Vice Omits Key Facts in Biased Southern Border Immigration Report

Vice News omitted key facts in biased immigration reporting about the southern U.S. border. Starting with the headline “Mexico Is Caving to Trump on Immigration,” the reporting’s positioning immediately stakes a claim against the idea that national sovereignty and borders are legitimate policies.

Vice reported how President Trump tweeted out “Incredible progress being made at the Southern Border!” along with a chart from the Mexican government showing a 92 decline in illegal immigrants staying in the United States who were traveling from Mexico. VICE then hits Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, accusing him of “an about-face” and said the Mexican government’s “crackdown would endanger migrants’ lives,” without any counter-voice suggesting prior enforcement strategies sparked greater humanitarian crises by encouraging illegal migration.

Mexico has seen a sharp uptick in immigrants from Central America en route to the United States. As mainstream media figures attack the Trump administration as being anti-immigrant and racist, VICE failed to point out that the administration’s concerns about illegal immigrants entering the country illegally are shared by a majority of the Mexican people, according to a Washington Post survey conducted in partnership with Mexico’s Reforma newspaper.

“Mexicans are deeply frustrated with immigrants after a year of heightened migration from Central America through the country, according to a survey conducted by The Washington Post and Mexico’s Reforma newspaper,” reported the Post’s  Kevin Sieff and Scott Clement. “More than 6 in 10 Mexicans say migrants are a burden on their country because they take jobs and benefits that should belong to Mexicans. A 55 percent majority supports deporting migrants who travel through Mexico to reach the United States.

“Those findings defy the perception that Mexico — a country that has sent millions of its own migrants to the United States, sending billions of dollars in remittances — is sympathetic to the surge of Central Americans. Instead, the data suggests Mexicans have turned against the migrants transiting through their own country, expressing antipathy that would be familiar to many supporters of President Trump north of the border.”

Go to Source
Author: Carrie Sheffield


Conflicting Messages Put Media Between Pelosi, Nadler on Impeachment

The Democratic Party holds the majority in the House of Representatives and is aiming to retake the Senate majority in 2020, but recent infighting on the issue of impeaching President Donald Trump is threatening to divide the party fourteen months before of the 2020 elections.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) are at odds publicly and privately on whether to push impeachment proceedings forward. Pelosi has slow-walked the impeachment issue, noting that many within the party are resistant to push for impeachment, while Nadler has publicly stated that his responsibility is to work towards impeachment. Pelosi also told lawmakers and aides in a closed-door meeting, “feel free to leak this,” after she criticized Nadler’s impeachment probe.

For example, Nadler told the media that whether it is called an impeachment inquiry or impeachment investigation does not matter in legal terms. But Pelosi refused to call it an impeachment probe. Pelosi’s allies in the party, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), gave conflicting statements to CNN on the impeachment proceedings. Jeffries called it an impeachment investigation, while Hoyer said it was not an impeachment inquiry.

The mainstream media is stuck between two combating sides within the Democratic Party and does not know who to turn to for a straight answer. Instead of taking a neutral position, the mainstream media continues to run headlines and articles on impeachment to portray it as an inevitable event. However, without a clear timeline and clear directives from the Democratic Party, the media is misleading the American public into believing that all-is-well in the Democrat-majority House of Representatives.

Go to Source
Author: Spencer Irvine

CNN Allegedly Mocks ‘Thoughts and Prayers’ in Publishing Article on Academic Study

CNN published an article about a study by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which discussed the perceived values of “thoughts and prayers” after the occurrence of a disaster. The study, entitled, “The value of thoughts and prayers,” focused on 400 North Carolina residents after the deadly storm known as Hurricane Florence in 2018.

The study asked religious and non-religious people affected by the hurricane and involved the assigning of monetary value to ‘thoughts and prayers’ from religious officials and ‘Christian strangers.” The study participants received compensation for participating in the study. 

Despite the intentions of the ‘Christian strangers’ and ‘religious officials,’ atheist and agnostic participants assigned higher values to avoiding prayers from religious people and leaders. In stark contrast, religious people assigned higher values to receiving prayers from strangers. In the words of the study’s authors, “We find that Christians value thoughts and prayers from religious strangers and priests, while atheists and agnostics are “prayer averse”—willing to pay to avoid receiving prayers. Furthermore, while indifferent to receiving thoughts from other secular people, they negatively value thoughts from Christians.”

