Fox News Shamelessly Whitewashes Donald Trump’s Threat Of RNC Riots

It is difficult to recall any leading candidate for president who has so frequently and blatantly insinuated the threat of violence into a political campaign as Donald Trump. And his threats have not been merely hypothetical rhetoric, they have produced actual assaults at his rallies on peaceful protesters and even members of the press.

Donald Trump Fox News

When Trump made recent comments that he expects that there will be riots at the Republican National Convention if he is not given the GOP nomination for president that he believes is his entitlement, he said it in the context of his prior statements that literally encouraged violence from his followers. However, Fox News is trying desperately to absolve him of any responsibility for the potential harm that he is forecasting and inciting. This morning on MediaBuzz with Howard Kurtz, the host went to great extremes to let Trump off the hook:

“I was surprised that the media went to DEFCON 1 over Trump’s riots comment. I mean, I’ve used that phrase, ‘oh, there will be riots if this happens,’ and I thought it was hyperbole.”

That is typical of what is coming from the Trump apologists at Fox News. They are lock-step in agreement that Trump’s dangerous language is merely a figure of speech or, at worst, a careless exaggeration. What they seem to be purposefully sweep under the rug is the full story that Trump is telling his glassy-eyed disciples. That story includes advocating openly hostile behavior such as his desire to “punch [protesters] in the face,” and his praising of an assault about which he said the protester “deserved to be roughed up.” He lamented the old days when protesters would be “carried out on a stretcher,” and even offered to pay the legal fees of his goons if they “knocked the crap out of” some protesters (see the video below). In light of all of that, his talk of riots can no longer be dismissed as hyperbole. What Trump actually said was

“I don’t think you can say that we don’t get [the nomination] automatically. I think you’d have riots. I think you’d have riots. I’m representing a tremendous — many, many millions of people. […] I think bad things would happen. I really do, I believe that. I wouldn’t lead it, but I think bad things would happen.”

In other words, if his tyrannical orders are not obeyed, his followers have his permission to fulfill his prophecy. He knows exactly what his storm-Trumpers are capable of. This was an unambiguous threat intended by Trump to convey that he is determined to be the GOP nominee, or else. And if he is not exalted, riots will ensue. Of course he says that he “wouldn’t lead it,” but conspicuously never says that it shouldn’t happen. That wasn’t an accident. It was a message.

For Howard Kurtz to pretend that Trump was entertaining a flight of fancy and meant no harm requires a massive dose of slef-delusion. And on that measure, Kurtz is full of it. He has performed the duties of Trump’s fluffer before, as he tried to exempt Trump from criticism for his repugnant remarks, while simultaneously trying to keep Trump’s verbal fecal splatter from soiling the Republican Party.

Kurtz had help from his Fox News comrades who similarly stepped up to scour the scum off of Trump. Fox regulars Steve Doocy, Brian Kilmeade, Ainsley Earhardt, Greta Van Susteren, Andrea Tantaros, and Chris Wallace all sought to attach the “figure of speech” fallacy to Trump’s hate-speech.

In addition to whitewashing Trump’s endorsement of riots, Fox made sure that the protesters were disparaged as the real problem simply for exercising their rights to express themselves. In the view of Fox News the First Amendment is only available to conservatives, and dissenters are infringing on them when they seek to speak out. Had Fox been around when Martin Luther King was protesting racist segregation in Alabama, they would have vilified him for interrupting George Wallace’s freedom to oppress black schoolchildren.

Fox News

In pursuit of the sort slander that turned bigots like Wallace into heroes, Fox trotted some of their old fear mongering to rile up their dimwitted audience. Trump is standing in today for Wallace, but his bigotry is no different. So Fox is going after Trump’s protesters so as to turn them into villains. And of course Fox’s coverage of protesters is always slanted to portray progressives as evil, but a couple of years ago, when the protesters were the Tea Party, Fox heralded them as patriots. Now the foul remnants of the Tea Party are lining up behind Donald Trump. And Fox News is running the media interference for them.

How Fox News Deceives and Controls Their Flock:
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Donald Trump's History of Inciting Violence

Terrifying. #DumpTrump

Posted by MoveOn.org on Sunday, March 13, 2016

Fox News Admits That The Media Is Rooting For Donald Trump

Yesterday News Corpse published an article on The Trump Effect that laid out how the media has a profit motive to keep Donald Trump in the race. The article included a quote from the CEO of CBS who confessed that, with regard to Trump, “It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS.” In other words, their lust for profit has a higher priority than their love of country.

Donald Trump News

So what happened on Fox News last night could not have happened at better time. On the Kelly File, host Megyn Kelly did a segment with the Fox News media correspondent and host of Fox’s MediaBuzz, Howard Kurtz. The discussion began with Kelly asserting that “a lot of the media, they love Trump.” That’s an understatement, particularly after exploring the Trump Effect and the profound financial incentive the media has to extend his place in the limelight. They are doing everything they can to keep his face in front of voters and maintain his electoral viability. Which led to this revealing exchange:

Kurtz: Now Cruz has made this argument in recent days, and Marco Rubio as well, that the media has focused so much attention on Donald Trump. They love Donald Trump. They’re rooting for Donald Trump. At least until the fall.
Kelly: But they do. If you look at the numbers even on the nightly newscast — the time they devoted just in the past night — last night to Donald Trump vs the other two, it was six minutes Trump, I think seven seconds, Rubio. I mean, the disparity was remarkable.
Kurtz: There’s a clear imbalance. And we’ve all had banners awaiting Trump news conference, which shows how he can hijack the news cycle. But a lot of that attention has been negative.

