Clinton Cash author and Republican activist Peter Schweizer acknowledged that, contrary to earlier reporting, there is no similar book in the works on the personal finances and policy decisions of former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, a claim journalists have previously cited to legitimize Schweizer's forthcoming book on the Clintons.
There are at least 20 documented errors, fabrications, and distortions in Schweizer's forthcoming book Clinton Cash, where the conservative author speculates about allegedly unethical ties between the Clinton Foundation and actions Hillary Clinton purportedly made as secretary of state. His allegations of impropriety by the Clintons and their family foundation have been picked apart by ABC News, BuzzFeed, MSNBC, NBC News, and ThinkProgress, among several other news agencies, and Schweizer has even been accused by one of his sources of taking comments "badly out of context" in hopes of slighting the Clinton family.
Bloomberg Politics reported on April 23 that in contrast to the "left-wing clamor that Schweizer is simply out to get Hillary Clinton," "Schweizer is working on a similar investigation of Jeb Bush's finances that he expects to publish this summer." Politico and CNN subsequently reported this would be a "book" on Bush.
But days later, Schweizer admitted that no similar book on Jeb Bush will be published. On the May 3 edition of Fox News' MediaBuzz, host Howard Kurtz asked about accusations that the book is "pursuing an agenda" based on his conservative political affiliations and activism. Schweizer acknowledged that while he's been researching Bush's finances, there are no plans to publish a book similar to Clinton Cash:
KURTZ: To be fair, you have been digging into Jeb Bush's finances --
KURTZ: -- So the Clintons aren't the only ones you're going to be looking at. But that's not going to result in a book, as I understand.
A spokesperson for Schweizer's current publisher, HarperCollins, previously told Media Matters that it has no plans to publish a book on Bush's complex finances. Instead, it expects Schweizer to issue a follow-up report at his far-right think tank, the Government Accountability Institute.
See the full segment here:
After Baltimore City State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby announced she was charging six police officers in the death of Freddie Gray, the Daily Caller reported on how she's a "sexy," "smoldering civil servant."
Gray's death and treatment while in police custody has sparked national outrage and contributed to riots and peaceful demonstrations in Baltimore over the last week. Mosby, who is Baltimore's chief prosecutor, announced during a May 1 press conference she had filed the charges against the officers after a medical examiner's report ruled the death a homicide.
Daily Caller Sports Editor Christian Datoc reported on the press conference by calling Mosby a "smokeshow" with "'crazy girl' eyes":
Throughout the presser, the 35-year-old prosecutor managed to maintain a fiery, authoritative demeanor AND flashed some serious "crazy girl" eyes, a combination which -- if truth be told -- I found incredibly sexy.
I wouldn't mind being unrestrained in the back of Ms. Mosby's paddy wagon.
Datoc's post also featured tweets from individuals calling Mosby attractive, writing "it looks like we weren't the only ones smitten with this smoldering civil servant."
The Daily Caller has an extensive history of sexist commentary demeaning women. Recently, the Caller's founder and Editor-in-Chief Tucker Carlson dismissed controversy surrounding an email his brother sent, which called New York City Major Bill de Blasio's female spokesperson a "self-righteous bitch" with "dick-fright." Previously, Caller writer Patrick Howley came under fire for inappropriate comments about a female reporter. The conservative website also published a sexist cartoon attacking Meghan McCain which featured a photograph of McCain with speech bubbles emerging from her breasts. Tucker Carlson told Politico in 2014 that the site frequently publishes "slideshows of the female form" because they "care about traffic."
Who is more likely to be influenced by money: The vast majority of climate scientists who agree with the scientific consensus that human activities are driving global warming, or the small pool of climate change deniers funded by the fossil fuel industry? The answer probably seems obvious, but some deniers are doing their best to play the "conflict of interest" card against respected climate scientists.
Right-wing media are promoting the myth that scientists who agree with the consensus of human-caused climate change have been "corrupt[ed]" by "massive amounts of money." Most recently, National Review published an op-ed from the Cato Institute's science director, Patrick Michaels, who wrote that the U.S. government disburses "tens of billions of dollars" to climate scientists "who would not have received those funds had their research shown climate change to be beneficial or even modest in its effects."
Here's the bizarre thing: After arguing that money "corrupts" science that supports the consensus on man-made climate change, Michaels then tried to defend the industry funding behind the research that's used to deny climate change. Michaels wrote: "Are the very, very few climate scientists whose research is supported by [the fossil fuel] industry somehow less virtuous?"