In other words, non-religious people in the study did not view Christian prayers in a positive light.

Questions arose about why CNN ran an article on the study. For example, the cable news network’s headline read as, “Not everybody wants thoughts and prayers after a disaster, according to a study of hurricane survivors,” which some could interpret as critical of religious people’s intentions. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) mocked the network and said, “Please pray for CNN” in a tweet.

Although the article itself did not have an explicit bias, the phrasing of the article’s headline called into question of the implicit media bias at CNN against prayers from religious people.

Go to Source
Author: Spencer Irvine

Media Launches Counterattack as Trump Makes Waves With California Homelessness Comments

President Donald Trump must be making headway with his talk of interceding in California’s giant and growing homelessness problem because the mainstream media has become concerned.

The Washington Post responded with two stories that essentially try to paint the president’s concerns as alternately disingenuous and cruelly preoccupied with the impact of the problem on property owners and the cities’ images.

The New York Times acknowledged that, although none of the Democrat politicians in California plan to align with Trump on homelessness or any other problem, “the shared diagnosis of California’s housing problem left many policymakers here in the deeply uncomfortable position of conceding that the Trump administration has made some fair points.”

The Post opened the newsier of its two stories – Trump: Homeless people hurt the ‘prestige’ of Los Angeles, San Francisco” by Philip Rucker and Jeff Stein – by saying the administration “has been eyeing sweeping unilateral action on homelessness … arguing that people living on the streets here have ruined the ‘prestige’ of two of the state’s most populous cities and suggesting the possibility of federal action.”

It then quickly reminded readers “It is unclear what legal authority the federal government has to clear the streets and ho that might be accomplished” and that “California is controlled by Democrats and has become a bastion of resistance to Trump’s presidency.”

It went on to say Trump “claimed” – as if it weren’t necessarily true – “that police officers here are ‘getting sick’ from dealing with homeless people. It then admitted a Los Angeles police detective has been diagnosed with typhoid fever and other officers have shown symptoms.

It presented one reaction quote in the story from the president and chief executive of the National Low-Income Housing Coalition, saying, “The president’s remarks are abhorrent. He’s apparently more concerned with the doorways and streets than with the people who are homeless and sleeping on them.”

It’s all about the real estate owners – and not even the American ones, wrote Philip Rucker in the other Post piece, “Trump reveals a motivation for his anti-homelessness push: Foreign real estate tenants.”

Rucker wrote that “the mention of people experiencing homelessness might seem like something of a non sequitur, an unusual topic that had found its way into Trump’s speech,” but he offered an explanation.

“When the Post first reported on the possibility that Trump wanted to address the homelessness issue, we noted it had been something of a focus of conservative media,” Bump wrote. “Back in July, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson raised the issue of homelessness and urban decay in an interview with Trump. Then Trump inexplicably declared it was ‘a phenomena that started two years ago’ and blamed Democratic leaders.

“His answer on Tuesday makes a lot more sense. The focus of his concern, as presented to reporters on Air Force One, wasn’t Americans or veterans, but foreigners who rent or buy high-end real estate, people who get frustrated at seeing those experiencing homelessness at the entrance to their office buildings. It’s the sort of complaint that might resonate with someone who owns real estate in major U.S. cities that is used for housing or office space. Someone, in other words, like Donald Trump, whose Trump Organization owns 30 percent of what used to be known as the Bank of America tower in San Francisco.”

That’s why the Times, in “Trump and California See Same Homeless Problem, but Not the Same Solutions” by Conor Dougherty, assured readers that, despite Trump having “made some fair points,” leaders have no “intention to cooperate with the administration on a solution, given the cauldron of mistrust and mutual distaste that exists between the president and large sections of California.

“For all his talk of homelessness, Mr. Trump indicated to reporters that his sympathies rested with the taxpayers, rich immigrants and business leaders forced to wade through California’s urban detritus.”

Go to Source
Author: Brian McNicoll

Media Overlooks Sanders’ Campaign Struggles in New Hampshire

The mainstream media struggles to keep up with the ever-changing political dynamics of the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primary field, as front-runner and former vice president Joe Biden continues his polling dominance while Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) attempt to unseat Biden for the nomination.