Kelly had finally admitted something that has been true for more than half a year – that the coverage of Trump by the media has been wildly out of proportion to the rest of the candidates of both parties. While Kurtz only mentioned that Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio had complained about this, last December Bernie Sanders told Chris Cuomo of CNN about a study that showed that Trump received 81 minutes of airtime on ABC News in 2015 while Bernie Sanders got 20 seconds.

The response by Kurtz to Kelly’s revelation, however, was painfully oblivious to reality. First of all, he tried to blame Trump for the imbalance by accusing him of “hijacking the news cycle.” Which makes you wonder if Kurtz knows the definition of “hijack.” Trump did not storm the studio and force the news producers at gunpoint to put him on the air. They did that all of their own accord. It was more of a gift from the press than a hijacking by Trump. If the media didn’t want to put him on then he wouldn’t be on, and there would be nothing he could do about it. Just ask Bernie Sanders.

Following that absurd portrayal of events, Kurtz then attempted to conflate two completely different issues. By veering off to say that “a lot of that attention has been negative,” he was changing the subject from the free airtime that Trump got to the amount of time spent discussing him. But that isn’t the problem that was raised by observing how much time Trump got every time he gave a stump speech. The cable news networks seem to cut to him live whenever he holds a rally. And, of course, they don’t do that for anyone else. That’s the problem, and Kurtz appeared not to want to acknowledge it.

How Fox News Deceives and Controls Their Flock:
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

The most striking part of this whole segment, though, was how both Kelly and Kurtz spoke about the media as if it were a detached entity that had nothing to do with them. However, the truth is that Fox New is the network that is most responsible for the coverage imbalance that they both concede exists. No network gives Trump more airtime than Fox News. And on Fox, no candidate receives as much airtime as Trump. So it was a bit disorienting to hear these two pretend that the Trump Effect was just some vague theory that was floating around and impacted all of the media equally. They may have come closer to representing reality by admitting that the media roots for Trump, but they continue to lie about their decidedly prominent role in the cheering section.

Really? Fox News Thinks Rachel Maddow Is Too Biased To Moderate A Debate

Howard Kurtz, host of MediaBuzz on Fox News, wrote a column today that might have consumed the world’s supply of chutzpah. In the column Kurtz took MSNBC to task for having the audacity to let their biggest star, Rachel Maddow, co-moderate a Democratic debate. Of course, that’s something that Fox has done itself with their hot property, Megyn Kelly, but never mind that. Kurtz is very upset.

Megyn Kelly

The headline of the article asked this pressing question: “Why did MSNBC put Rachel Maddow on the debate stage?” The question was apparently so easy to answer that Kurtz managed to handle it all by himself.

Kurtz: Rachel Maddow did a pretty good job in questioning Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders at MSNBC’s Democratic debate last night. (…) She is smart and passionate, a Rhodes scholar with a deep knowledge of the issues. She did not roll over for Clinton during a recent interview on her prime-time show.

Well, with a track record like that she should never be allowed anywhere near a candidate debate. The last thing Fox would want is a smart, knowledgeable, fair person to facilitate a political discussion. That certainly isn’t the way they do it. Fox has taken great pains to make sure that all of their presenters are cut from the same moldy conservative cloth. And yet, Kurtz can still pose this scenario as if it weren’t utterly oblivious to reality:

“Imagine the reaction on the left if the Fox News moderators at a debate were Bret Baier and Sean Hannity, an unabashed conservative. The criticism of Fox for fielding such a team would have been intense.”

Of course, the truth is that Fox’s moderators are unabashed conservatives, which I’ll get to in a moment. But first it is important to note that Kurtz couldn’t simply praise for Maddow without qualifying it by insisting that, despite her evident skills “she shouldn’t have been on that stage as a moderator,” and that “she should not have been put in that position,” because “she is an unabashedly liberal commentator who rips the Republicans every night on her program.”

If that is their criteria for choosing debate moderators then Fox has some explaining to do. Their own debate moderators have included relentless liberal bashers like Megyn Kelly, one of the most stridently partisan purveyors of propaganda on the Republican PR channel (aka Fox News). She spreads more lies about Benghazi than any of her Fox colleagues (and that’s saying something). She was caught leading a discussion that was based on a series of “Fox Facts” that were cribbed directly from a Republican National Committee press release. She made a point of informing her viewers that it was a fact that both Jesus and Santa Claus were white.

Media Matters did a survey a couple of years back that showed that Kelly “has hosted conservatives (56%) significantly more often than progressives (18%) and has surpassed even Fox’s Hannity in its divide between guests on the left and right.” That’s the same Hannity that Kurtz used in his imaginary scenario about unabashed conservatives. And in March she will host her third debate on Fox News.

Also moderating for Fox was Neil Cavuto, the Glenn Beck of business news. His first question in the debate he moderated asked the candidates which of their economic plans God would endorse. He has made it his mission to castigate low-income Americans as sponges and leeches who are actually living the good life at the expense of the one-percent. He is a committed climate-change denier. And he frequently has segments about alleged government waste that usually turns out to be completely bogus (like this on about the famous shrimp on a treadmill).

