4 Dead Soldiers in Niger Shows How Bad the Media Has Gotten

Four dead soldiers in Niger. They were ambushed and gave their lives in a place most Americans (including journalists) couldn’t find on a map. Their names are Sgt. LaDavid Johnson, Staff Sgt. Bryan Black, Staff Sgt. Jeremiah Johnson, and Staff Sgt. Dustin Wright.

Black and Jeremiah Johnson were assigned to the 3rd Special Forces Group, and their bodies received a heroes’ somber return to Fort Bragg in Fayetteville, N.C. Dustin Wright was from Lyons, Georgia, which is not too far from my home. I live in a military town, and people very close to me have deployed in harm’s way.

The media went after the president.

They focused on President Trump calling the families of the dead soldiers. They knew Trump would get defensive. They knew he’d try to play “whatabout” games or react in a way they could exploit. They knew that some of the families were not Trump supporters and would make a good story. They exploited the situation to make the president look bad, and participated in a dishonoring of the lives of American professional special forces soldiers.

Of course, they were right.

Trump fumbled his response. They were counting on it. He got defensive and tried to deflect blame. Then when Trump called the widow of a fallen soldier, they were on a hair trigger for anything he might say to upset her. And of course, whatever he said, she was upset.

And instead of respecting her privacy, they pounced and make her suffering a public event.

That’s despicable; it’s no better than a tabloid. But they do it because they’re on a mission. Make no mistake, the media has a case to make: that Trump is a bad president.

And the nation is fed up with hearing it. A recent poll by Politico and Morning Consult shows that 46 percent of all voters think the media makes up stories about Trump. Even 35 percent of Democrats believe the press makes up stories. 85 percent of Trump supporters believe the press makes up stories. They do make up stories, or at least play fast and loose with sources and “facts” from others who make up stories and spoon-feed them to the press.

Let’s contrast that with a story that hasn’t gotten much reporting.

Raqqa has been liberated, and ISIS is being crushed. Most of the reason for this is explained in this one chart. Look at the number of strikes since Jan 20. (From Ricochet.)

President Trump and Secretary of Defense James Mattis deserve tremendous credit, even though the media will be loath to give it. Where the previous administration was content with precision drone strikes and economic damage, the current Commander-in-Chief decided to snuff out the would-be caliphate. Well done.

The European press is reporting this, but in America, the media won’t report anything that makes Trump look good. They only want to report his failures, even if they have to resort to tabloid methods.

It has gotten that bad.

Leaks, Tweets and the White House

27 Whoever restrains his words has knowledge, and he who has a cool spirit is a man of understanding. 28 Even a fool who keeps silent is considered wise; when he closes his lips, he is deemed intelligent. Proverbs 17: 27-28

The fact that the MSM is hostile to President Trump has been obvious to conservatives from day one,  and the fact that they will stop at nothing in their attempts to take him down while equally obvious; is now quantified: (MRC)

As President Trump approaches the end of his first 100 days in office, he has received by far the most hostile press treatment of any incoming American president, with the broadcast networks punishing him with coverage that has been 89% negative.

From overtly hostile statements to seemingly innocuous questions, the liberal news shows shape the narrative daily: (MRC)

Five big topics accounted for roughly two-fifths (43%) of the whopping 1,900 minutes of total network airtime devoted to the Trump administration. But those five topics accounted for a much larger share (63%) of the negative coverage hurled at the administration, as the networks covered each with an overwhelmingly hostile (more than 90% negative) slant. The next-most-covered item (222 minutes) was the continuing probe of Russia’s presumed role in last year’s hacks of Democratic e-mails, and whether individuals connected to the Trump campaign may have participated in the scheme. While this topic generated only about half as many evaluative statements as the travel ban, an overwhelming 97% (153 out of 157) were critical of President Trump and his associates. Network anchors used the flap to brand the President as an incorrigible liar. “After a string of unproven claims, will this President struggle to keep the trust of the American public?” NBC’s Lester Holt intoned on his March 20 newscast. Earlier, on March 8, CBS’s Scott Pelley suggested President Trump had psychological problems, asking longtime Democratic official Leon Panetta: “Is it appropriate to ask whether the President is having difficulty with rationality?”

