Could Trump Be Prosecuted for Leaks Under New Department of Justice Directive?

The still nascent presidency of Donald Trump is rife with controversies and scandals. His financial conflicts of interests and unsavory connections to Russia have dominated his short tenure in office. Additionally, he has produced no legislative accomplishments. Most notably, the failure of his efforts to kill ObamaCare went down in flames. He has made no progress on immigration, taxes, terrorism, or his lame-brained border wall.

Rod Rosenstein Fox New

However, Trump regularly signals what issues are of most importance to him. And judging by the frequency of his tweets, it has little to do with matters critical to the nation. Rather, he is variously obsessed with either the media, last November’s election, or the torrent of White House leaks. Most experts agree that leaks occur when an organization is in disarray. But in Trump World it is blamed on a shadowy conspiracy of “deep state” saboteurs.

On yesterday’s edition of Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace interviewed Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein (video below). Much of the segment specifically addressed the question of leaks and what the Justice Department intends to do about them. Wallace sought to follow up on remarks made last week by Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Those comments sparked some controversy for implying that journalists could be targeted for prosecution. Rosenstein walked that back a bit in the following exchange:

Wallace: Some of the people who engage in leaks, I don’t have to tell you, are not the members of the so-called ‘deep state’ or faceless bureaucrats inside intelligence agencies. They are White House officials. They are members of Congress. If you find any of them have committed these leaks – have disclosed classified information – will you prosecute?
Rosenstein: “What we need to look at in every leak referral we get, we look at the facts and circumstances. What was the potential harm caused by the leaks? What were the circumstances? That’s more important to us than who it is, than who is the leaker. So if we identify somebody, no matter what their position is, if they violated the law and that case warrants prosecution, we’ll prosecute them.
Wallace: Including White House officials and members of Congress?
Rosenstein: Including anybody who breaks the law.

If Rosenstein can be taken at his word, Donald Trump may be in even more trouble than previously thought. Leaks from any administration are made for a variety of reasons. It may be because someone is genuinely concerned about a course of action and has no other recourse to alter it. Sometimes a leaker is angling for position or acting out of vengeance. And sometimes leaks are deliberate attempts by the White House to disseminate information that it wants disseminated.

For example, Anthony Scaramucci, Trump’s short-lived communications director, recently outed his boss as a leaker. During an interview on CNN, Scaramucci defended Trump’s reluctance to concede that the Russians were responsible for hacking during last year’s election. He even offered “evidence” by way of an anonymous insider:

“You know, somebody said to me yesterday — I won’t tell you who — that if the Russians actually hacked this situation and spilled out those e-mails, you would have never seen it.”

That, of course, is grade AAA bullshit. Professional spies may be good at what they do, but they are not infallible. Scaramucci is suggesting that the Russians are so superior in their clandestine operations that their American counterparts are helpless yokels, incapable of facing off against the almighty Ruskies. But more important was what Scaramucci said next. After CNN’s Jake Tapper challenged Scaramucci’s hypocritical use of an anonymous source, the Mooch spilled the beans:

“How about it was – how about it was the President, Jake? I talked to him yesterday. He called me from Air Force One.”

So here we have a White House official admitting that the President was the source of a leak that disclosed inside information. Trump’s observations about the capabilities of Russian intelligence ought to be regarded as top secret. But this business was aired on national television at the behest of Donald Trump. On another occasion, Trump leaked classified data to Russian diplomats visiting the White House. This leak may have put intelligence assets of an ally at risk of discovery or termination.

Who knows what else the President might have leaked. Handing out information that advances the administration’s interest is an ago-old tactic. Dick Cheney did it to plant the lie that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. And Trump has his own media operation headquartered in the White House and led by Breitbart News chairman, Stephen Bannon. Remember, this is the same guy who used to call newspapers and pretend that he was a publicist working for, well, himself.

So if Trump is later found to be the source of leaks to the media, will the Department of Justice keep their word and prosecute him? That’s an open question for the time being. They have not been especially anxious to pursue criminal investigations of the President. And, of course, Trump remains poised to fire anyone he thinks is getting too close to the truth. In the end, it may only be possible to obtain justice with a truly independent counsel, or a Democratic congress. Stay tuned.