How Fox News Deceives and Controls Their Flock:
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

With blatantly biased moderators like this on Fox, Kurtz has the gall to complain about Maddow, even as he admits that she has all the qualifications for a moderator and that she acquitted herself well. What more does he want? His complaint obviously doesn’t have anything to do with Maddow’s ability to perform with proficiency and fairness, so the only thing left to explain why he would devote a column to this whining is his own bias and partisanship. Or perhaps he was ordered to do it by his boss, Roger Ailes, as a slap at Megyn Kelly’s time period competition. Expect to see more of this Maddow bashing on his Sunday morning program.

WTF? Donald Trump Doesn’t Deny That He’s “A Racist And A Neo-Fascist” On Fox News

One of Donald Trump’s core personality traits is his resistance to acknowledging when he’s wrong. He will make brazenly false statements that are easily proven to be lies, but when challenged he will stand firmly by them no matter how ridiculous he looks.

Donald Trump

For example, despite that fact that there is no evidence that “thousands and thousands” of Muslims in New Jersey were cheering the fall of the World Trade Center on 9/11, Trump continues to insist that he saw it on a TV news broadcast. Also, he feverishly denied that he had mocked a disabled journalist, even though there is video of him doing so. [There are dozens more examples of Trump’s affinity for lying in the Donald Trump Bullshitopedia] It is due to his affinity for fabrication, even when facts are readily available to expose his deceit, that Bernie Sanders said this about Trump Sunday morning:

“I think you have a pathological liar there. Pathological, I really do. I mean, I think much of what he says are lies or gross distortion of reality.”

Trump’s aggressive defensiveness extends beyond the substance of his lies to the accusations that he is a liar. On Fox News’ MediaBuzz, host Howard Kurtz asked him if it’s his strategy to deliberately make “controversial” statements in order to get more media attention, Trump responded saying that “I have no strategy. You know what my strategy is? Honesty.” Of course, the record shows that that statement is just another helping of hogwash.

However, there was a more important revelation in the MediaBuzz interview. Kurtz questioned Trump about his adversarial relationship with media. He gave several examples of editorial opinions that hammered Trump for his frequently outrageous remarks, including Campbell Brown who referred to his “hateful and harmful demagoguery,” or Ben Smith (Buzzfeed) who called him a “mendacious racist,” or this exchange:

Kurtz: The Daily Beast executive editor Noah Schactman says people should boycott your businesses because he thinks you’re a racist and a neo-fascist. What do you make of this combined artillery?
Trump: I’m the only one that speaks my mind and tells the truth. And everybody knows I’m right.

Really? The man who is best known for his pugnacious self-defense; who viciously attacks anyone who is remotely critical of him; who has banned reporters from his public events because they held him to account for his crackpot rhetoric; that man failed to deny the charge that he is a racist and a neo-fascist? He simply explained that he’s speaking his mind – his a racist, neo-fascist mind.

Anyone else accused of such awful things would very likely lash out at the accuser, deny the scurrilous charges, and demand an apology. Trump, however, appears to take it as a compliment that acknowledges his open and candid expressions of hate. There was nothing in his reaction that indicated that he considered being regarded as a racist, neo-fascist an insult. Which is consistent with his campaign rhetoric that is veritably dripping with fascistic fervor.

Trump has already called for making Muslims wear ID badges, and for loading boxcars with Mexicans to ship them out of the country. He has essentially the same view of gays as his new BFF, Russian dictator Vladimir Putin.

This isn’t even the first time that Trump has virtually adopted Nazi ideology. Two weeks ago George Stephanopoulos asked him whether it bothered him to be compared to Hitler. Once again the notoriously bellicose candidate was given an opportunity to stand up against a harsh invective, but rather than pushing back he merely said “No, what I’m doing is no different from FDR.” And with that he was not only embracing the Hitler comparison, but he was aligning himself with one of the most shameful episodes of American history, the Japanese internment camps, which Trump refused to say he would have opposed.

How Fox News Deceives and Controls Their Flock:
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

When someone with the personality of Donald Trump declines to fight back, it can only be because he doesn’t regard the attack as offensive. Being compared to Hitler, or accused of being a racist, neo-fascist, just doesn’t bother him because it’s true and, in his view, flattering. What’s more, he doesn’t want to alienate his supporters, many of whom are affiliated with America’s white supremacists. And by standing with Trump, the Republican Party is latching on to the same affiliation.

Good Timing: Media Now Says Donald Trump Can Win, Just As His Polling Is Collapsing

When Donald Trump began jaw-flapping about becoming president a few months ago, the media quite properly regarded his delusions as a joke, and a bad one at that. Most were reluctant to take him seriously due to his utter ignorance of governing and the issues that impact the nation. Add to that his clumsy, racist, boorish rhetoric and childish insults, and why would anyone with a functioning brain stem consider him viable?