Amid the political hubbub, the mainstream media and cable news networks tend to miss out on scoops that are picked up by media outlets such as Politico. Politico published an article on how Sanders’ struggles in New Hampshire could have significant repercussions for the 2020 primary.

The article, entitled, “Sanders campaign wracked by dissension,” discussed how the Sanders campaign is setting off internal alarms due to “disorganization, personality clashes and poor communication between state operations and national headquarters.” Politico noted that his campaign’s shake-up this past week and also losing the endorsement of the Working Families Party to fellow candidate Elizabeth Warren worried allies and former aides.

In the 2016 presidential campaign cycle, Sanders won the New Hampshire primary over Hillary Clinton by a 60%-38% vote, a margin of 22%. Considering Sanders would eventually lose to Clinton, it was still a significant result for Sanders’s longshot candidacy in 2016. The expectation for the 2020 primary is that Sanders wins the primary, but recent events suggest it could be slipping from Sanders’s grasp.

While Politico’s coverage is relevant and important for 2020 primary voters, the mainstream media is occupied with the impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives, where the Democrat-majority House Judiciary Committee heard the testimony of former Trump operative Corey Lewandowski, to topics such as the president’s new national security adviser.

Go to Source
Author: Spencer Irvine

Politico Points Out That Senate Dems’ Opposition to Kavanaugh Impeachment Kills Efforts

Despite renewed calls from multiple 2020 Democratic Party presidential candidates and some television pundits and analysts to impeach Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the mainstream media outlet Politico poked holes in their impeachment argument.

A recent New York Times piece claimed there was another sexual misconduct allegation levied against Kavanaugh, but the details were obscured by the Times’ editors. Only after public outcry did the newspaper revise their article and decided to include the information that the alleged accuser did not recall the specific incident in question.

Politico reported that senior Democrats in the Senate moved “quickly to snuff out calls to impeach Brett Kavanaugh, arguing those tactics are unrealistic and politically harmful.” Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) told Politico, “Get real,” to make his point of the implausibility of getting an impeachment through Congress. Also, because the Senate has a Republican majority, it would be unlikely it would go through the Senate. As Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said, “Mitch McConnell would block any impeachment. So that’s a moot point.”

Also, House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said that he would not move for a Kavanaugh impeachment because he is focused on impeaching President Donald Trump.

Politico’s article is a stark contrast from the rest of the mainstream media, which reported on the New York Times allegations and the resulting fallout from the news. Much of the media’s coverage portrayed impeachment as a viable option by quoting 2020 Democratic Party candidates, but not recognizing the political realities in the Senate (i.e. Republican majority in the Senate).

Adding to context, if Kavanaugh were impeached, he would be the second sitting Supreme Court justice to undergo impeachment proceedings in the history of the United States. Samuel Chase was impeached by the House of Representatives in 1805, but the Senate declined to move impeachment proceedings forward, which killed the impeachment efforts. In other words, it would be difficult for Democratic Party lawmakers to impeach Kavanaugh in both the House of Representatives and Senate because it has never been done before.

Go to Source
Author: Spencer Irvine

CNN Critical of New York Times’s Latest Kavanaugh Story

CNN criticized the New York Times for its shoddy reporting about a new sexual misconduct allegation against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in a storyheadlined, “New York Times’ botched Kavanaugh story the latest in series of blunders from Opinion section.

The piece was written by Oliver Darcy, who used to work for conservative news outlet The Blaze.

CNN said that this latest public debacle was “the latest in a series of high-profile blunders that have caused embarrassment to James Bennet since he was appointed in 2016 as the editor overseeing The Times’ Opinion section.” CNN noted that Bennet has overseen multiple “mishaps that have generated controversy, drawn criticism, and spurred at least one lawsuit.” In response, the Times told CNN that the Opinion section “produces powerful journalism that makes a difference in people’s lives.”

CNN listed the series of blunders from the Opinion section:

  • The unsubstantiated sexual misconduct allegation against Brett Kavanaugh;
  • the section’s Twitter account’s offensive tweet referring to the sexual misconduct allegation;
  • an opinion editorial that claimed links between Sarah Palin’s political action committee and the 2011 Tucson shooting that injured then-congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, resulting in a lawsuit;
  • published an anti-Semitic cartoon; and
  • a Twitter poll on the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings last year.