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

Hannity Orders His Trump-Cult Audience to Attack Journalists – Gets Slapped Back HARD!

Donald Trump’s First Amendment foes are assembling the troops in what they think is a massive show of force. They have a new general in the White House, Anthony Scaramucci, who unseated feeble Fibby Spice (Sean Spicer). The Mooch is already parroting the worst of Trump’s anti-media rhetoric. He is an avid supporter of the President’s Twitter tantrums and infantile assaults on free speech. And now he’s got some help from the Trump TV Network (aka Fox News).

Sean Hannity Fox News

Leading the way is Fox News Trump fluffer, Sean Hannity. Always a reliable soldier in the fight against honest journalism, Hannity has ordered a significant escalation. He’s taking the unusual step of enlisting his glassy-eyed audience into battle. On Monday night’s program he issued a call to the recruits to prepare to deploy for an all out offensive. And knowing his audience, they can be pretty damn offensive (video below):

Hannity began by praising the Trump administration for “ramping up one of the most effective tactics for combating all the fake news.” He was referring to the Propaganda Squad that has been fanning out to pick fights with their favorite media foils. They include Kellyanne Conway, Sarah Huckabee-Sanders, and Sebastian Gorka. Hannity lauded them for “standing up to pundits who treat the White House with hatred and disdain.” In reality they were just being jerks and insisting that the press accept Trump’s lies as truth. Then Hannity issued his orders to the troops:

“Members of the Trump administration, they’re beginning to shine a bright light on these dark corners of this fake news industry. And now thanks to social media, you can too. […] You can call out fake news right at the source. For example, you can tell fake news Jake Tapper exactly what you think of his interview with Anthony Scaramucci. You can do it on twitter.”

Tapper was only the beginning. Hannity also made juvenile insults aimed at CNN’s Brian Stelter and MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski. His diatribe was filled with childish taunts and ludicrous, debunked accusations against Hillary Clinton. And then he addressed those who might “want to take it to the next level.”

“Write a message to their bosses. Send a tweet over to [Jeff] Zucker over at fake news CNN or Andy Lack from NBC fake news. Right now the media is living in their little bubble. It is our job to remind them that there is an America way outside of New York, D.C., Los Angeles and San Francisco. Tonight, technology is now making it possible for you to take your point of view directly to the source and show America’s elites that the forgotten men and forgotten women of this country voted for this agenda and they want it completed and for them to stop lying to you. Take to the social media, and I think you’re going to have a positive impact.”

First of all, if Hannity is really concerned about the people’s position on Trump’s agenda, he should take notice that Trump is the most unpopular president in modern history. And that goes for his policies as well.

More to the point, Hannity is apparently aware that his viewers don’t already know about Twitter. He has the oldest skewing audience in cable news. Recent demographic studies show that “The median age of the average primetime Fox News viewer is 68 — five years older than MSNBC, and nine years older than CNN.” And the consequences of that disparity can be devastating when reaching out to a more youthful, social media capable, audience. So Hannity’s Twitter blitz produced predictably contrary results, as documented by the Huffington Post:

And as Tapper noted in his reply thanking those tweeters: “I don’t think that turned out the way he intended.”

Hannity will always lose on this battleground. He is too much of an ideologue who spins so furiously that reality is unrecognizable. And his followers are handicapped by being dumb enough to watch him in the first place. There are plenty of problems with corporate media outlets like CNN, but they pale in comparison to the rancid hostility and blatant dishonesty of Hannity and Fox News. And online communities on Twitter and Facebook will continue to let him know how irrelevant he is.

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

Trump’s Lawyer Repeatedly Contradicts President’s Claim that He’s Under Investigation

Donald Trump and his administration are not known for their ability to communicate a consistent, coherent message. They have a history of wildly contradictory statements and absurd deflections from reality. So it isn’t surprising that Trump’s new lawyer, Jay Sekulow, has continued that tradition. He made several appearances on the Sunday morning news shows that did nothing but contribute to the confusion surrounding the investigation into Trump’s obstruction of justice.