Fox News Donald Trump

News Corpse was among those ridiculing Trump and his lunatic, unachievable aspirations. I explained then that the only reason Trump was leading in the polls was that the field of candidates was so large that it diluted all of the opposing support between more than a dozen non-Trump candidates. I wrote that

“…there is a demographic in the Republican electorate that can best be described as batshit insane. And Trump has managed to secure a near monopoly on that addle-brained GOP faction. […] Trump’s confederacy of dunces is sufficient in numbers to rise above his rivals, so long as there’s a lot of them. That’s because when you divide the remaining Republicans who are not wacko-birds (h/t John McCain) among the fifteen other candidates, there aren’t enough of them left to surpass the Trump/crazy constituency. That does not mean that Trump has a commanding lead. It means that there are way too many players on the field diluting the results for each of them. As they whittle down to a more manageable number, the 82% of non-Trump supporters will disperse to other candidates who will then tower over his paltry flock.”

Nothing has substantively changed since then. Now, however, the political pundits that were dismissing Trump as the clown that he is, are beginning to warm up to the notion that he is electable. They generally propose that, despite their prior skepticism, the duration of his poll-leading candidacy requires them to reconsider and concede that he is a plausible contestant in the reality show of GOP politics. For example:

  • Joe Scarborough, MSNBC: The Republican establishment for the first time saying, off the record, this guy could win.
  • Alex Castellanos, GOP strategist: The odds of Trump’s success have increased and been validated in the past few weeks.
  • Brit Hume, Fox News: His nomination now becomes something everybody has to say is possible.
  • Ed Rollins, GOP strategist: Trump is a serious player for the nomination at this time.
  • Chris Wallace, Fox News: I am beginning to believe he could be elected president of the United States.

On Fox News’ MediaBuzz, host Howard Kurtz devoted a segment to the media’s new found faith in Trump’s viability with a graphic reading “Media admit Trump could win after months of being in denial.” First of all, the media aren’t “admitting” anything. They are altering their previously held position. And secondly, they were not in “denial” at the outset. They were uncharacteristically correct in assessing Trump as unserious.

The only problem with this rush to anointing The Donald’s campaign as realistic is that it comes just as his poll numbers are sinking like a stone. There have been several polls in the past week that show him trailing Ben Carson in early primary states, and one showing him behind Carson nationally (not that Carson should be taken seriously either). On top of that, a new poll shows that the Tea Party, whose dying remnants have morphed into Trumpers, has dropped to its lowest level of support ever recorded.

Leave it to the media to crumble and adopt a lazy analysis about an alleged Trump rise to legitimacy just he is being rejected in ever-growing numbers. All of the reasons for treating Trump’s candidacy like a farce headed by a fool are still in place. He still caps out at about a quarter of the GOP vote in a field that is still crowded with rivals. Since when is a candidate considered serious when 75% of those polled choose someone else?

How Fox News Deceives and Controls Their Flock:
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

The myopic view that suddenly Trump is worthy of being called plausible runs contrary to all the evidence available. He is still what he has always been – a joke who most Americans hate and who can’t corral anything near majority. There are only two places where the Plausible Trump Theory resonates: 1) in his own party where “seven in 10 Republican and Republican-leaning registered voters say Trump could win in November 2016 if he is nominated.” And 2) in the media that has been seduced by a hostile, immature, intellectually lightweight, bigoted, celebrity candidate. You think that their assessment of Trump has anything to do with their ratings?

Ben Carson Tells The Jesus Praisathon Network (aka Fox News) That ‘Atheism Is A Religion’

Republican presidential guilt suppressant and all-purpose sedative, Ben Carson, appeared today on Fox News MediaBuzz with Howard Kurtz (video below). The conversation covered a gamut of critical issues facing the nation, such as his dust up with Donald Trump, the irrelevancy of race in party politics, and why he is trying to stop saying stupid things on the campaign trail (i.e. ObamaCare is just like slavery and being gay is choice that people make when they go to prison). It’s good to see the media forcing candidates to address the real problems our society has to deal with.

Ben Carson

In addition to those examples of national crises, Kurtz asked Carson about his views on faith in public life. For a few minutes Fox turned into the Jesus Praisathon Network, even posting graphics that asked whether voters would “heed the call” of Carson’s “faith-based run.”. Like every other Republican candidate, Carson believes in a form of Christian Sharia Law wherein everybody has to be subject to the biblical dogma of the majority. To emphasize his point, Carson told Kurtz about how fond he is of the First Amendment and then went on to say that anyone who doesn’t practice a religious faith is an idiot:

Carson: People who say that religion has nothing to do with their life probably don’t know exactly what religion is. Just because you don’t necessarily believe in God or Jesus doesn’t mean that you don’t have a religion. Even atheism is a religion. You have something that you believe in without complete evidence that it exists.

Carson is demonstrating his reverence for the Constitution by demeaning everyone who holds different beliefs than he does. Obviously they can’t possibly understand religion if they don’t follow his. What’s more, the notion that someone who doesn’t accept the existence of a supernatural nanny, is still following a religion, defies reason. Atheism is the absence of a belief in religion. It’s like saying that someone who doesn’t believe in the fairy tale of Santa Claus still believes in the fairy tale of a world without Santa Claus. Come on people, where’s the evidence that Santa doesn’t exist?

This is consistent with Carson’s previous assaults on religious freedom. In the recent case involving Kim Davis, the Kentucky County Clerk who was found in contempt of court for refusing to issue marriage licenses to legal applicants who happened to gay, Carson took the absurd position that requiring her to do her job without discriminating was an infringement of her civil rights.

