I recently wrote a column about five facts that justified the start of an impeachment inquiry. While I have stressed that I do not believe that there is currently sufficient evidence for an actual impeachment, I am mystified by the claim that there is not ample evidence to warrant an inquiry into possible impeachable offenses. Notably, CNN just reactivated its fact-checking team for a review of the basis for the inquiry. In so doing, the network made an iron-clad argument in support of the decision by Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Continue reading “CNN Makes the Case for an Impeachment Inquiry”
The Telegraph is reporting that the BBC has removed Irish singer Róisín Murphy from a prepared feature radio broadcast. The reason is a comment opposing puberty-blocking drugs. While I understand why such criticism is deeply hurtful to some, it is also political speech. Artists should be able to hold opposing views. I would feel the same way if BBC blocked an artist for supporting puberty-blocking drugs. However, these controversies evidence an orthodoxy that seems to only run against those on one side in this and other issues. Continue reading “BBC Cancels Event of Singer Who Criticized Puberty-Blocking Drugs”
I have previously written how the level of advocacy and bias has created a danger of a de facto state media in the United States. It is possible to have such a system by consent rather than coercion. Given that long concern, a letter drafted by the Biden White House Legal Counsel’s Office was striking in a call for major media to “ramp up their scrutiny” of House Republicans “for opening an impeachment inquiry based on lies.” Continue reading “Marching Orders: White House Letter Tells Media To “Ramp Up Their Scrutiny” In Response to Impeachment Inquiry”
Below is my column in USA Today on adoption of some Democrats of arguments and rationales once used against the left to silence or jail them. Pundits and politicians are becoming the very thing that they have long condemned in this age of rage. It is realization of Nietzsche’s monster theory.
I recently wrote how the Washington Post issued a statement that declared that the newspaper was “standing by” columnist Philip Bump on his proven false claims on subjects ranging from Lafayette Park to Russian collusion. Bump’s prior claims have not only been conclusively shown to be false but other major media outlets have now rejected those claims. However, the Post claimed this week that they are in fact true in response to one of my earlier columns.
Now, Miranda Devine at the New York Post has written about a meltdown by Bump in a podcast interview with Noam Dworman, owner of New York’s own Comedy Cellar. Dworman had asked Bump to explain some of his claims and Bump offered one of the most vivid examples of the new media and it is chilling. After declaring that “I’m gonna lose my mind,” he stormed out of the interview after refusing to address the contradictions and dubious claims in his prior columns. Continue reading ““You Don’t Listen to the Press . . . I’m Telling You”: Post Columnist Philip Bump Strikes Out at Those Questioning Prior False Claims”
This morning, I was surprised to receive a note from the Washington Post on my prior criticism of the Post’s Philip Bump as previously spreading “false stories” and refusing to accept the facts after they were established by the media. The Post has declared that Bump’s original claims on Lafayette Park, the Hunter Biden laptop, and Russian collusion were true and they stand by them. In light of the unprompted review by the Post, I wanted to lay out what the Post is now embracing as true. Continue reading “Washington Post Stands by Philip Bump’s Claims on Lafayette Park, the Hunter Biden Laptop, and Other Controversial Claims”
Below is my column in The Messenger on the celebrations after the fourth indictment of former president Donald Trump — and the dismissal of any concerns over the implications of these prosecutions for free speech. Some Democrats are warning that they need to avoid the public displays of joy. The danger is that Democrats just might conga their way into another 2016 backlash against the establishment.
Here is the column:
Being a legal analyst in this rage-filled age often invites criticism, particularly if you challenge widely held narratives. I rarely respond to such stories, which falls into the category of complaining about the weather in Washington. Unfortunately, even stories that I view as manifestly distorted, tend to be replicated on hostile sites. In that vein, I thought that I would respond to a misleading story at Mediaite, which suggested that I recently changed my view of Donald Trump’s call to Georgia. (The site was founded by ABC Legal Analyst Dan Abrams). The article by Alex Griffin compares my comments this week with a tweet that I sent out on January 2, 2021. The suggestion is that my view of the call evolved after Trump was indicted. The original story omitted the fact that I stated the current position the next day when the transcript became available and that the tweet was based on an erroneous article in the Washington Post. I have maintained the same position since the release of the transcript. Continue reading “No, I Did Not Just Change My View of the Georgia Call”
Below is my column in the Daily Beast on the second federal indictment of former president Donald Trump. I remain deeply concerned over the implications of free speech from this prosecution. Indeed, the general dismissal of these concerns by legal experts shows how our current rage politics can blind us to dangers even to our own fundamental rights.
President Joe Biden has been a regular recipient of “Pinocchios” by the Washington Post for his false statements on subjects ranging from election laws to abortion protections to deficit reduction. Biden is undeterred and regularly repeats false stories from his life that have ranged from an invented arrest with Nelson Mandela to a zombie-like train conductor. Undeterred, this week he continued with the false claim about the “Joey, Baby” conductor. Now, the President has a fresh set of “Four Pinocchios,” but the false claim is far more serious than inventing a conductor or rewriting the history of the Second Amendment. The Post is admitting that Biden has been lying about how his son Hunter never made money from China. It is the latest indication that the protective media wall surrounding Biden is beginning to crumble under the weight of new evidence in the corruption scandal. Continue reading ““Four Pinocchios”: The Washington Post Admits Biden Lied About Hunter Not Accepting Money from China”
I suppose this represents progress in Washington. On “CNN News Central,” co-host John Berman actually asked a Democratic House member about the allegations against President Joe Biden. The response from Rep. Madeleine Dean (D., Pa.) captured the increasingly incomprehensible position of members as the evidence of corruption has mounted and implicated the President. Dean admitted that there are legitimate questions that should be answered but stressed that she does not have any herself. In other words, the public has a right to know, but I will not help them find out. Continue reading “Rep. Dean: There are Questions That Need to be Asked on the Biden Scandal But “I Don’t Have Any””
We have often discussed the embrace of censorship by the left and many Democratic politicians, including President Joe Biden. However, the most distressing aspect of this trend has been the support of many in the media. That erosion of support for free speech was on display this week in a tweet from a New York Times’ reporter. Sheryl Gay Stolberg said that this week’s effort by Democrats to censor Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “raised thorny questions” about whether misinformation is protected speech. The statement shows a breathtaking lack of understanding of the First Amendment as well as a lack of fealty for free speech values. There are no “thorny questions” over the censorship of this speech, because misinformation is unquestionably protected under the First Amendment.