It should come as no surprise that Michaels himself works for an organization funded by the fossil fuel industry. The Cato Institute was co-founded by the oil billionaire Koch brothers and has received millions from the Koch family, while also receiving funding from ExxonMobil and the American Petroleum Institute.
Conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is again raising conservative media talking points in court, advancing the debunked idea that the definition of marriage has remained unchanged for a "millennia."
On April 28, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Obergefell v. Hodges, a case that will determine whether state bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional. During arguments, the conservative justices, including Scalia, expressed concern about "redefining" the institution of marriage to include gay couples. In one exchange with Mary Bonauto, the lawyer representing the same-sex plaintiffs, Scalia wondered if it was appropriate for the court to "decide it for this society" since marriage has applied only to heterosexual couples "for millennia."
The idea that the definition of marriage has had a fixed tradition or definition "for millennia" is untrue, although right-wing media have pushed that notion in varying forms for years -- and Scalia's propensity for embracing right-wing talking points is well-known. In 2012, he repeated the idea that if the Affordable Care Act was upheld, the federal government might be allowed to force Americans to buy broccoli -- an argument borrowed from Rush Limbaugh's talk show. Earlier this year, Scalia claimed that if the court struck down the availability of health care subsidies, Congress would move quickly to fix the problem -- apparently convinced by right-wing media's false claims that Senate Republicans had a viable back-up plan if the court hobbled the Affordable Care Act. When the Supreme Court struck down Arizona's notorious anti-immigrant racial profiling law in 2012, Scalia dispensed with legal arguments to instead attack the unrelated deferred action program for DREAMers and scaremonger that the "state's citizens feel themselves under siege by large numbers of illegal immigrants." Professor Jeffrey Rosen of George Washington University said Scalia's commentary in that case "sound[ed] more like a conservative blogger or Fox News pundit than a justice."
Kwame Rose, the Baltimore resident who confronted Fox News' Geraldo Rivera over media's biased coverage of the city, responded to Rivera's personal on-air attacks in an interview with Media Matters. Rose reacted to video of his interaction with Rivera going viral, discussed the media landscape in Baltimore, and highlighted racial disparities in the criminal justice system.
National media has swarmed to cover the Baltimore protesters who have taken to the streets to voice concerns about the criminal justice system following the shocking death of Freddie Gray, a young Baltimore resident whose spine was fatally severed while in police custody. Fox's Rivera was among those pundits reporting on the protests when Rose confronted the Fox personality and expressed frustration that the network failed to spotlight Gray's death in favor of hyping the unrest that ensued, an exchange that quickly found a large audience online.
Rivera later used his platform on Fox News to bash Rose as a "vandal," "annoying," and an "obstructionist" on-air. He accused Rose of displaying "exactly that kind of youthful anarchy that led to the destruction and pain in that community."
Rose has responded to Geraldo and to the video's popularity, in an email exchange with Media Matters.
"I want people to know that this issue is bigger than some clip of me, it's about Black Lives," said Rose, after emphasizing that being featured in a viral video was never his intention. His frustration lies with establishment media and its depictions of Baltimore in the wake of the unrest.
"I have been out protesting for almost two weeks now without being on one camera," Rose explained. "After Monday night when the media started pouring in, I sat at work and watched how the media basically forced people to believe that Baltimore was some Third World city. I just wanted to set the record straight and let it be known that this generation refuses to be misinterpreted."
Rose noted how the media paid attention to the violence in Baltimore, but failed to cover the community's efforts to unite and clean up the city.
"I sat and watched the media set up their camps in front of boarded up homes ... while we were cleaning up the streets as one community. The cameras weren't rolling, nobody cared. Outside agitators such as Fox News came onto the scene trying to exploit the situation. I don't care about the people watching Fox News, but I will not let you report lies about the people of this city."
Emily Miller, chief investigative reporter for Washington, D.C. Fox affiliate WTTG (Fox 5) reported on the alleged rape of a Maryland woman, repeatedly emphasizing claims that the woman was a "virgin."
According to Miller, police said a man sexually assaulted a Catholic nun during a home invasion in Prince George's County, MD on April 29. Miller's April 30 write-up of the assault on Fox 5's website noted that "Sources tell FOX 5 the victim, an older woman, was a virgin." In her televised report, Miller said "according to our sources, a Catholic nun, who was a virgin, was raped in her home last night." Miller repeated that the woman was a virgin later in the segment, saying "according to police sources, the victim was a Catholic nun who was a virgin."