Carson told Megyn Kelly of Fox News that Davis should be entitled to deny marriage licenses to people who do not adhere to the laws of her faith. When Kelly asked if that might be slippery slope wherein Catholics could refuse licenses to people who had divorced (which Davis had done three times), or Muslims could deny licenses to Christian couples, Carson’s response was that it was OK for Christians to discriminate because America is a Judeo-Christian majority nation.

So take that, Freedom of Religion. I guess it’s also OK for whites to discriminate against blacks because we are a white majority nation. Clearly Carson’s interpretation of the Constitution is a perverse mutilation of reality and the principles for which our country stands. He would take America further along the path of theocracy were he to have any role in governing. And what’s worse is that his is not a fringe opinion in the GOP. Every Republican candidate holds the very same views. It’s the old story about the party that pretends to want government off your back, but still wants it in your bedroom and in your deepest, most personal thoughts.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

A Tool Of The Obama Administration? Jon Stewart Responds Hilariously

A couple of weeks ago, Fox News invented a scandal surrounding the allegedly “secret” meetings that Jon Stewart had with President Obama. The truth of the matter was far less scandalous than Fox News tried to make it appear. There were only two meetings over seven years and neither of them were secret.

Stewart, of course, mocked the the Fox News segment that appeared on MediaBuzz with Fox’s chief hack, Howard Kurtz. With his characteristic exasperated wit he demonstrated the utter foolishness of Kurtz and his lame attempt to portray Stewart as a White House pawn. But that only stirred Kurtz up even more. He followed up the story with another segment featuring professional Stewart-hater David Zurawik of the Baltimore Sun. Zurawik repeated his mantra that Stewart is hopelessly liberal and that…

“He has become more and more and more a tool of the Obama administration. […] If you serve a politician’s ideological agenda, you are a propagandist.”

Indeed. And Fox News was created to serve politicians’ ideological agendas. It is the prime directive of the network founded by an arch-conservative press magnate (Rupert Murdoch) and a far-right, Republican media operative (Roger Ailes). Fox has essentially branded the Republican Party as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Murdoch empire (in partnership with Koch Industries). Particularly with the upcoming primaries over which Fox is exerting an unprecedented measure of control. So for anyone on Fox to accuse Stewart, or anybody else, of being a “tool” of a political entity is hypocrisy on an Olympian scale.

Jon Stewart

Stewart’s latest rebuttal (video below) to the Fox News hysteria over his alleged political allegiances sought to humorously help Kurtz to prove that he is a leftist toady. The only problem was that each example he provided proved instead that he was fairly even handed with biting criticisms of the President and other Democrats. Even Fox News gleefully reported on those occasions when Stewart hammered Obama. That is something that News Corpse documented years ago. Here are a few (like 45) examples:

  • Jon Stewart Continues Piling on Scandal-Plagued Obama: He’s Either Nixon or Mr. Magoo
  • Stewart Tears Apart Obama: You Can’t Keep Saying You Found Out About News At the Same Time As Us!
  • Jon Stewart Destroys Obama Over IRS Scandal
  • Jon Stewart Goes Hog Wild on CNN
  • Stewart Eviscerates Obama for Withholding Drone Memos
  • Jon Stewart Tears Up Congress for Quietly Scaling Back Insider Trading Law
  • Stewart Destroys Former Obama Spox Robert Gibbs
  • Jon Stewart Tears Apart CNN
  • Jon Stewart Grills Hypocrite Al Gore
  • Jon Stewart’s F-Bomb Tirade Against Obama
  • Stewart Rips Obama SOTU: ‘Who’s Running This Sh*thole?!’
  • Jon Stewart Tears Into Obama’s ‘Attractive’ AG Comment
  • Jon Stewart Grills Susan Rice
  • Jon Stewart Tears Into Obama Hypocrisy
  • Jon Stewart Destroys Media Over Inauguration Coverage
  • Jon Stewart Mocks ‘All-White’ Obama Cabinet Controversy
  • Jon Stewart Mocks Obama’s Hot Mic Moment
  • Jon Stewart Roasts Obama for Failed SOTU Joke
  • Jon Stewart Mocks CNN Iowa Coverage
  • Jon Stewart Makes Mincemeat Out of Jon Corzine
  • Jon Stewart Takes a Weed Whacker to Obama’s Squandered Green Initiatives
  • Jon Stewart Ruthlessly Mocks CNN
  • Jon Stewart’s Anti-Obama Tirade
  • Jon Stewart Turns on Obama: ‘Did the President Just Quit?’
  • Jon Stewart Savages Democrats: Your Big Plan Is to Label the Tea Party Extreme
  • Jon Stewart Mocks Obama’s Fake ‘Puerto Rican’ Accent
  • Jon Stewart Scorches Obama Over Transparency
  • Jon Stewart Knocks Obama Bus Tour
  • Jon Stewart Mocks Ridiculous Union Protest
  • Jon Stewart Rips Obama for Mosque Flip-Flop
  • Jon Stewart Ridicules Obama Press Conference
  • Jon Stewart: Obama Dances Like White Man
  • Jon Stewart: Obama ‘Delusional’
  • Jon Stewart Scolds Maddow, NBC News For Saying ‘Teabagger’
  • Jon Stewart Mocks CNN to Larry King’s Face
  • Jon Stewart Blasts Obama’s Cartoonish Response to Spill
  • Jon Stewart Mocks NPR
  • Jon Stewart Ridicules Rick ‘Twit’ Sanchez
  • Jon Stewart Pokes Fun at MSNBC’s New Ad Campaign
  • Jon Stewart Obliterates CNN’s Rick Sanchez
  • Jon Stewart Takes Obama to Task Over Weatherization
  • Jon Stewart Mocks Obama’s Teleprompter Dependence
  • Jon Stewart Slams Democrat Healthcare “Incoherence”
  • Jon Stewart Tells Obama to Act More Like Bush
  • Jon Stewart Calls Palin a Genius

