In academia, one of the most common criticisms in research and discussions is that correlation does not mean causation. It refers to the logical fallacy for some who draw a cause-and-effect relationship between two events. The logical fallacy is captured in the Latin phrase cum hoc ergo propter hoc (‘with this, therefore because of this’). With the horrific attacks on Israel this week, some well-known commentators have been criticized for using the killing of hundreds by Hamas as a criticism of conservative figures or Republicans in general. That includes the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin who appeared to blame the GOP for inviting the attack and Professor Laurence Tribe who suggested (and later retracted) that the war was actually a “wag-the-dog” operation by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to distract from corruption allegations. Continue reading “Rubin and Tribe Under Fire for Using the Massacre in Israel for Bizarre Attacks on Political Figures”
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has caused another stir by suggesting that the millions of Trump supporters may require a “formal deprogramming” in a CNN interview. It was a moment clearly enjoyed by CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, who previously suggested that the FBI should have stopped Trump from making certain campaign statements. Even former FBI Director James Comey balked at Amanpour’s suggested censorship. Now, Amanpour has clearly found a kindred spirit. Continue reading “Deprogramming “Deplorables”: Clinton Raises Need for “Formal Deprogramming” of Trump Supporters”
Below is my column in the Daily Beast responding to the attack launched by Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) during my testimony in the first hearing of the impeachment inquiry into the conduct of President Joseph Biden. Krishnamoorthi falsely suggested that I represented and supported Tom Green, a polygamist who was convicted of child rape. While I attempted to explain that that was untrue, Krishnamoorthi would not allow me to finish and then quickly left the hearing room. I never represented Green, I condemned Green in those columns, and said that he was justifiably prosecuted. The columns dealt with my opposition to “morality legislation.” I was representing The Sister Wives family both during a criminal investigation and my later challenge to the underlying law. I continue to oppose such laws that have been used against a wide range of religious and social groups, including LGBT individuals. I never thought that a liberal Democrat would attack me for such pro bono representation in support of civil liberties. Continue reading “The Green Scare and the New McCarthyism: A Response to Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi”
In a chilling message, former President Trump pledged to investigate Comcast if he is elected in 2024. Trump insisted that the parent company for NBC and MSNBC “will be thoroughly scrutinized for their knowingly dishonest and corrupt coverage of people, things, and events.” The stated grounds are “country threatening treason.” The pledge is not simply a threat to these news organizations but to the Constitution. While Trump has a history of reckless rhetoric, the statement on Truth Social is an attack on core First Amendment values that define us as a nation. Continue reading “Trump Pledges to Investigate Comcast for “Country Threatening Treason””
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”