MILLER: Tony, this is one of those stories you just hate to believe is true. According to our sources, a Catholic nun who was a virgin was raped in her home last night. The suspect got away, but he was caught early this morning in Northeast, Washington. D.C. police cornered the alleged rapist this morning in this apartment in Northeast. He was hiding in a kitchen cabinet. Juan Randolph, seen in these photos, was arrested and is going to be extradited to Prince George's County to face charges including rape and home invasion.
CPL. NICOLE HUBBARD: At about 10:00 last night, officers responded to the five thousand block of Sixteenth Avenue in Chillum for the report of a sexual assault. They got there and found out that the victim -- or that the suspect, Randolph, had broken into the victim's home, assaulted her and fled the scene.
MILLER: According police sources, the victim was a Catholic nun who was a virgin. She is an older woman. The spokeswoman would not comment on the sexual assault victim. She would only say this --
HUBBARD: This is just a very disturbing crime. When something like this occurs, it just really affects our entire community -- affects our police department.
Ever since Peter Schweizer's new attack book Clinton Cash was touted as the must-read tome of the campaign season, a growing number of media organizations, including Politico, BuzzFeed, ABC News, FactCheck.org, and Time, have detailed factual shortcomings in the book. (Media Matters has, too.) Noticeably absent from that fact-checking procession has been The New York Times and the Washington Post, the two newspapers that entered into exclusive editorial agreements with Clinton Cash's publisher.
The Times' and Post's seeming lack of interest in detailing the book's long list of misstatements certainly raises questions about whether the papers' exclusive pacts made the dailies reluctant to highlight Clinton Cash's obvious shortcomings.
After all, if those other media organizations can find the Clinton Cash errors, why can't the Times and the Post? And even if Times and Post reporters can't spot the misinformation, why aren't they at least writing about the key revelations that others are uncovering? Recall that it was the Times that trumpeted Clinton Cash as the "the most anticipated and feared book" of the campaign season. If it's so important, why isn't the Times documenting the crucial errors found between the Clinton Cash covers?
Hyped by its publisher -- the Rupert Murdoch-owned HarperCollins -- as being "meticulously researched and scrupulously sourced," Clinton Cash has instead turned out to be a mishmash of allegations glued together by innuendo and falsehoods. That, according to an array of news outlets that have documented the book's shortcomings.
Fox News se ha destacado esta semana con ejemplos de cómo no debería cubrirse un caso de disturbios urbanos. La cobertura de Fox News de las protestas en Baltimore desencadenadas por la muerte de Freddie Gray mientras se encontraba bajo custodia de la policía, han resaltado por sus rasgos de prejuicio racial, negación de la realidad, y aspectos de doble victimización. Media Matters destacó diferentes instancias en las que la cadena Fox News falló al reportar sobre esta noticia:
Descartando el rol que la brutalidad policial ha jugado en desencadenar las protestas, Fox News decidió culpar un rango de factores que incluyeron desde la "negligencia parental" hasta la "cultura del hip hop". En el programa Happening Now, el analista Juan Williams contestó a la pregunta de qué había ocasionado los disturbios diciendo:
WILLIAMS: Lo que tenemos aquí es una situación donde, yo creo, tienes gente pobre, que sienten que han sido agraviados -- una situación difícil a lo largo de nuestro país en lo que respecta a cómo la policía trata con la disfuncionalidad existente en este vecindario, pero tratan con ella en todas las comunidades de Estados Unidos. Estamos pidiéndole a nuestros policías a que entren y traten con personas que son extremadamente violentas, desorganizadas, con familias en caos, y le decimos a la policía, ustedes son nuestras líneas al frente. Y cuando la policía falla en el manejo de la situación, decimos, es una cuestión de brutalidad policial. Creo que es una cuestión de que la sociedad, a menudo, le pide a la policía que haga cosas para las que no están entrenados.
Lo anterior ignora la marcada historia de brutalidad policial reinante en Baltimore, tal y como ha sido reportada por el periódico Baltimore Sun.
Como si la muerte de la víctima a manos de la policía fuera justificable, el colaborador de Fox News Bo Dietl fue más allá en el programa Fox & Friends al especular -- sin ningún fundamento -- que Freddie Gray se encontraba bajo los efectos de drogas.