Clearly Stewart has not shied away from criticizing Obama. And clearly Fox News is aware of that as evidenced by their own giddy reporting. Now Stewart has has addressed this false premise with his own examples of Fox praising his fairness and balance. In each case they qualify their commentary by prefacing it with “Even Jon Stewart…” After a damning reel of Foxies slobbering over Stewart’s Obama-bashing he plaintively asks “How often does a dude have to criticize the President before his name legally changes from “Even Jon Stewart” to “Unsurprisingly Jon Stewart?”

The answer, of course, is that there is no point at which Fox, or the rest of the rightist media, will admit that Stewart has made all sides of the political debate subjects of his satire. No matter what he does or says they will continue to malign him as a one-sided enemy of American values. The same is true for Stephen Colbert. So when he begins hosting The Late Show next month he should ignore the wingnuts who will similarly paint him as a socialist stooge.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Fox News EXCLUSIVE: Jon Stewart’s Secret Plot To Rule The World (w/Stewart’s Response)

When Jon Stewart announced a few months ago that he was leaving the The Daily Show it came as a shock to millions of Americans who couldn’t understand why he suddenly decided to give up the program that had brought him so much success and notoriety. After sixteen years of skewering the media and the public parasites who feed off of it, Stewart was inexplicably walking away while still at the height of his game.

Well, now it can be told. Thanks to intrepid reporting by the journalists at Fox News we can reveal that Jon Stewart is only resigning from The Daily Show so that he can take his place as Supreme Leader, a post for which he has been preparing for years. The evidence cited by Fox revolves around the disclosure that Stewart met secretly with President Obama, presumably to grease the wheels for his eventual ascendance to power.

Jon Stewart Roger Ailes

Never mind that the meetings at the White House were not actually secret at all. They were readily available in the public records that identify all White House visitors. And set aside that there were only two meetings in seven years, which hardly seems sufficient to have much impact on either Stewart or Obama. The discovery of these rendezvous can only be interpreted as ominous portents of what is to come. (See Stewart’s response to the “secret meeting” allegations in the video below)

Witness the editorial commentary used on Fox News to describe the affair. Anchor Bret Baier said that Stewart “has a close working relationship with the President. It turns out a lot closer than we thought.” Exactly. What could be closer than two meetings in seven years? They were practically joined at the hip.

Then there was anchor Jenna Lee who surmised that “Maybe that’s the secret of [Stewart’s] success. The White House has been writing his show.” An astute observation. Especially considering the wealth of talent and comedic brilliance for which political functionaries are known. Without that help Stewart would have been left to rely on mere comedy writers. Although it does make one wonder who was writing his material during the Bush administration.

Fox’s media analyst, Howard Kurtz, weighed in to reveal that “Last year the President chatted up Stewart hours before warning Russia about further military intervention in Ukraine. The next Daily Show mocked Vladimir Putin.” Obviously Stewart was carrying out orders from Chairman Obama. Why else would he do a segment on his daily news satire program that referenced something that was in the news that day?

Kurtz is among many Fox News commentators who frequently lambaste Stewart for allegedly being a fierce devotee of a far-left ideology. Bill O’Reilly called Stewart “a key component of left-wing television.” Megyn Kelly said that “he was not a force for good.” Greg Gutfeld called Stewart’s departure “a big loss for the simpering, left-wing media.” Eric Bolling reprimanded Stewart for “protecting the corrupt politicians.” And Sean Hannity took the high road by simply calling Stewart “a sanctimonious jackass..”

Fox News criticizing Stewart for being biased is something like Bill Cosby criticizing you for sexually assaulting drugged women. Fox News is the undisputed champion of bias in journalism. Their entire schedule is rife with right-wing propaganda. They are currently engaged in a blatant promotional campaign for Republican presidential candidates. Hannity’s show has so far given his full hour over to eleven of the GOP primary contenders (Bobby Jindal, Rick Santorum, Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, Jeb Bush, Donald Trump, Carly Fiorina, Chris Christie, John Kasich, Ted Cruz, and Rand Paul). Even the daytime “news” portion of Fox’s schedule hosted five GOP candidates for the full hour of Outnumbered (Jindal, Santorum, Rubio, Mike Huckabee, and Lindsey Graham).

To reiterate, these are not candidate interview segments. They are gifts of the entire hour of the program which the candidates don’t have to declare on their financial disclosure forms. And when Fox isn’t donating free airtime to Republicans they are bashing Hillary Clinton for anything from her email etiquette to rope lines for reporters, and always Benghazi.

