked. “ It’s hard to figure out what this is about,” Andrea Mitchell quizzically responded.
The humorous exchange happened during the 9 am hour on MSNBC Live. Williams began by reading the tweet, that had just been put out a few minutes before, then asked Mitchell if she could “take a whack” at figuring out its meaning:
BRIAN WILLIAMS: Andrea Mitchell, I said earlier no public events for three days on the president's calendar. He leaves tonight for Paris, for Bastille day celebrations. What we've heard from the president again, three minutes ago on Twitter, I'm hoping you can help me decipher this: 'Why aren't the same standards placed on the Democrats. Look what Hillary Clinton may have gotten away with. Disgraceful.' Do you want to take a whack at that?
MITCHELL: I'm trying to figure it out myself. Earlier he called it a witch hunt, so he's still on the fake news or what the Democrats are doing, that combo. Perhaps this is a reference to e-mails, since his son voluntarily tweeted out a whole e-mail chain. Nobody was forcing him to do that other than the questions that were raised by The New York Times, and they said they were about to reveal them themselves. So he voluntarily released his e-mails, so perhaps it's an e-mail reference. But it's hard to figure out what this is about.
WILLIAMS: Let the record show Andrea Mitchell is always game for a challenge, though sometimes the material leaves us with more questions than answers. [laughter]
Trump’s tweet was referring to a seven-month old report from Politico, which found that Ukrainian officials worked with the DNC to help do opposition research on Trump in order to help Clinton’s campaign. This research was also leaked to several American journalists, according to the report.
Politico found that a veteran DNC operative, Alexandra Chalupa, sought out information to damage the Trump campaign after media reports speculated Paul Manafort had ties to Russia. She sought out help to do this from the Ukrainian Ambassador to the U.S. and one of his top aides, “with the DNC’s encouragement,” Politico reported.
Chalupa spoke to Politico, which recalled:
She [Chalupa] said that, when Trump’s unlikely presidential campaign began surging in late 2015, she began focusing more on the research, and expanded it to include Trump’s ties to Russia, as well. She occasionally shared her findings with officials from the DNC and Clinton’s campaign, Chalupa said.
The report went into further detail, but the long and short of it explained how Ukrainian officials admitted to “working very closely” with Chalupa, who then shared this information with the DNC.
One official, Andrii Telizhenko told Politico:
“They were coordinating an investigation with the Hillary team on Paul Manafort with Alexandra Chalupa.”
Telizhenko recalled that Chalupa told him and Shulyar that, “If we can get enough information on Paul [Manafort] or Trump’s involvement with Russia, she can get a hearing in Congress by September.”
|
|
By Nicholas Fondacaro
 Following the revelations found in Donald Trump Jr.’s e-mails earlier in the week, the media have put greater focus on President Trump’s close-knit family. So late Wednesday night, during CNN Tonight, the network’s Presidential Historian Douglas Brinkley went on an angry rant where he railed against the Trumps as a family. And in addition, made baseless accusations about what White House staffers thought about them and their desire to work there.
Brinkley clearly had a bone to pick with the Trump family as he equated them to an Italian organized crime family. “You have a kind of-- like a Mafioso; the family’s in charge only, and we keep it in our clan together,” he chided. “And some people find that honorable, but when it starts damaging the United States at home and abroad.”
In particular, Brinkley’s ire was directed at Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who he claimed had “the bull’s eye” of controversy on him. “I think he's going to at the very least have to have his security clearance revoked. And I think he should step down. I don't believe he's trustworthy anymore,” he asserted. But his tirade against Kushner didn’t end there:
And having somebody like Jared Kushner over and over again mislead people, spending taxpayer's money, people are trying to understand what's going on about our election hacking and here is somebody; Kushner is supposed to be coming to negotiate peace in the Middle East according to Donald Trump when he's taking meetings with rogue Russians in such a fashion.
He was also quite adamant in claiming that most people who worked in the White House didn’t want to be there. “But for White House staff this is just a disaster. I mean, people are going to want to start heading for the hills pretty soon,” he stated while citing no sources.