Sekulow Trump CNN

On all of these programs the discussion was related to a story in the Washington Post saying Trump is under investigation. The Post reported that on the basis of five (count ’em, five) sources who requested anonymity. Of course, Trump has previously railed against the use of anonymous sources despite using them himself when it suits him. However, professional journalists have relied on such sources with great accuracy for as long as there has been journalism.

Trump’s response to the story was expressed in a tweet that apparently confirmed the Post’s account:

That’s simple enough. The President is explicitly agreeing with the Post that he is being investigated. And the investigation concerns, in part, the events leading to the termination of former FBI Director, James Comey. He’s also blaming it on someone at the Justice Department who told him to do it. Never mind that he told NBC’s Lester Holt it was his decision alone. A decision that he made before consulting the DOJ. The bottom line is that everyone is on the same page with regard to the existence of an investigation. Right?

Wrong. Mr. Sekulow, Trump’s attorney, objects. On each of his Sunday interviews he blatantly contradicted his client. He repeated that the President is not now, nor has he ever been, under investigation. But his attempts to support that argument were ludicrous. Let’s begin with the most friendly forum for Trump’s representative, Fox News. Chris Wallace noted that Sekulow himself said that Trump is being investigated.

Sekulow: [Trump] is being investigated for taking the action that the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, recommended him to take by the agency that recommended the termination.
Wallace: First of all, you’ve now stated that he is being investigated after saying that he …
Sekulow: No.
Wallace: You just said that he’s being investigated.
Sekulow: Let me be crystal clear so you completely understand. We have not received, nor are we aware of any investigation of the President of the United States.

Wallace deserves some credit for not letting Sekulow get away with contradicting both himself and Trump. But Sekulow’s attempt at crystal clarity just dodges the substance of his own prior remarks. So let’s move on to Meet the Press with Chuck Todd:

Todd: Let me begin with getting some clarification here. The President tweeted this week “I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director.” When did the President become aware that he was officially under investigation by the special counsel?
Sekulow: The President is not under investigation by the special counsel. The tweet from the President was in response to the five anonymous sources that were purportedly leaking information to the Washington Post about a potential investigation of the President.

Sekulow’s reply doesn’t begin to answer the question. In fact, it makes no sense. How does Trump’s alleged response being aimed at the Post’s story change the meaning of it? That question comes up again when Sekulow appears on CNN’s State of the Nation with Jake Tapper (video below):

Tapper: The President said “I am being investigated” in a tweet and people take his word on that. But you’re his attorney. You’re saying that when the President said that he was not accurate.
Sekulow: No. The President was – It was 141 (sic) characters. There’s a limitation on Twitter, as we all know. And the President has very effective utilization of social media. So here’s what we have. The President issued that tweet, that social media statement based on a fake report, a report with no documented sources from the Washington Post. […] The President’s response was as it related to the Washington Post report. He cannot in a Twitter statement include all of that in there. But the Washington Post statement came out that morning. There should be no confusion. The President is not under investigation.

Now Sekulow is asserting that the Post’s story is fake. Of course, he doesn’t provide any evidence to substantiate that allegation. As a lawyer he should know better. But even that reckless remark doesn’t explain why Trump said that he is being investigated. Sekulow tried to bolster his defense by asserting that Twitter’s character limit is what prevented Trump from being clear. But Trump’s tweet contained only 111 characters. So he had twenty-nine to spare. And according to Sekulow, “the President has very effective utilization of social media.” So he could easily have added “WaPo Says,” or even “the fake news WaPo says.” So there was no impediment by Twitter on Trump making an accurate statement.

At this point it should be noted that Sekulow is not telling the truth about whether Trump is under investigation. All he can say honestly is that he isn’t aware of any investigation. He cannot say that there isn’t one. Wallace called him that and he agreed. Nevertheless, he repeated the same falsehood on the other programs. It’s a propaganda tactic aimed at convincing people that Trump is pure as the driven snow. But his execution is so inept that he just winds up muddying the waters and making his client look guilty. Which I suppose is a professional hazard for lawyers with guilty clients.

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

WATCH Kellyanne Conway Admit That CNN is NOT Fake News And That Trump Lies

Donald Trump’s war on the media is still in full swing. Everyday he escalates the assault with juvenile insults and utterly baseless criticisms. While past presidents have had contentious relationships with the press, none have been so overtly hostile.