The relentless bashing of Stewart is all the more absurd in light of the fact that when it suits Fox they will hail him for attacking liberals and/or Obama. As documented by News Corpse, Fox has published dozens of articles heaping praise on Stewart for either “destroying, tearing apart, eviscerating, or grilling” Obama and other liberals (see this list here). And if that weren’t enough, they also highlighted the many times Stewart “mocked, roasted, savaged, scorched, ridiculed, and obliterated” the President and his lefty allies (see this list here).

Now that the secret meetings have been revealed, all of the anti-liberal material Stewart did can be seen as sly attempts to throw everyone off the trail of his otherwise flagrant socialistic allegiances. Even the actual secret meeting Stewart held with a powerful media czar takes on new meaning. As Stewart notes in the video below, his meetings with Obama were not really secret, but his meeting with Fox News CEO Roger Ailes ended with him being told that “This conversation never happened and if you say it did, I’ll deny it.” It’s nice of Ailes to admit that he is not above lying.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Next week will be the last for Jon Stewart on The Daily Show. His departure will leave a noticeable gap in the world of social satire. It remains to be seen if new host Trevor Noah, or Stephen Colbert’s Late Show, will take up the slack. One thing is obvious, however. Conservatives have no intention (or ability) to offer up any quality humor. Fox News is trying – and failing – with their new Greg Gutfeld program. And this morning on Outnumbered, Fox booked a comedian guest host (Ryan Reiss) who fell flat with this opening gag: “Let’s first address the issue of [Hillary Clinton’s poll] numbers falling. She’s an older candidate so I’m sure she’s familiar with falls. At this point I think we’re gonna have to get her a Life-Alert.” Even the regular all-female panelists on the show greeted that joke with silence or groans. But sadly, that’s all they’ve got. The right is so full of hostility and hatred and prejudice and undeserved superiority that they have no sense of humor whatsoever. Their idea of comedy is a noxious blend of insults and childish chest-thumping.

For some of the real thing, here is Jon Stewart’s response to the scandal of the secret meeting. This should tide you over until Stewart’s control of the planet is complete. While Fox News revealed Stewart’s plot prematurely, they cannot stop his progress to impose his left-wing brand of comedyism on the world.

Fox News Scumbag Of The Week: Howard Kurtz, Trump Fluffer

In a week that’s seen various Fox News personnel take inane and/or offensive positions on everything from the Supreme Court’s decision on marriage equality (being the cause of floods in the capital) to the Charleston church massacre (being an attack on Christianity), a late entry to the contest sneaked in Friday just before the deadline to win the Fox News Scumbag Of The Week Award:

Fox News Howard Kurtz

On Friday’s broadcast of Special Report (video below), Howard Kurtz was introduced for a segment on how the press treats poor Donald Trump. Rather than report on the ever-expanding backlash to Trump’s racist assault on immigrants, Kurtz took the opportunity to slam the media for doing their job. He simultaneously attempted to run interference for the Republican Party to cleanse it of any stray excrement emanating from The Donald.

Kurtz: The media are trying to turn the Trump problem into the Republican problem. […] Why should Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and the others, have to answer for the billionaire businessman who is hardly an establishment Republican?

What a bunch of unadulterated hogwash. The Republican Party doesn’t need any help from the media to turn Trump’s boorish vulgarity into their own problem. They invited him into their party with open arms. In 2008 Mitt Romney solicited and received Trump’s endorsement. Fox News, the GOP’s PR division, made him a weekly feature on Fox & Friends, as well a frequent guest on other programs. And every time he lashed out at President Obama with his signature classlessness, Republicans cheered and praised him.

The reason other Republicans are expected to respond to Trump’s assholiness is because Trump represents a broad swath of the establishment Republican ideology. He is anti-immigrant, anti-tax, anti-ObamaCare, anti-gay, anti-environment, and pro-war. Where does Kurtz get the idea that Trump isn’t in line with the GOP regulars? As evidence of his harmony with conservative voters, they have boosted him to the top tier in Republican primary polls after he made his repulsive remarks about immigrants. Only now, since Trump’s misfire has ricocheted back at them, are some trying to put some distance between themselves and his hate mongering.

But what really clinched the Scumbag prize for Kurtz is a wildly off-base comparison between how the media has treated Trump and how they treated a Democrat from the past with regard to whether Trump is hurting Republicans.

Kurtz: Is there a double standard here? The press didn’t say that John Edwards, for instance, hurt the Democratic brand by fathering an out-of-wedlock child.

WTF? It must have taken a Herculean effort for Kurtz to come up with the most reprehensibly inappropriate stab at false equivalency imaginable. First of all, unlike today’s Republicans, Democrats universally repudiated Edwards for his vile infidelity. The reason the Republican brand is hurting is because Trump’s comments are so closely aligned to the party’s platform. That simply wasn’t true with regard to Edwards. In fact, Edwards misbehavior was entirely personal, so it could not have reflected on the reputation of a political party. Trump’s transgressions, on the other hand, are purely political. And even now he is being defended by folks like Ann Coulter and Ted Cruz.

Even from an opportunistic journalistic perspective, the two scenarios are not remotely similar. Trump’s comments came during the heat of a presidential primary battle when candidates are expected to participate in open debate. However, the first reports of Edwards infidelity were published in October of 2007 by the National Enquirer, a tabloid rag with a reputation for sensationalist garbage that usually proved to be untrue. The story was justifiably dismissed considering the source.