It is rare that mainstream media outlets criticize one another as they work in the same industry with the same goal to publish and generate news. But CNN’s criticism of the New York Times demonstrated the fallibility of the New York Times and how journalists recognized some media employers permit their biases to negatively affect integrity, accuracy, and ethics in journalism.

Go to Source
Author: Spencer Irvine

Trump Blasts New York Times Over Kavanaugh Book Essay, Calls for Resignation of Everyone Involved with ‘SMEAR Story’

President Donald Trump called for the resignation of “everybody” at the Times who was involved in the “smear campaign” against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh after it was revealed that an essay published on Sunday omitted some key facts about the accusations leveled against Kavanaugh.

“I call for the Resignation of everybody at The New York Times involved in the Kavanaugh SMEAR story, and while you’re at it, the Russian Witch Hunt Hoax, which is just as phony!” Trump tweeted Monday evening.

“They’ve taken the Old Grey Lady and broken her down, destroyed her virtue and ruined her reputation… She can never recover, and will never return to Greatness, under current Management. The Times is DEAD, long live The New York Times!”

The essay which was written by New York Times reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, to promote their upcoming book on Kavanaugh failed to mention that one of the alleged sexual assault victims declined to be interviewed and couldn’t recall the incident according to her friends.

The essay led many Democratic presidential candidates to rip Kavanaugh and call for an investigation and impeachment of the Supreme Court Justice but failed to apologize or retract their statements after the Times issued a correction to the original article.

Go to Source
Author: Don Irvine

Washington Post: When Trump Says ‘My,’ It Means Something Different Than When You Say ‘My’

When most people refer to someone as “my friend” or “my man” or “my quarterback,” they mean it as a sign of affection. But when President Trump does it, it means something entirely different – something dark and uncomfortable and worrisome for the American people.

That was the thesis of Ashley Parker’s story in the Tuesday Washington Post, headlined, “From ‘my generals’ to ‘my Kevin,’ Trump’s preferred possessive can be a sign of affection or control.”

Parker begins: “President Trump has used it with groups and individuals. He has used it for family members and employees. And he has bestowed it on Washington politicians and middle-of-the-country farmers.

“For Trump, the possessive pronoun ‘my’ is a term of endearment – one he dispenses with freely, from ‘my generals’ to ‘my Peter’ Navarro, one of the president’s senior economic advisers, to ‘my little Melania,’ his wife.”

But it’s not as familiar and warm as it seems, Parker wrote.

“Trump uses the pronoun affectionately, part of an almost subconscious effort to shine warmth on someone in his orbit, say current and former aides, who describe the linguistic tic as a doting gesture,” she wrote. “But others say the habit can also seem belittling and, for Trump, that it may be as much about dominance and control as familiarity.”

Tim O’Brien, a go-to source for the Post for Trump insights because he is writing a biography the paper expects to be critical of the president, told Parker he has “never heard the president use the term dismissively” and “always uses it to convey you’re part of the home team.”

Yet, to O’Brien, Parker wrote, “the practical reality is more complicated.”

She quotes him saying: “He thinks he’s conveying a compliment to the people he says it about, but in fact, it’s not really about putting them on equal footing. I read anytime President Trump starts a statement with ‘my’ that it’s completely in the possessive, and it’s about ownership, and it’s about control.’”

Parker continued: “And with Trump, O’Brien added, the modifier provides only minute-to-minute reassurance. ‘You can go from ‘my’ to being gone in a tweet that goes out in 15 seconds,’ he said.”

Parker wrote that Trump most recently asked “Where’s my favorite dictator?” at the recent G-7 summit as he awaited a meeting with Egytian President Abdel Fatah al-Sissi.

Maggie Haberman of the New York Times has assembled a list of people the president has referred to as “my,” Parker wrote. Al-Sissi, senior White House policy adviser Stephen Miller and unidentified reporters and attendees at his rallies have received the sobriquet, Haberman wrote.