CNN Kellyanne Conway

Trump’s unambiguous purpose is to delegitimize the media and neutralize it as an independent source of information. He barks ferociously about what he calls “fake news,” but which is actually just reporting that he doesn’t like. And he rarely backs up his accusations with anything resembling facts.

On Wednesday, White House senior advisor and purveyor of “alternative facts,” Kellyanne Conway, was interviewed by CNN’s Jake Tapper. The entire interview (video below) was a striking display of journalistic integrity matched with surreal political spin. Tapper made several references to Trump’s frequent public lying, and he actually used the word “lie.” Meanwhile, Conway dodged almost every question with canned responses straight from White House talking points.

However, a couple of exchanges deserve closer scrutiny. First of all, Tapper addresses the President’s disparaging comments about CNN head on:

“Certainly the media makes mistakes. But it’s very difficult to hear those criticisms from a White House that has such little regard, day in day out, for facts, for truth. And who calls us ‘fake news’ for stories they don’t like”

Conway insists that, despite the evidence, they have a “high respect for the truth.” But Tapper persists and later asks pointedly “Is CNN fake news?” Conway replies:

“No, I don’t think CNN is fake news. I think there are some reports everywhere. In print, on TV, on radio, in conversations that are not well-researched and are sometimes based on falsehoods.”

So Conway is expressly contradicting her boss who has repeatedly called CNN “fake news.” For instance:

Perhaps Conway will be called to the principals office for a reprimand. By proclaiming that CNN isn’t fake news after all she is, by extension, validating their prior reporting on Trump. He isn’t gonna like that. But something even worse slipped later in the interview. While discussing one of Trump’s recent whoppers, Tapper tried to get Conway to respond without swerving off into something irrelevant. It wasn’t easy. Finally he said:

TAPPER: “I’m talking about the President of the United States saying things that are not true, demonstrably not true. That is important.”

CONWAY: “Are they more important than the many things that he says that are true? That are making a difference in people’s lives?”

And there you have it. Conway just admitted that Trump says things that are demonstrably untrue (as if we didn’t already know). Sure, she attempts to dismiss them as being less important than some other unidentified truthful statements. But occasional bouts of alleged honesty do not excuse purposeful lying, which she unequivocally conceded takes place. And yes, the President lying IS more important than the things he ways that are true. President’s are expected to tell the truth. They don’t get extra points for doing so.

Now, only two questions remain. Will Trump be held accountable for deliberately deceiving the American people? And will Kellyanne Conway be sent to Gitmo? Stay tuned.

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

WTF? Trump Regime Mulls Making Foreign Visitors Turn Over Social Media And Cell Phone Info

During the presidential campaign there was considerable anxiety about the way that Donald Trump was shaping his political ideology. It seemed to be frighteningly similar to the authoritarian regimes he admires. His casual advocacy of policies that reek of dictatorship worried civil libertarians and Constitutional experts. But now those concerns appear to have been fully justified.

Refugees, Let Them In

CNN’s Jake Tapper reported Sunday that the Trump administration is considering the sort of “extreme vetting” that he threatened in the campaign (video below). Tapper’s sources revealed:

“…the preliminary idea being kicked around in the U.S. government right now. And that would be to ask foreign visitors to the U.S. to provide the names of websites and social media sites that they visit, and to provide all the contacts on their cells phones. And if a foreign visitor refuses to turn that over they would be denied entry.”

This sort of invasive screening is both ineffective and contrary to the values of a free society. Probing personal information in order to discriminate against people for their political beliefs might be done in totalitarian regimes like Russia, but not in America. What’s more, once this policy is in place, all an aspiring terrorist would have to do is get a new phone before boarding the plane. And when asked about websites and Facebook pages, provide only those without any controversial content. How hard is that?

In the meantime, every innocent traveler would be subject to this invasion of privacy and potential harassment. There is no mention of what would be done with the private data after scrutiny at customs. And a regime that would demand to see it would also be likely to store it and use it against perceived political foes. That could include diplomats, journalists, and even members of Congress.