In contrast, the prior President suffered no such indignity: (MRC)

Eight years ago, the networks’ treatment of President Obama’s first 100 days was very different. Back then, the networks delivered most of their coverage to Obama’s key policy priorities, topped by the nearly $1 trillion “stimulus” package (150 stories, or 15% of the total). The network spin for that legislation: 58% positive, vs. 42% negative. “The President’s first seven weeks have been a whirlwind, with often dramatic movement in all directions, on all fronts: the economy, health care, two wars and today education reform,” then-anchor Brian Williams marveled on the March 10, 2009 NBC Nightly News. On World News, March 1, 2009, ABC’s medical editor, Dr. Tim Johnson, gushed after a forum on health care: “I was blown away by President Obama’s grasp of the subject, how he connected the dots, how he answered the questions without any script.”

Over the past few weeks, it appears the MSM animus has increased by an order of magnitude. This seems to be correlated directly to the inordinate number of intelligence leaks flowing out of our capital city on a daily basis. The lack of actual reporting, the dearth of sourced journalism has led to a smarmy stream of gossipy innuendo rather than what was respected methodology just a few years ago.

That the WH and intelligence leaks must be stopped isn’t in question. The success of stemming those leaks is. The intelligence community appears to have the long knifes out for President Trump, and locating embedded liberal Obama supporters is akin to “whack-a-mole”. Like roaches, the bureaucratic deep state can’t be completely eliminated, and won’t go down without a fight.

 There is however a simple, perhaps even wise solution for the White House. Silence. Press Secretary Sean Spicer should announce the following as policy:

The White House will no longer respond to any question on any issue which stems from leaks or unnamed sources.

As oxygen is an oxidizer to fire, so is WH response to ongoing news coverage. The MSM needs, absolutely requires an official administration response to maintain any semblance of ongoing news coverage. Without official response, these anonymously sourced leaks would just become basement level op-ed.

This is not to say the President’s tweets should stop, just any official WH response. The single reply:  “We don’t respond to questions about stories with unnamed sources.” will effectively eliminate at least some of the white noise.

Today, Sean Spicer announced he would no longer address questions about All Things Russia, but would instead direct those questions to the WH Counsel. This is a great start, but Russia isn’t the only story that originated with unnamed sources, nor will it be the last. A standard WH reply would be highly effective, as well as serve to eliminate the odious and snide remarks that usually surround “No Comment”.

 Trying to muzzle the President is an exercise in futility. But, watching him twist the MSM into pretzels through his tweets, while at the same time seeing the DC coterie of news hacks chase Mr. Spicer or Ms. Huckabee Sanders around the press room squealing fruitlessly for any response to intelligence leaks would be fantastic early afternoon entertainment.

Lessons from Rush, Newt and The President

Rush Limbaugh has had a storied legendary radio career. When he came on the national scene, he was just about the lone conservative voice, and his success set the table for the conservative talk show radio boom as well as for Fox News. Along the way, he has accumulated millions of loyal listeners, and accordingly has been in tune to the attitudes and thoughts of every day Americans who identify as conservative.

For a long, long time, Rush has virulently attacked the mainstream media. He might have even coined that term. He certainly invented more than a few labels over the years. Rush has pulled no punches in his narrative that they are not our friends, that they have no regard for the conservative movement, and actually possess haughty distain for the common American citizen. Because of his MSM perspective, he quite correctly exposed their mindless devotion to the Democratic Party and their willingness to do whatever it takes to provide cover for them.

Rush is very insightful, he recognized the anger building bubbling up among Americans, as a matter of fact he was a primary force stoking it into the outrage which propelled the Tea Party into 2010 prominence as well as the Republican electoral successes in 2012, 2014 and 2016.

In the early stages of the 2012 Presidential Republican primary season,  Newt Gingrich proved what Rush had been saying. Without fail, the MSM will attack conservative candidates, and he was no different. But it became evident his popularity increased with each counter-attack on the press. His win in South Carolina was certainly facilitated by the preceding debate where he absolutely spanked the moderators.

What Rush spoke about, and what Newt showed briefly; President Trump proved resoundingly. He campaigned against the MSM  and his win proved Rush Limbaugh’s thesis, showing the only true route to success is to take the attack to the press every time the opportunity comes up.