It wasn’t until July of 2008 that Edwards was caught visiting his mistress at the Beverly Hilton Hotel. However, by that time Edwards was not a candidate. He had dropped out of the race six months earlier. In fact, there was no race because Hillary Clinton had also conceded in June of 2008 and endorsed Obama. Consequently, there was no reason for the media cover Edwards as anything but a salacious human interest story. His troubles had absolutely nothing to do with the election or the Democratic Party.

Let’s face it – Kurtz only brought this up because A) He had no other example of a Democrat who is as repugnant as Trump and as adept at harming the interests of his party, and B) He desperately wanted to stigmatize Democrats with an ancient and unrelated memory to counteract the well-deserved bad publicity that Republicans are suffering. And for that purposefully manufactured slander, Kurtz easily walks away with the Scumbag Of The Week Award. Congratulations.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

p.s. Kurtz is interviewing Trump tomorrow on his Fox News program, MediaBuzz. Tune in if you have the stomach for it. As they say, “The circle jerk will be televised.”

Bill O’Reilly Left Out Of Discussion On Lying Anchors By Fox News Media Liars

On this week’s episode of Fox News MediaBuzz with Howard Kurtz, the host invited TV critic David Zurawik to continue the pummeling of Brian Williams, who NBC just announced would be taking a role on MSNBC rather than returning to the anchor desk on the Nightly News.

Brian Williams has only himself to blame for the predicament he finds himself in. It was wholly uncalled for when he invented an exciting but false narrative of his exploits in Iraq. NBC is justified in reassigning him, as would any network be after discovering that their anchor had embellished his resume with fabrications. The problem here is that Fox News spent an entire segment pontificating on the issue of credibility without paying the least bit of attention to their own disgraced anchor, Bill O’Reilly.

Bill O'Reilly

O’Reilly was discovered to have lied far more seriously and often than Williams. And after being caught with incontrovertible proof, O’Reilly continued to deny the charges and slander his critics. Unlike Williams, he showed absolutely no remorse or contrition. He accepted no responsibility and even hung his former colleagues out to dry, implying that they were lying. For a quick refresher, here is what News Corpse reported when O’Reilly’s lies were first revealed:

ONE: The parade of falsehoods began with O’Reilly’s claim to have been “on the ground in active war zones” during the Falkland Islands war with the United Kingdom. He wasn’t. And now there is video of him reporting from Buenos Aires, Argentina that contradicts the accounts he gave afterward.

TWO: O’Reilly also claimed to have been outside the Florida home of George de Mohrenschildt where he said that he heard the shotgun blast that marked his suicide. De Mohrenschildt was an associate of Lee Harvey Oswald and was scheduled to testify at a congressional hearing on the JFK assassination. However, a recording of a contemporaneous phone call shows that O’Reilly wasn’t even in Florida when de Mohrenschildt died.

THREE: On another occasion, O’Reilly told a story about how he “saw nuns get shot in the back of the head” in El Salvador. That also was not true and O’Reilly himself admitted it in a statement that said he had actually just seen some “images of violence” but did not witness the incidents himself. Oddly, while admitting that his original assertions were false, he neither apologized nor acknowledged any wrongdoing.

FOUR: This was a similar case where O’Reilly spoke of his visit to Northern Ireland. While there he claimed to have witnessed bombings, however, when challenged Fox News issued a statement similar to the one about El Salvador that said he had merely seen pictures.

FIVE: Then there was the time that O’Reilly was covering the riots in Los Angeles sparked by the acquittal of the police officers who beat Rodney King. He claimed to have been the target of attacks by rioters, however, his associates covering the story deny that any of them were assaulted or injured. They do, however, contend that some tensions flared due to O’Reilly being an asshole.

These fabrications by the guy who pretends to be running a “No Spin Zone” are hardly the only times he has lied. There have been numerous other episodes including bragging about winning two Peabody Awards (he didn’t), and claiming to be a registered Independent (he was a Republican for several years at the time).

Some other incidents may not have been lies technically, just horribly wrong statements that he refused to correct. For instance, he once argued that there were no homeless veterans in America; as proof that his boycott of France was working he offered a report by the “Paris Business Review,” which does not exist; and he insisted, after doing extensive research, that no one on Fox ever said that people who didn’t pay ObamaCare penalties would be subject to prison. PolitiFact gave that one a “Pants on Fire.”

All of that was swept under the rug as Kurtz and Zurawik lit into Williams and suggested that he should not have been given a second chance at MSNBC. Zurawik was apoplectic as he insisted that Williams should have been “banished” and sanctimoniously declared that “the moral reasoning here is so tortured that you have to wonder why would NBC not just end its relationship with him.” He went on to preach about journalistic standards saying that “people who lie in the news business, if you give everybody a second chance, we’re going to have no standards.”

Of course, none of this moralizing is meant to refer to Fox’s own primetime dissembler, Bill O’Reilly. And for some reason Zurawik and Kurtz are not concerned about the morality or credibility of a network that not only doesn’t punish their liars, but lets them continue their multi-million dollar careers without so much as a sideways glance. The reason for that, of course, is that O’Reilly’s lies are not regarded as violating Fox’s standards. In fact, he is the perfect representative of the Fox News brand. He’s the biggest liar on the network of lies. If the bulk of your programming is littered with partisan bullcrap, than Bill O’Reilly isn’t a problem at all. He’s your poster boy.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.