Tapper was careful to append a disclaimer of sorts to his story. He added “Again, this is a preliminary idea being discussed by the White House and the Trump administration.” However, there are already reports of these tactics being implemented. Caroline Mortimer of the UK’s Independent reports that:

“US border agents are checking people’s Facebook pages for their political views before allowing them into the country, an immigration lawyer has claimed. […] The [American Immigration Lawyers Association] said border agents were checking the social media accounts of those detained and were interrogating them about their political beliefs before allowing them into the US.”

To reiterate, these abusive tactics are being carried out against legal residents of the U.S, with valid visas. Some have lived in the U.S. with their families for many years. So if people like this can be treated so shamefully, just imagine how refugees will be treated. People fleeing terrorism, who have already endured unthinkable suffering, will be harassed and humiliated. And following that they could still be sent back to their native country and an uncertain future. Many would be marked for death as a result of their attempt to escape.

This is not the promise of freedom that is carved on the base of the Statue of Liberty. It is a decree of oppression from the new regime in Washington that is taking its cues from Vladimir Putin. And if it is allowed to stand, the American people may soon notice their own freedoms withering away. If Trump and his politburo get away with this, what’s to stop them from doing worse in the future?

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

DAFUQ? Giuliani Blames Clinton For Trump’s Birther Bullsh*t (VIDEO)

There is a toxic tendency among conservatives to persistently believe the most ridiculous lies about Hillary Clinton. Even after they’ve been thoroughly debunked, the right clings to them like ideological life preservers. This makes it hard for any of these crackpot notions to mercifully die.

Giuliani

One of the stickiest Hillary mythologies is the charge that she created the Birther movement. The fact that there are still people who believe that President Obama is a native Kenyan is puzzling and sad. But even worse are the loons who insist that Clinton started it all.

Donald Trump, of course, anointed himself as the Chief Birther years ago. He claimed to have sent an investigative team to Hawaii to get to the bottom of it. Later, he declared that the world “will be amazed” at what they found. Unfortunately, Trump’s “investigators” must have been swallowed up by a lava flow because they have never been heard from again. In the interim, Trump has refused to even talk about it. Amazing.

Additionally, Trump is also a vocal proponent of the theory that Clinton birthed Birtherism. Before he dropped it from his repertoire it was a regular part of his anti-Clinton spiel. For example, see this tweet from last September:

No it wasn’t, and no she wasn’t. For the record. neither Hillary Clinton, nor her campaign, had any part of the Birther business. In fact, she explicitly called it “ludicrous.” Every fact-checking organization refuted the allegation. PolitiFact wrote a detailed response declaring it “False” and concluding that:

“There is no record that Clinton herself or anyone within her campaign ever advanced the charge that Obama was not born in the United States.”

To its shame, the media has allowed Trump to evade questions on his Birther fetish. They have inexplicably honored his pronouncement that he doesn’t talk about it anymore. Just because he wants to put it aside doesn’t mean that responsible journalists have to comply. And this morning CNN’s Jake Tapper proved why it is still important to raise the issue. Tapper brought it up with respect to Trump’s recent efforts to pander to minority voters. He asked Trump adviser Rudy Giuliani to comment:

Jake Tapper: I have to say, in interviews many African-Americans say they are still troubled by Mr. Trump having suggested over and over, falsely, that the first African-American president was born in Africa and, thus, ineligible to be president.

Giuliani began to respond by asserting that “the first one that made that claim was Hillary Clinton.” Tapper interrupted to say that it wasn’t Clinton herself, but people around her. But even that isn’t correct. It was a group of fringe supporters who were unaffiliated with her campaign. Giuliani’s exchange with Tapper continued:

Tapper: It was resolved in 2011 when he released his birth certificate. Donald Trump talking about this as recently as February of last year at CPAC saying that he thinks the birth certificate is false. Should he just apologize for this to let – if he really wants to reach out to minority voters?

Rudy Giuliani: You know, if everybody apologized for all the things they said in politics, all we would be doing on television shows is apologizing. Maybe a lot of the Democrats should apologize for calling Donald Trump a racist and calling him all kinds of terrible names and? – it gets a little silly.

First of all, if all he would be doing on TV is apologizing for things he said, he is saying way too much bullcrap. Which, of course, in his case is true. More to the point, Giuliani’s suggestion that Democrats apologize for telling the truth about Trump is totally absurd. And lying about Obama’s citizenship is overtly racist and blaming Clinton for it just makes it worse. His refusal to apologize is evidence that he and Trump aren’t sorry about expressing their bigotry.