Tres figuras de Fox News aprovecharon la coyuntura para sugerir en el programa Special Report with Bret Baier que la política pública de la "opción escolar" -- que implica la entrega de cupones a las familias para que escojan matricular a sus hijos entre escuelas privadas o públicas -- era una solución apropiada a las protestas de Baltimore, de las que culparon a las escuelas. Calificaron al sistema escolar de "horrible" y de ser "el peor de la tierra", ignorando datos que demuestran que los alumnos del sistema público de Baltimore han avanzado significativamente en su desempeño en los últimos años:
El presentador Larry Wilmore, del programa de Comedy Central The Nightly Show, señaló a Fox News por hacer uso de estereotipos raciales para cubrir las protestas de Baltimore. Como ejemplo, Wilmore señaló varias comparaciones que Fox hizo de que la apariencia de las protestas era propia del "tercer mundo":
National Rifle Association (NRA) Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre relied on numerous falsehoods to claim that President Obama will move to ban sales of all firearm ammunition before he leaves office, thus making "the very real nightmare of every single gun owner in this country" a reality.
In the May issue of the NRA's magazine, America's 1st Freedom, LaPierre wrote, "President Barack Obama is setting the table to ban your ammunition -- all of it," and claimed that "the remaining two years of Obama's term pose the greatest threat ever to the Second Amendment and our freedom."
LaPierre imagined a ludicrous scheme where "two fatal turns of events" would lead the EPA to ban all lead ammunition and, subsequently, the Obama administration to ban all non-lead ammunition. According to LaPierre, "The president's bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are partnering with private enviro-radicals to ban lead projectiles -- including all hunting bullets -- as hazardous."
Despite the fact that the EPA has given no indication that it is preparing regulations on lead ammunition, LaPierre insisted that the agency is still seeking a ban.
The facts prove him wrong. In December 2014, FoxNews.com reported that "[i]n a decision favorable to gun enthusiasts," a federal court ruled against environmentalists who argued that the EPA has the authority to regulate lead ammunition. According to FoxNews.com, "The National Rifle Association and much of the pro-gun lobby intervened on the EPA's side in urging the federal appeals court to uphold the dismissal of a lawsuit by 101 environmentalist organizations." (The EPA does not believe it has authority to regulate lead ammunition under the Toxic Substances Control Act.)
Baltimore's WBAL-TV investigative reporter Jayne Miller highlighted serious concerns with a Washington Post report that a prisoner who was in the van with Freddie Gray heard Gray trying to injure himself, pointing to WBAL's reporting from medical experts on Gray's injuries.
On April 29, The Washington Post published a report, based on a police document obtained by the paper, that said a prisoner who was in the police van with Gray heard him "banging against the walls" and thought he "was intentionally trying to injure himself." The paper noted that the prisoner "was separated from Gray by a metal partition and could not see him," and included comment from Gray's family attorney.
But WBAL-TV's Jayne Miller says her reporting undermines this claim. She appeared on the April 30 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe, where she explained that "according to our sources familiar with this investigation, at that stop when that prisoner is loaded, Gray is unresponsive -- not able to bang his head against the wall." Miller went on to say that the preliminary autopsy findings indicated no injury to Gray other than to his spine, although the family says his voice box was injured. The Baltimore Sun reported on April 25 that "[p]olice have said that a preliminary report on Gray's autopsy showed he had no injuries except to his spinal cord." Miller also noted that their reporting indicated "the medical evidence does not suggest at all that he was able to injure himself," because "the force of this injury" was "akin to have the force involved in a car accident." This was also reported in the Baltimore Sun.
Miller had previously tweeted on April 23 that the Baltimore police commissioner said the other prisoner reported Gray was "mostly quiet."
The report was also called into question by Dr. Marc Siegel on Fox News' Fox & Friends, who said there was "no way that you could sever your spine by bashing your head against a wall or side of a car," and added there was "no chance" that Gray could have injured himself "to the extent where he would sever his spine."
The Daily Beast's Michael Daly suggested that the "banging" the prisoner says he heard might have been Gray "signaling his need for help." Daly said the "purpose of that banging seems to have been made clear when Gray asked for medical assistance."
The story has been widely reported by other outlets, including CNN, Business Insider, CBS and The Hill. The report was also covered on Fox News. On The Kelly File, host Megyn Kelly described the report as "explosive," and on Hannity, Sean Hannity suggested this report indicated there was a "rush to judgment without any facts by the president and others."
The Post story said that it's "not clear whether any additional evidence backs up the prisoner's version." What is clear is that there is available, credible information that contradicts the other prisoner's account, which the Post could have included before the story was uncritically repeated in other mainstream outlets. And as Salon's Joan Walsh pointed out, this sort of caution is even more necessary in the absence of an official police report on the incident.