The closest thing to a source Brinkley got to was a fellow panelist, author William Cohan, who said: “I think Gary Cohn is looking to position himself to get away from the White House,” so he could become the chairman of the FED. Despite the fact that it was only Cohan’s opinion, host Don Lemon insisted it was a “very interesting bit of news.” But that’s speculation, and speculation is not news.
In response to Cohan’s unsupported claim, Brinkley rambled on about how he thought White House staffers were “embarrassed” to work there. “Well, I just think that there are a lot of people that are working for Donald Trump now that are almost embarrassed to have it on their resume, meaning they work for somebody who seems to be involved in scandal all time,” he pushed.
And when it came presidents with a lot of scandals, Brinkley declared that one needed to “go back to like Warren Harding and [the] early scandals of teapot dome.” He eventually would recall Nixon and Reagan, but no others. Of course, he would only recall Republicans and completely ignore any and all Democrats.
With that kind of disgusting mudslinging coming from a so-called presidential historian, it’s no wonder CNN’s credibility is in the gutter. It’s one thing to want historical context for current events, that’s important, but to have the historian smearing the family of a sitting president, that’s something far different and damaging to journalism.
Transcript below:
CNN Tonight
July 12, 2017
10:50:39 PM Eastern
(…)
DON LEMON: How does a scandal like this deepen the divide among—the divide among his family and his staff?
DOUGLAS BRINKLEY: Well, I don't believe it divides them between his family. It probably does make them stronger. But for White House staff this is just a disaster. I mean, people are going to want to start heading for the hills pretty soon. Donald Trump just can't seem to be able to shake this Russia probe. Every day it's a drip, drip, drip. Something bad is happening.
I think the bull's eye and the family right now is on Jared Kushner. The fact he is in government, that he is in the White House as you’ve been talking about, Don, is problematic. I think he's going to at the very least have to have his security clearance revoked. And I think he should step down. I don't believe he's trustworthy anymore.
(…)
WILLIAM COHAN: [I think] He [Gary Cohn] is positioning himself as the head of the search for the new chairman of the FED to take over from Janet Yellen. Who Donald Trump has said he wants to not renew her term. I think Gary Cohn is looking to position himself to get away from the White House, to go over to the FED to be chairman of the fed to not have his reputation continuously tarnished by what’s going on in the Donald Trump White House.
LEMON: Oh, that’s a very interesting bit of news. Douglas, did you want to weigh in on that?
BRINKLEY: Well, I just think that there are a lot of people that are working for Donald Trump now that are almost embarrassed to have it on their resume, meaning they work for somebody who seems to be involved in scandal all time. I mean, you go back to like Warren Harding and when early scandals of teapot dome. Nixon was in for a long time before those kinds of scandals really kicked in.
But with this just the scandal a day going on, it's a White House in disarray. You have a kind of-- like a Mafioso, the family’s in charge only, and we keep it in our clan together. And some people find that honorable, but when it starts damaging the United States at home and abroad. And having somebody like Jared Kushner over and over again mislead people, spending taxpayer's money, people are trying to understand what's going on about our election hacking and here is somebody; Kushner is supposed to be coming to negotiate peace in the Middle East according to Donald Trump when he's taking meetings with rogue Russians in such a fashion.
So it's a White House right now that's disassembling and Donald Trump I think would serve people well to do what Reagan did Iran-Contra: try to talk honestly to the American public, not just to Fox News or to Christian Broadcasting Network where he feels he has friendly people doing the questioning.
(…)
|
|
By John Hirschauer
In MSNBC’s search for a spokesman of sacrosanct ethics and patriotism, they turned to an unlikely source: Dan Rather. The fake news forefather joined Chris Hayes on his Tuesday All In program, opining that lying by Trump Jr. and other Trump officials raised “a real ethical question” about their character. Moreover, he argued, it lead to very real questions about their “patriotism”:
Rather, of course, has himself engaged in behaviors of questionable patriotic substance when he literally forged a document impugning a sitting President.
What’s perhaps most remarkable was the unmitigated deference given to Rather by Hayes in this exchange, hoisting Rather up as “someone who has reported on and observed American political life for decades.”