The rush to hang Birtherism on Clinton is not a new phenomenon. Saturday on CNN Trump surrogate Scottie Nell Hughes also falsely claimed that Clinton was the source of Birtherism. Much of last year Fox News pushed this nonsense. Many of their top personalities joined in, including Megyn Kelly, Sean Hannity, Kimberly Guilfoyle, and Steve Doocy.

By continuing to spread these lies, Giuliani, Trump, Fox News, and all of their cohorts, are demonstrating an open aversion to the truth. They are embracing racism. In addition, they are effectively admitting that they haven’t got a single factual criticism to make about Clinton. Otherwise, why would they have to keep pounding away on one that they surely know is false? And if it’s their intention to keep Birtherism alive, then Trump should be forced to face questions about it whether he wants to or not.

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

Gov. Sanford’s Treatment By The Liberal Media

Here are a few examples of how the so-called “liberal” media rushed to smear Republican Gov. Mark Sanford after he surfaced from his hike in Appalachia …er… vacation in South America …er… tryst with his Argentinian mistress. These are emails sent to Sanford to solicit him for interviews.

Griff Jenkins of Fox News
“Having known the Governor for years and even worked with him when he would host radio shows for me — I find this story and the media frenzy surrounding it to be absolutely ridiculous! Please give him my best.”

If the Gov does an interview and its exclusive, it will make air on the tv channel and our radio news service all across the country. And I’m not sure if you’ve seen the stuff I do on the channel as a reporter, but I work mostly for our primetime coverage – Oreilly, Hannity, Greta, Beck – so there likely would be primetime coverage as well for some soundbites of the gov dispelling this flap.

Jenkins, you may recall, is one of the contingent of Fox News ambush journalists (along with Jesse Watters, and Porter Barry). He was also prominent in last April’s Tea Baggery. In this affair he is unabashedly promising a political delinquent favorable treatment.

Brendan Miniter of the Wall Street Journal
“Someone at WSJ should be fired for today’s story. Ridiculous.”

Miniter is actually bashing his own paper for publishing a story that merely reported that Sanford was off hiking the Appalachian Trail. So I guess that I’d agree with Miniter. Someone should be fired for having gotten the story so wrong. And Miniter should go with him for pandering to the story’s subject.

Joseph Deoudes of the Washington Times
“If you all want to speak on this publicly, you’re welcome to Washington Times Radio. You know that you will be on friendly ground here!”

Isn’t nice to know that there is “friendly ground” available for wayward Republicans? Not that this is news coming from the Moonie Times, a perennial happy place for rightists.

Ann Edelberg of MSNBC’s Morning Joe
“Of course the Gov has an open invite to a friendly place here at MJ, if he would like to speak out.”

And if anyone can call themselves a friend of Sanford, it’s Joe Scarborough, the former Florida congressman who had his own problems with the press when an intern turned up dead in his office.

Jake Tapper of ABC News
“NBC spot was slimy.” […] “For the record, I think the TODAY show spot was pretty insulting.”

Tapper’s main problem here is not that he is offering Sanford a safe haven, but that he is deliberately bashing his competition. Tapper is crossing the line in order to get a story. To his credit, he apologized and acknowledged that what he did was inappropriate. None of his colleagues have yet to do so.

Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central
As you may know, I declared myself Governor of South Carolina last night. I went power mad for abut 40 seconds before learning that Gov. Sanford was returning today.

If the governor is looking for a friendly place to make light of what I think is a small story that got blown out of scale I would be happy to have him on. In person here, on the phone, or in South Carolina.

Stay strong, Stephen

Et tu, Colbert? As the most reputable journalist of the bunch, it is disheartening to see that Colbert has compromised his impeccable journalistic credentials (a Peabody winner) in order to suck up to this miscreant governor. Since Colbert is on record as being philosophically opposed to apologies, I wouldn’t expect one to be forthcoming. In fact, it would hardly be necessary for him to bother correcting the record since, as he has noted, “reality has a well known liberal bias.” So what’s the point?