Indeed, Trump “deploys ‘my’ widely and frequently,” Parker wrote. “Just before his January 2017 inauguration, the president-elect gazed across a ballroom during a celebratory lunch at the Trump International Hotel and used the diminutive for then-House Majority Leader Kevin McCarty, R-Calif. – a pet name that was viewed as verbal evidence of the two men’s strong political relationship.

“’Where’s Kevin?’ Trump asked. ‘There’s my Kevin.’”

He also referred to Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), as “my Steve” when complimenting the congressman on making a good play on a ground ball in the congressional baseball game. He talks of having to take care of “my farmers with disaster relief” and, on his tariffs against China, “There may be a little pain for a little while, but ultimately for my farmers, I love my farmers.”

Sam Nunberg, who worked on Trump’s 2016 campaign, told Parker he viewed it as simply a form of flattery, but Parker had to add an insult even to the paragraph where she provided that detail.

“With business relationships, Nunberg added, proclaiming faux ownership over an individual is, to Trump, simply a form of flattery. ‘He’s very good at making people feel as if they’re the center of the universe, and that’s part of his charm,’ he said.”

Go to Source
Author: Brian McNicoll

Media Gives Long-Lost Cousin Megaphone to Blast Trump For Allegedly Stealing Pancakes

According to a distant cousin who does not like President Donald Trump, he has not donated any money to the town in Scotland where his mother grew up, but his sister and mother did.

That failure to donate led to what the president might call a “nasty” article in The National, a newspaper in Scotland, entitled “Scottish cousin unmasks Donald Trump as ‘pancake thief.’ That story was, in turn, picked up and reported on by Newsweek.

“A relative of President Donald Trump has accused the self-proclaimed billionaire of being a pancake thief, having stolen a handful of flat cakes while on vacation at his late mother’s former home in Scotland,” begins the story “Donald Trump Stole Pancakes and Forgot a Relative Was Dead While Visiting Family, Cousin Claims,” by David Brennan of Newsweek.

The cousin, Alice Mackay, who is 79, said she is related to Trump through his mother’s family, the McLeods. She said Trump’s mother, Mary Anne MacLeod Trump, who died in 2000, and his sister, Maryanne Trump Barry, now 82, “were both generous people who made many contributions to the Isle of Lewis, an island located in Scotland’s far northern Outer Hebrides archipelago.”

But Trump himself “is an unpleasant man who has never used any of his wealth to help his mother’s local community,” Brennan wrote, citing Mackay.

The president “had lovely parents. I don’t know what went wrong with him. My mum and dad were second cousins. Every time they were over here, they came to ours for dinner.”

Trump’s mother left her hometown in 1930 at the age of 17 and moved to New York, where she met his father and got married six years later.

Trump visited his mother’s hometown of Tong in 2008, and, according to Mackay, spent exactly 97 seconds in the house where she was raised with her nine siblings. The story in the National says only that Trump stayed less than two minutes. Newsweek doesn’t say how it knows his time there down to the second.

On another visit, Mackay “recalled … when the future president committed two social faux pas in quick succession,” Brennan wrote for Newsweek. “’He was here one morning, I was busy making pancakes, and he had forgotten my husband had died,’ she said. ‘He put a few pancakes in his pocket and never said ‘cheerio’ or anything.’”

After this, Brennan wrote: “The White House did not immediately respond to Newsweek’s request for comment regarding the allegation of theft.”

Also during that 2008 visit, Brennan wrote, Trump said he had been “very busy – I am building jobs all over the world – and it’s very, very tough to find the time to come back. But this just seemed an appropriate time because I have the plane. I’m very glad I did, and I will be back again.”

But he has not been back, and he has not stroked a check. Meanwhile, according to Brennan, his mother “retained her links with the isolated community, donating funds to help construct a village hall in the 1970s.” His sister later donated almost $200,000 for a care home and hospice in Stornoway, the largest city on the Isle of Lewis.

She visited frequently, Brennan wrote, and “spoke the traditional Gaelic language when she did, according to the BBC.”

For that, Mackay said the sister “was lovely.”

During Trump’s trip there in 2008, he met with a delegation from the local council to talk about plans to convert Lews Castle into a hotel and museum. Trump said he would look at it,” but has never gotten back in touch with the officials, Newsweek wrote.


Go to Source
Author: Brian McNicoll