Candidate Trump found electoral success for a myriad of reasons, but it is a certainty his almost daily aggressive defiant approach with the press endeared him to millions of eventual Trump voters. A reasonable peson could conclude that instead of the MSM hurting Candidate Trump’s presidential aspirations, they facilitated it in their blatant opposition. Every time CNN, MSNBC or the Washington Post attacked Candidate Trump, his supporters became more obdurate in their support for him.

Standing in stark contrast, many if not most congressional Republicans appear to structure their entire political calculations based upon MSM considerations. The reasons for their spineless acquiescence are wholly rooted in they crave approval and have an abiding fear of negative press.

The life of the senior Congressional Republican can be quite heady. In addition to being the decision makers for the most powerful nation on earth, after their workday, they have countless opportunities to mingle and play with the nation’s elite. Whether it’s a big money donor cocktail party, a socialite’s dinner party, or any number of embassy galas, these pols can party it up every night of the week, and many do.

Most, if not all of these gatherings also include MSM star power, as well as their counterparts from the Democratic Party and liberal elites.  Establishment Republicans are welcome precisely because they are establishment, they are not a threat to the status quo, they don’t desire or advocate change, and their value system is not discernibly different.

What these party hacks do not seem to understand is their love affair with the MSM puts them at odds with the conservative part of the party. When McCain goes on CNN and knifes the President in the back, he doesn’t come off as a statesman, he doesn’t show gravitas, his opposition screams disloyalty to the party and ratchets up anger in the base.

When Jason Chaffetz goes on MSNBC Morning Joe and solemnly pronounces how concerned he is with President Trump and all things Russia, the base only remembers his cowardly approach to the Obama administration and how he mouthed toothless threats, none of which were realized.

Republican leaders are scared to death of the MSM. Which is why they won’t consider a budget fight if it could lead to a government shutdown, which is why defunding Planned Parenthood is promised but never happens, and there are numerous other examples. These preening courtiers worry endlessly about totally useless polls, and how the party will be affected by negative press.

If they had half a clue, they would understand the road to being a party hero is to take on the media, celebrate its opposition and even delight in the negative coverage, safe in the knowledge that each line of negative print, each minute of false TV commentary, just cements their bona fides with the conservative voter base. If they had anything in common with these voters, they would also understand every time they fail to support the White House, they are not hurting the President, they are shoring up his base support, and ripping another hole in the party fabric.

For the most part, conservatives no longer receive their press coverage from the MSM. Most refuse to watch MSM news shows and they don’t tend to populate liberal websites. They are getting news and political analysis from Fox and conservative websites. They are retweeting articles on Twitter at a astounding rate, and their opinions are well-informed. Far more so than most inside the Beltway can even comprehend. Overall, Trump supporters cannot be described as low-information. No longer can establishment moderate Republicans secretly get away with playing footsie with the MSM and opposition party. They are outed on Twitter and other social medial platforms each and every time they betray the base.

These Rockefeller Republicans desperately want the demise of the Administration, they do not want the swamp cleared, they do not want the federal government downsized, the pro-abortion and pro-gay lobby scares them witless, they do not want the budget cut and they do not want controversy of any sort.

It is achingly obvious they are in the process of facilitating the Democrats full-throated campaign to drive President Trump off of the world stage. They might think they appear fair, they might be misled to believe they are being statesmen with immense gravitas, they might be fooled by the false adoration from the MSM, but outside the capital city they are deceiving exactly no one. Dirty Harry Reid might have been corrupt, but the stonewall he built to protect Obama was stout indeed. For all you can say about him, Harry could circle the wagons with the best of em.

This will not end well. It simply cannot succeed. The anger in flyover country has not abated, the conservative movement has not given up and will not fade away. In the end, their vacuous character will betray only themselves, and the Republican Party will once again be a barking powerless minority. They will have only themselves to blame.

Intellectual Diversity Is A Dirty Word For The MSM

NBC News chairman Andy Lack admitted on Wednesday that the press “screwed up” on polling and that “Democracy is messy.” That’s a small encouragement from an entrenched media that seems to become more dug in every day. But the media’s problem is bigger than just polls–it’s their stunning lack of intellectual and social diversity.