While this is true, the optics of this conversation were akin to Bill Clinton discussing the merits of chastity or George Wallace explaining the importance of integration.
A certain amount of charity ought to be given to those attempting to earnestly atone for their own past misdeeds, and it is possible to take seriously those sincerely remorseful for mistakes they’ve made. But, it seems, Rather gives his political opponents no such generosity.
Read the full transcript below:
7-11-17
All in With Chris Hayes
8:13 PM
RATHER: If he has in fact lied about it--I know some people would say since he's lied about it, but if in fact he lied about it, that's a crime. That can be perjury. But at the very least, whether he is legally accountable or not there is a real ethical question involved here. There’s a question of patriotism involved here. And it is an immense political question for Donald Trump’s presidency right now because the hot breath of truth is coming down heavy on their necks just now.
HAYES: As to the ethical problem, I really want to get your perspective on what we have seen happen in just the last 24 hours. We've seen, okay, you know, people who defended the President said there's no interference. Then there was interference but no collusion. And now it’s, basically, well, they tried to collude but really who wouldn't? I mean, as someone who has reported on and observed American political life for decades, what do you say to people who say that any campaign would have taken this meeting, this is totally normal, this isn’t aberrant.
RATHER: I would say that’s not true and it’s demonstrably untrue.
|
|
By Brad Wilmouth
On Monday's CNN Tonight, correspondent Sara Sidner recalled reports of an 11 percent increase in hate crimes in California, but did not put into context that the state has recently suffered a general increase in violent crime -- that is about in line with the hate crime increase -- that has been linked to the release of many formerly incarcerated criminals.
In the next segment, liberal CNN commentator Bakari Sellers tried to implicate President Donald Trump as he asserted that the President "did light a fire" to "racism," "anti-Semitism," "misogyny," "bigotry," and "xenophobia" even if he did not "invent" them.
At 11:35 p.m. ET, Sidner filed a pre-recorded report recalling a recent harassment campaign against a Jewish real estate agent in Montana carried out by readers of a white supremacist website. After the piece concluded, host Don Lemon wondered if the "political climate" -- presumably referring to Donald Trump -- was linked to such behavior. Lemon: "Is there any sense that this political climate, Sara, that we're living in right now, is it egging on these kinds of hatemongers on social media or just in general?"
Sidner recounted statistics on the increase in hate crimes -- specifically a recent report about California -- as she responded:
You know, it's interesting that you ask that because we asked that very question to Tanya Gersh herself and her family, and she said to me, "Look, I don't want to look at this as politics."
But when you look at the overall picture, you look at the Southern Poverty Law Center, for example, or the Anti-Defamation League, or even the FBI, the statistics are showing that the numbers of hate incidents are up across the country. California, for example, where I am right now, just had a report out this past week saying the hate incidents are up about 11 percent this year.
She added:
So, yes, indeed, there are a lot of people looking at this and saying, "You know what, the political climate we're living in is egging some of these folks on and giving them more of a voice paying attention to them."
Not mentioned by Sidner is that violent crime in California has increased each of the last couple of years with conservatives placing blame on a prison reform plan that released criminals back into the population. So Sidner cherry-picked one category of crime that liberals often link to their caricature of right-wing whites targeting minorities.
Also of note, the most recent FBI annual statistics on hate crimes in the U.S. released last November finds that, of all hate crimes whose perpetrators could be identified by race, 42 percent were committed by minorities, undermining the stereotype that hate crimes are committed by whites against minorities.
In the next segment, during a discussion of how current political discourse might tie into the Montana harassment case, liberal CNN political commentator Bakari Sellers complained that President Donald Trump has not done enough to speak out against hate, and accused the President of "lighting a fire" to different types of bigotry. Sellers: "I think that Donald Trump didn't invent racism. I mean, Donald Trump didn't invent anti-Semitism or misogyny or bigotry or xenophobia. He did light a fire to it..."
Below is a transcript of relevant portions of the Monday, July 10, CNN Tonight:
11:35 p.m. Eastern
DON LEMON: Is there any sense that this political climate, Sara, that we're living in right now, is it egging on these kinds of hatemongers on social media or just in general?