POLITICO quoted Lack’s comments made in an interview at IESE Business School in New York.

We didn’t get this election right, news organizations, we didn’t know that night how wrong or how close it was. I don’t know anyone who thought at 6 o’clock in the evening it was going to go down that way.

Democracy is messy, our relationship to the free and independent press that we cherish is messy, and we forget about that too often. It is not clean, it is not perfect, we make mistakes, we screw up, but we fix that and are open about that. Embarrassed, humbled, yes, but not shy about saying we didn’t get that right.

In an age when the Washington Post and the New York Times have retreated behind smug slogans (“Democracy dies in darkness”) and narrow self-righteousness, Lack is beginning to understand how wrong the press–and the polls–have been.

The telling words were “I don’t know anyone who thought…” This is because the media, as a group, has not even tried for many years to incorporate people who think differently than they do at Columbia School of Journalism, NYU and other liberal enclaves that churn our reporters. They are smug, lazy, and insular about their worldview and unwilling to entertain any voice that challenges it.

We all know that the polls missed. It wasn’t the polling itself, but it was the presuppositions related to the polling that skewed the data. Instead of putting boots on the ground, they sat in cubicles in New York and Washington, looking at numbers.

The same flaws that haunted the media also fatally infected the Clinton campaign. When Clinton supporters in Michigan furiously and desperately called out for help, her campaign sat in Brooklyn looking at numbers, just like the press.

They both got lazy, and they both were wrong. FiveThirtyEight, which tempered its polling and recognized that error trends are a thread running through and linking multiple states, tried to unravel the mess on November 9.

Pollsters, and the media companies whose dwindling budgets have left them commissioning fewer polls, have to decide where to go from here. “Traditional methods are not in crisis, just expensive,” said Barbara Carvalho of Marist College, whose final poll of the race showed Clinton leading by 1 point, in line with her current lead. “Few want to pay for scientific polling.”

Other polling problems include technology, bias, and statistical skewing. How our culture communicates, and who we trust had been changing behind the pollsters’ backs. So when a black swan like Trump came around, people didn’t know what to say or to whom they were saying it. Many simply punted or said what they thought the pollster wanted to hear.

On Nov. 9, The Atlantic boiled it down to caveat emptor.

It seems that NBC’s lack agrees.

“We have to make some big changes in that area [polling]. I think we have to get out in the county more, and live in these states more, and that will take a bigger commitment from us going in,” Lack said. “I think we relied too much on polls, and not enough on our own good reporting inside Michigan and Pennsylvania and Ohio.”

Where reporters got out into the communities, they saw the mood and the move toward Trump. But editors and pundits didn’t want to use anecdotal and observational stories. They wanted to follow the polls.

I know because I fell victim to this. Back in February, 2016, I saw a huge groundswell for Trump in New Hampshire. I chose to ignore reports I didn’t like and hoped for a Cruz or Rubio surge (not Christie or Kasich) against the observational and anecdotal data. I stood at the polling place in Seabrook, NH on primary day and talked to voter after voter who were enamored with Trump.

Some who were registered Democrats were angry they couldn’t switch parties–in order to vote for Trump–at the polling place and didn’t vote at all in protest. It wasn’t until the exit poll results were published showing Trump’s momentum that I began to understand his attraction. But I still hoped against the data, preferring to collect polling data that turned out to be flawed and incorrect.

We were all wrong about the value of polling data.

Three days before the inauguration, Erick Erickson declared that Trump’s approval rating polls are irrelevant.

It does no good to say Trump is losing the popular vote nationwide in a poll, or that most voters view him negatively. They did before the election too. They did on Election Day too. He still won. Shaping news coverage based on these polls now seems outmoded.

Polling is outmoded, for a host of reasons the press is still trying to figure out, but at least they’re beginning to understand its value is limited.

The media’s intractable problem is they don’t want to listen to people in Podunk. Lack wasn’t willing to admit that NBC and the other main stream media have an enormous bias problem. When they venture out into Pennsylvania and Michigan, they might hear and record what Americans are telling them, but when it’s time to write it up, it’s clear they don’t agree or believe it.

Lack said “We are not the opposition party,” but he’s wrong. NBC and the main stream media are the opposition party–not to Republicans or conservatives, but to all Americans outside of their social and educational bubble–because if they had their druthers, these reporters would try to convince the people they’re reporting on to change their minds, instead of trying to understand them.

The answer is more than just not being lazy and relying on national polls. The answer is a dirty word in media circles: intellectual diversity. They need to reach down into society and change their own demographics to reflect the country’s. We can’t have a fair and impartial press when 90-plus percent of the press represents the views of 50 percent of the country, and not at all the other 50 percent.

Until the media can solve its own intellectual diversity issue, they need to understand the same problem that they accuse police across the nation of having. If a supermajority white police department can’t impartially serve a black community because of racial demographics, then a supermajority liberal media can’t impartially serve a God-fearing, family-loving, hunting, fishing, pickup-driving American community.

Actually, racial diversity matters less than intellectual and worldview diversity. Try telling liberals that you don’t believe that race matters, and you’ll be called a bigot. But they’re perfectly willing to hear from racists of all stripes.

The main stream media fall all over themselves to ensure that all skin colors, religions (except born-again Christianity) and creeds are represented proportionally in their ranks. They need to make the same commitment to social, intellectual, and worldview diversity. Only then will the polling and bias problems begin to go away.

#TheResistance is Failing

Trial lawyers have a saying:

“If you’re weak on the facts and strong on the law, pound the law. If you’re weak on the law and strong on the facts, pound the facts. If you’re weak on both, pound the table.”

Liberal politicians along with their low-rent hooker, the MSM, have created a blizzard of chaff with their ceaseless Chicken Little “the sky is falling” mantra. It has become obvious this is a coordinated attempt to delegitimize the constitutionally qualified and duly elected president. From the Emoluments Clause nonsense to the Russian Connection-“The Hacked Election” conspiracy theory, President Trump’s first 30 days in office has been under constant attack.

However, even the staunchest Never-Trump Republicans are beginning to acknowledge both President Trump’s conservative bent, as well as his initial success. Yesterday on Fox News Sunday, Karl Rove was very complimentary: (via RedState)

“But let’s give him credit, on substance, off to a strong start. A cabinet that’s turning out to be impressive. Moving ahead with some regulatory changes to Obamacare. Republicans on The Hill beginning to wrangle over what legislation to repeal it. Tax reform, again, wrangling, moving it forward….But, you know, that’s the — we’ve got to give him credit. He’s — he’s — he’s moving forward in a lot of ways.”

The author of the article offered up a commentary which is spot-on:

“I think Rove is right. On the policy side we’re seeing the most conservative cabinet of my lifetime installed. How can you possibly argue with Jeff Sessions, Scott Pruitt, and Betsy DeVos in terms of their policy preferences…The House and Senate are felling Obama regulations, including an Obama regulation protecting Planned Parenthood. Trump’s regulatory freeze is beginning to bite.” He concluded his article with a salient point, “I understand people not liking Trump, though, I have to admit it is becoming a bit harder each day to take the anti-Trump people any more seriously that I take Evan McMuffin McMullin. Id be a lot more open to their constant whining and fault finding if they would, like Rove, take a couple of seconds to acknowledge we’ve got more conservative stuff done in the past month than we got under eight years of Bush.” (Emphasis mine)

This goes to the heart of the issue. Stuff is getting done. What has become noticeable is how the Resistance Party can’t and won’t say anything of substance on his policies or what he has accomplished. This kind of discussion is verboten.

The reason lies in the number 73. A recent Harvard-Harris poll showed 73% of all Americans want the Democrats working with the President to accomplish his goals and policies. Notice the phrasing. “Work with the President”. Not as Sen. Chuck Schumer is wont to say “Mr. President, we’re more than glad to compromise with you if you are willing to do it our way.”

The Resistance Party is plainly avoiding any semblance of a frank policy discussion because it’s a loser for them. 73% is a huge number. They first have to delegitimize him and stain him with Fake News in order to turn public opinion their way.

Even this morning on President’s Day, the mandarins on Morning Joe are still obsessively focused on “Trump’s assault on the media”, and “The Russian Connection”.