 SARA SIDNER: You know, it's interesting that you ask that because we asked that very question to Tanya Gersh herself and her family, and she said to me, "Look, I don't want to look at this as politics." But when you look at the overall picture, you look at the Southern Poverty Law Center, for example, or the Anti-Defamation League, or even the FBI, the statistics are showing that the numbers of hate incidents are up across the country. California, for example, where I am right now, just had a report out this past week saying the hate incidents are up about 11 percent this year. So, yes, indeed, there are a lot of people looking at this and saying, "You know what, the political climate we're living in is egging some of these folks on and giving them more of a voice paying attention to them."
(...)
11:44 p.m. Eastern
LEMON: I think it's interesting, Matt, because you think that the Trump White House is the result of a rise in hate incidents of groups rather than a catalyst for it. Why is that?
MATT LEWIS: Well, I, here's what I think. Clearly, Donald Trump's candidacy and presidency excited some of the, you know, Alt-Righters and white supremacists. There's no doubt about that. But, by and large, when I look at these cultural trends, I think Donald Trump is more a product or a symptom of these trends than he is the catalyst of them. So, for example, whether it's the reality show phenomenon that we have right now, or whether it is the troll culture, the memes, Donald Trump capitalized on that. He didn't invent it, but I think he's -- we get the politicians that we deserve, and he's sort of the man of the hour.
LEMON: Who's saying correct on that? I couldn't see who it was.
BAKARI SELLERS: I said that was correct. I mean, I think that Donald Trump didn't invent racism. I mean, Donald Trump didn't invent anti-Semitism or misogyny or bigotry or xenophobia. He did light a fire to it, and, just to the point of my colleague who's on the panel with us tonight, you know, yeah, this isn't a left or right issue, this is an American issue that we can all stand up and speak out against. You know, my response to that is: Okay, I agree with you. Why don't you tell your President to speak out against it? The lone voice that's missing from this condemnation of this hate speech on the internet, social media, in bathrooms, wherever it is, is Donald Trump. And the fact that no one can see that, the fact that no one wants to say that, I mean, that in itself is cowardly. So, if we want to have a conversation about "how do we stop this speech?" let's start with the quote, unquote, "leader of the free world."
|
|
By Nicholas Fondacaro
 Many climate change alarmists were in full panic mode on Wednesday after scientists announced that a truly massive sheet of ice weighing 1 trillion tons and the size of Delaware had finally broken off of the continent. The fear continued during the evening broadcasts of the Big Three Networks as ABC and NBC were more than happy to contribute to the hysteria.
“At the bottom of the world tonight a massive fracture on the continent of Antarctica has caused one of the biggest icebergs on record to break away into the ocean. It's so big it could fill Lake Erie twice over,” hyped Anchor Lester Holt during NBC Nightly News. “NBC News National Correspondent Miguel Almaguer with the extraordinary details.”
National Correspondent Miguel Almaguer cranked up the horror right out of the gate when he declared: “Tonight in Antarctica, a titanic shift in our planet's landscape … Its size is stunning, a block of ice weighing 1 trillion tons, roughly the size of Delaware.” He did briefly admit that ice shelf breaks were “not unusual,” but he followed it up by claiming that “this event is redefining geography.”
“Scientists say, for now, there is no consensus whether this break is linked to climate change but say the region is in peril,” Almaguer fretted. He then played a clip of a man who asserted that “Antarctica is losing mass at an alarming rate. That is a climate warming signal much more important than this iceberg.” The man was presumably a scientist but it’s impossible to know for sure because there was no indication of who he was, either from the NBC reporter verbally or an on-screen chyron.
On ABC’s World News Tonight, Anchor David Muir put on his serious face and announced that “And from the bottom of the Earth this evening, one of the largest icebergs ever recorded has now broken away from the Antarctic ice shelf. Scientists have been concerned for some time about this.”