Will it work? It hasn’t so far, and doesn’t seem to be a winning strategy. From now on, when you watch the liberals pound the table, just smile and chuckle. It is an implicit admission of a very weak hand.

 

 

The Left Is Sad That OSU Attacker Was An Observant Muslim

Abdul Razak Ali Artan, the Ohio State killer, was an observant Muslim, who spoke out on the lack of prayer rooms on campus.

“I just transferred from Columbus State. We had prayer rooms, like actual rooms where we could go pray because we Muslims have to pray five times a day.

“There’s Fajr, which is early in the morning, at dawn. Then Zuhr during the daytime, then Asr in the evening, like right about now. And then Maghrib, which is like right at sunset and then Isha at night. I wanted to pray Asr. I mean, I’m new here. This is my first day. This place is huge, and I don’t even know where to pray.

“I wanted to pray in the open, but I was scared with everything going on in the media. I’m a Muslim, it’s not what the media portrays me to be. If people look at me, a Muslim praying, I don’t know what they’re going to think, what’s going to happen. But, I don’t blame them. It’s the media that put that picture in their heads so they’re just going to have it and it, it’s going to make them feel uncomfortable. I was kind of scared right now. But I just did it. I relied on God. I went over to the corner and just prayed.”

When the San Bernardino shooters turned out to be Sayeed Farouk and Tashfeen Malik, many on the left were disappointed. Now after a horrifying knife and vehicle attack at Ohio State University, we’re seeing a faster correction, but the record is still there.

CNN reported that Artan was Somali, and living legally in the U.S. as a “permanent resident.” To me, that means he wasn’t a citizen, which indicates he wasn’t born here. We can therefore say CNN reported Artan is a Somali immigrant.

According to The Columbus Dispatch, the attack happened outside a building which was evacuated earlier in the day due to a report of a gas leak. “It’s unclear whether that was related to the attack or whether that’s why people were outside at the time of the attack.”

OSU Police Officer Alan Horujko shot and killed Artan less than 60 seconds after the attack, preventing further loss of life.

Of course, not all the facts are in, and more facts will be released to the public as the investigation continues into Artan’s background, connections and possible motive.

But the MSM would rather report on a rifle-toting white man wearing a Make America Great Again ballcap than a Somali teen with a butcher knife. They really would. Then they could take up the cudgel and bash those of us who are friendly to the NRA with “do something!”

Or they could break out a new round of Trump swastika fever. But now, they’re left with an attack–possibly a terror attack inspired by Islamic terrorists–by a young man who wasted his life to kill others.

We who aren’t disappointed by who did the killing are sad because it happened. But those in the media who are sadder because of the color, religion, and probable motive of the killer never learn from the past.

Olympus Has Fallen: Trump Transition Is Not Behind Despite Media Spin

The fact that CBS News threw this story up at all is proof that the media spin machine is crashing. The main stream media wants Trump’s transition to fail. As Jim Stinson wrote, “there is outright media lust for failure.” The New York Times headlined a Wednesday piece “Trump Says Transition Going ‘Smoothly,’ Disputing Disarray Reports.”

This drew a tweet from Trump disparaging the NYT (not unusual).

Then the media criticized Trump for tweeting about the media! They really do think they are gods and goddesses on Olympus. Well, Olympus has fallen.

Looks like that @POTUS Twitter handle will be very active under President Trump and many of those tweets could be directed at the press.

Now CBS News reports that, gee wilikers, Trump’s transition isn’t really behind.

People who have paid close attention to presidential transitions over the years note that they rarely run smoothly. “There is a long history of unfortunate transition activity,” Max Stier, the president and chief executive of the Center for Presidential Transition, told the New York Times.

And David Axelrod, President Obama’s chief strategist, tweeted Thursday that the Trump campaign isn’t behind at all:

In fact, Trump is somewhat ahead of Bill Clinton in 1992, way ahead of George W. Bush in 2000, and about even with Barack Obama in 2008.

Turns out this is just another media spin crash. If you’ve got extra investment money, you might put it into egg production, because the main stream media is looking at four years of constant egg on their faces, as they constantly predict failure around every corner and are proven wrong again and again.