The report was short, but reporter Lindsey Davis managed to hit most of the talking points. “Scientists are calling the split an enormous geographical event and are studying what role, if any, regional warming may have played,” she said. “Disappearing ice is an issue on both poles, as we saw firsthand during a visit to Baffin Island, just off the coast of Greenland in 2012.” She didn’t talk to any scientists during her segment.
CBS Evening News was the only network in the Big Three to not go over the top even though they did push climate change. In fact, Anchor Anthony Mason noted that “as alarming as that sounds, scientists are urging everyone to chill.”
“At more than 2,200 square miles, the massive fracture certainly looks dramatic, but scientists are not pressing the panic button just yet,” explained reporter Debora Patta. She also asked Glaciologist David Vaughan if there was anything to worry about right now, and he responded with: “At the moment, I would categorically say no.”
Vaughan made it clear that it would take some time to assess if the break-off was the result of climate change or something else (perhaps it broke off because it weighed 1 trillion tons). But Patta still pushed the climate change angle. “The warmer temperatures have seen some ice shelves retreat to such a point that they are unable to regenerate. Scientists will now be able to determine if this is one such case,” she said.
Transcripts below:
NBC Nightly News
July 12, 2017
7:08:33 PM Eastern
LESTER HOLT: At the bottom of the world tonight a massive fracture on the continent of Antarctica has caused one of the biggest icebergs on record to break away into the ocean. It's so big it could fill Lake Erie twice over. NBC News national correspondent Miguel Almaguer with the extraordinary details.
 [Cuts to video]
MIGUEL ALMAGUER: Tonight in Antarctica, a titanic shift in our planet's landscape. A massive iceberg, one of the largest in recorded history, has broken away from an ice shelf known as Larsen C. Its size is stunning, a block of ice weighing 1 trillion tons, roughly the size of Delaware.
DAVID VAUGHAN: That crack has finally gone through all the way and formed an iceberg. And that iceberg is now free to move off into the Southern Ocean and to melt.
ALMAGUER: NASA is tracking it all, surveying the ice and mapping its movement. Though change to ice shelves in the coldest continent on our planet is not unusual, this event is redefining geography. Over the last several years scientists watched the rift slowly grow reaching 120 miles in length, a 2200 square mile chunk of ice breaking away.
That separation is called calving. Scientists say for now there is no consensus whether this break is linked to climate change but say the region is in peril.
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Antarctica is losing mass at an alarming rate. That is a climate warming signal much more important than this iceberg.
ALMAGUER: Tonight scientists say the iceberg will likely have no direct impact on our lives but warn this is a snapshot of our changing world. Miguel Almaguer, NBC News.
...
 CBS Evening NewsJuly 12, 2017 6:51:06 PM
ANTHONY MASON: Breaking news now from the bottom of the planet. One of the world's largest icebergs has broken away from a tremendous ice sheet in Antarctica. As alarming as that sounds, scientists are urging everyone to chill. Here's Debora Patta.
[Cuts to video]
DEBORA: It's been hanging on by a thread for months. But finally a giant chunk of ice the size of Delaware has snapped off. At more than 2,200 square miles, the massive fracture certainly looks dramatic, but scientists are not pressing the panic button just yet. If the fracturing of this ice berg cause for alarm?
DAVID VAUGHAN: At the moment, I would categorically say no.
PATTA: Glaciologist David Vaughan says, it’s all part of the regular housekeeping in the Antarctic, But may provide scientific clues long term.
VAUGHAN: The question is whether this is the beginning of a retreat of this ice shelf that may eventually be linked to climate change.
PATTA: An ice shelf is a permanent floating sheet of ice attached to land. An iceberg will snap off every few decades, but the ice shelf usually grows again as it gains new ice from land. The warmer temperatures have seen some ice shelves retreat to such a point that they are unable to regenerate. Scientists will now be able to determine if this is one such case.
VAUGHAN: We will take sediment samples beneath the ice shelf and it will tell us how often this type of event has concerned in the past.
PATTA: Of more immediate concern, however, is that without a shelf to hold it back, the glacial ice behind it will flow into the sea and contribute the driving sea levels up more quickly than predicted for this century. Debora Patta, CBS News, London.
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment