Posted tagged ‘CNN’

CNN throws in the towel on fake Russian news

September 6, 2017

CNN throws in the towel on fake Russian news, American ThinkerMonica Showalter, September 6, 2017

CNN has dismantled its vaunted Trump-colluded-with-the-Russians investigative unit in a wretched concession to reality.  The only thing the unit found was an empty well for stories, surrounded by a crust of fake news.  The whole caper damaged the network’s credibility, and the public just wasn’t buying it anymore.  So the whole unit had to go.

What a shabby end to what the network had put so much stock in in the heady days of trying to oust President Trump just as he had taken office.

The New York Times attributes the unit’s sorry end to confusion in the fact-checking process – which is baloney for anyone who has ever worked in a newsroom – claiming that on one bad story, a lawyer’s concerns were ignored.  That’s not the way it works in most newsrooms – normally, the lawyer has the loudest voice about what goes to press, given the potential for lawsuits, much to the resentment of the reporters.  Well, the CNN editors ignored it and paid for it with their jobs when it came back to bite them.

Another problem the Times mentions but doesn’t dwell on is the issue of single-source reporting – from political partisans.  Of course a single-source report from a political partisan is going to yield a bad result.  This is why reporters are supposed to add value and put out something different from press releases.  Well, CNN opted to go for single sources, which is testimony in the Times’ mind to the pressure the network was under to produce something.

The only reason the people at CNN were unable to produce is that there was no there there.  And that’s the real reason for the unit’s ignominious end.  The news project was not premised on finding the truth, as real journalism is supposed to, but on confirming the left’s deepest rage, resentment, and fear – that the election was stolen from them by the hated Russians.  That was the root of all the fake news that came of the unit, such as claims that certain Trump administration officials were under investigation when they were not and errant reporting about James Comey.

Setting up a unit to confirm an ideological bias from an embittered losing party is no way to get bang for the news buck, which is the cash and resources that go into investigative reporting.  There has to be a there there, and there wasn’t any there there on the Russia story.  There wasn’t even an audience.

Maybe if CNN can learn to curb its ideological biases and refocus on reporting the news without fear or favor, it might just return to what it used to be.  As it is now, its reputation lies in ruins.

 

Doin’ the CNN Two-Step

July 7, 2017

Doin’ the CNN Two-Step, PJ MediaAndrew Klavan, July 6, 2017

There is little in the news today quite as delightful as watching the mainstream media do the CNN Two-Step. The CNN Two-Step is a simple dance. Step One: Put your foot in your mouth. Step Two: Shoot yourself in the foot. The results are bloody but hilarious.

The latest iteration comes from CNN’s own Jim Acosta. Acosta seems to have modeled himself on the Grandfather of Fake News, Dan Rather. Rather made his name by shouting biased and hostile questions at a president despised of the elite. Acosta has made a fool of himself doing the same thing. Acosta beclowned himself most recently (as of this writing; it’s hard to keep up) filing a sneering, unprofessional report on the president’s press conference in Poland. Acosta scornfully called it a “fake news conference“:

The other thing that was fake news coming from President Trump is he said, “Well, I keep hearing it is 17 intelligence agencies who said Russia interfered in the election. I think it is only three or four.” Where does that number come from? Where does this three or four number come from?

Turns out the number comes from corrections filed by the New York Times and the Associated Press, after weeks of complaints about the error from conservative websites.

But, of course, this is only the latest example. Over at MSNBC, they were doing the CNN Two-Step last week after Trump tweeted some nasty remarks about Morning Joe co-host Mika Brzezinski. This came after months of Mika and her fiance Joe Scarborough attacking Trump as a “thug,” a “goon,” “mentally ill,” and so forth. When Trump finally gave them the smack they deserved, their over-the-top whining and crying were absurd enough to make a statue laugh.

And we mustn’t forget how CNN extorted an apology out of a private citizen after Trump retweeted an anti-CNN .gif that the citizen may or may not have made. Alisyn Camerota reported this act of sinister thuggery by the network as if it were some kind of happy ending. And the entire CNN staff seemed surprised when Trump supporters responded in kind by releasing staffers’ personal info along with a blizzard of anti-CNN memes.

The media might use this opportunity to stop dancing the CNN Two-Step — to stop blowing their own heads off in other words — and take stock. They might ignore Donald Trump’s manners and ask themselves whether perhaps he has a point, whether perhaps their industry is desperately in need of reform.

After sixteen years of listening to CNN and the networks and WaPo and the New York Times attack the honest George W. Bush relentlessly, then coddle the corrupt Barack Obama; after listening to Middle-American values disdained and the Tea Party movement denigrated; after being told their opinions were only a backlash to the progressive genius of the elites; after being told they must not say what was right in front of their eyes whether it was Islamic terrorism or that boys aren’t girls or that cops make black neighborhoods safer… after sixteen years of snarling contempt from the fancy-pants mouthpieces of large media corporations, the American people elected Donald Trump, in part at least, to send the media a message.

The message is: Go to hell. It’s about time the press received it loud and clear.

CNN Producer: Voters “Stupid as Sh*t”– American Pravda: CNN Part 3

June 30, 2017

CNN Producer: Voters “Stupid as Sh*t”– American Pravda: CNN Part 3, Project Veritas via YouTube, June 3, 2017

(Please see also, Why James O’Keefe Is a More Honest Journalist than the MSM. — DM

Humor | CNN Tries To Move Forward After Its Latest Humiliation

June 29, 2017

CNN Tries To Move Forward After Its Latest Humiliation, TownhallKurt Schlichter, June 29, 2017

(Please see also, Van Jones Exposed! Tucker Carlson Reacts to Project Veritas Exposing CNN. — DM

“People, listen up! Trump just tweeted ‘This Russia fake news is fake. Failing CNN is failing. Sad!’ Clearly, he’s hiding something, and I’m guessing its collusion. Put up the ‘TREASON WATCH’ chyron and someone get Louise Mensch on the phone! This is not a drill – we’re flooding the zone! CNN is back!”

**********************

“Ladies, gentlemen, and non-binary beings who refuse to be forced into one or more specific genders,” began CNN Worldwide President Jeff Zucker, employing the network’s prescribed group salutation. “I have gathered you all today here in the CNN newsroom to discuss this Anthony Scaramucci Russia story we retracted and how it has had a negative impact on our network’s sterling reputation for journalistic integrity and objectivity. Hey, pay attention! Stop laughing!”

The room quieted down. Even Don Lemon looked up from the bar, where he was mixing a cosmopolitan.

“Listen, people….,” Zucker began.

“I identify as an otherkin and that’s humanocentric!” shouted a producer dressed in a bright blue fox costume. The network was rightfully proud of its “a-furry-mative action” outreach to the marginalized furry and brony communities.

Zucker sighed. “Before I go on, I just want to make sure that O’Keefe guy isn’t secretly taping us again. You’re the sharpest, keenest investigative journalists in the business – any sign of him?”

“Nope, he’s totally not here,” replied a voice from the audience, a young white man dressed like Superfly.

“Great. Now this Scaramucci story was a big problem, and not just because we got caught. As you know, Russia is ratings gold, but if we keep coming up empty we’ll leave our audience as unsatisfied as a woman married to a liberal man,” Zucker explained, using an analogy his audience could relate to. “We just can’t keep reporting shaky Russia stories about billionaires based on single, anonymous sources that turn out to be fake news.”

“So … avoid slandering billionaires? Maybe focus on rodeo clowns and so forth?” suggested Jim Acosta.

“Exactly,” replied Zucker. “Don’t do this kind of thing to people who buy their lawyers in bulk! I’m not saying pick on people who can’t fight back against a giant media company but, you know, try and pick on people who can’t fight back against a giant media company.”

A cheerful voice from someone in the front row cried out: “I got a new puppy! His name is Woofy!”

“Yes, Chris, you’ve already told us all about Woofy several times,” sighed Zucker.

“Woofy likes to bark at squirrels, and my brother is governor!”

“That’s terrific, Chris. Someone, get him his fidget spinner. Anyway, starting now, we’re instituting new policies for handling Russia stories. Stop groaning! This important! From now on, we’re going to need your Russia stories to all have an element of truth.”

The room erupted into chaos.

“What the hell?” screeched Wolf Blitzer. “Preposterous!”

“Wolf, your name is sort of like my puppy Woofy’s!” said Chris Cuomo. “Sort of.”

“Never!” snorted Christiane Amanpour, who had been annoying Jake Tapper because her enormous pink gyno hat was blocking his view.

“Look at it spin!” piped up Chris Cuomo between delighted giggles.

Jim Acosta stood up and adjusted his tie. “I want to register my outrage and disapproval of this hateful attack on the free press in the strongest possible terms!”

“Oh, knock it off, Jimmy. There’s no camera here,” Zucker said. “From now on, your anonymous sources have to actually exist. That’s final. I’m sorry people – calm down! – but you can’t quote sources who don’t exist.”

From the back, Don Lemon finished his drink and howled, “The voices tell me MANY THINGS!”

“Look,” said Jim Sciutto. “Like my friend Don, I deeply believe that invisible voices in our heads can be legitimate news sources. Especially if a different voice in our head confirms what the first voice told us.”

“But don’t you understand,” stuttered an indignant Brian Stelter. “Don’t you know that democracy will die in darkness if you impose arbitrary rules on us that limit our ability to report things that never happened?”

“Look, I know this represents a sea change in how CNN operates, but there’s a lot of heat on us right now,” said Zucker. “Personally, I’m still heartbroken that we were unable to go forward with our plans for CNN Kidz Newz Nite With Kathy Griffin.”

“Kathy is a saint and she was robbed!” yelled Don Lemon, who staggered up the aisle, pausing to “accidentally” spill his fresh cosmo on Jake Tapper.

“Hey!” shouted Tapper. “That suit cost more than your pec implants!”

“Get out of my head!” screamed Lemon, who began sobbing. He’d been an emotional train wreck since the defeat of his friend Hillary, who he had steadfastly defended against all sorts of awful people who insisted on telling the truth about her.

“Settle!” howled Zucker. “We are journalists! We are all about our sacred duty as reporters to tell the truth to our viewers in an objective and professional manner! And also ratings. Sweet, sweet, life-giving ratings.”

“Sometimes daddy used to come home late at night with his special friends and they were all dirty and had shovels. They always took the cannoli,” Chris Cuomo said to John Berman, who got up and moved down three chairs.

“All right, all right, let’s move on to solutions. Cooper, your eyebrows are fine, so put down that mirror and pay attention! Now, we’ve had some troubles, but we’re going to come back stronger. The consensus is that the best way to do that is by leveraging exciting, diverse talents and marginalized minority voices, like Shaun King…”

“You want to tell him?” Jake Tapper whispered to Brooke Baldwin.

“Nope.”

“And Sally Kohn,” said Zucker. “Their smart, common sense takes on current issues will help reach out to red America on whatever issues those hicks care about.”

Just then a young production assistant with “#Resist” tattooed across xis forehead rushed over to the network president and handed him a note. He read it and furrowed his brow.

“People, listen up! Trump just tweeted ‘This Russia fake news is fake. Failing CNN is failing. Sad!’ Clearly, he’s hiding something, and I’m guessing its collusion. Put up the ‘TREASON WATCH’ chyron and someone get Louise Mensch on the phone! This is not a drill – we’re flooding the zone! CNN is back!”

The crowd broke up as people rushed to their places. And while a producer led Chris Cuomo by his soft hand to the anchor chair, he was heard to say, “I got a new puppy! His name is Woofy!”

Van Jones Exposed! Tucker Carlson Reacts to Project Veritas Exposing CNN

June 29, 2017

Van Jones Exposed! Tucker Carlson Reacts to Project Veritas Exposing CNN, Fox News via YouTube, June 28, 2017

(Mark Steyn suggests that CNN’s talking puppet should replace at least one of the CNN “news”  purveyors. — DM)

Why James O’Keefe Is a More Honest Journalist than the MSM

June 29, 2017

Why James O’Keefe Is a More Honest Journalist than the MSM, PJ MediaRoger L. Simon, June 28, 2017

The rap on James O’Keefe — whose latest bombshell caught CNN’s quasi-Marxist star pundit Van Jones with his well-tailored pants down — is that his Project Veritas videos are “unfairly edited.”

I have news for O’Keefe’s critics. All videos (and films) are basically unfairly edited, as Sergei Eisenstein and the early Soviet directors demonstrated a hundred years ago. It’s the nature of the medium. Some things get left out and others put in.

Nevertheless, the video or movie camera is a recording device. On close examination, looked at specifically, the actual photographs and recordings finally don’t lie, juxtapose them how you will. Van Jones did say “Russia is a nothingburger!” The network’s John Bonifield did call CNN’s Russia narrative “bullsh$t” concocted for the money. The repellent lady from Planned Parenthood did offer to sell fetal parts. The equally repellent Democratic Party operatives did instigate violent demonstrations at Trump rallies to make the candidate’s supporters look like thugs. O’Keefe himself did walk back and forth undeterred across the Rio Grande from Mexico to the USA dressed as Osama bin Laden to show the pathetic level of our border security.

I could go on. There are many more, including examples unmasking the shibboleths of voter registration, but the point is obvious. Despite some selective editing (but not any that materially alters the facts) and sometimes overly portentous music (why bother when you have the goods?), what James O’Keefe reports is true. It happened.

Because they so often rely on leaks — no photographs, videos or anything like them, often nothing concrete at all — what the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and so many others (even the front pages of the Wall Street Journal, alas) report is very often, one is tempted to say most often, either a distortion or an outright lie. This is particularly true when what they are reporting has political relevance — and so much does.

If not the root cause — that’s uncontrolled and unacknowledged bias — this excessive reliance on leaks has seriously exacerbated the precipitous decline of the mainstream media. For much of our media, leaks are an opium-like drug that clouds their thinking and to which they are literally addicted. They are waiting for the phone to ring like the junkie is waiting for his next fix. That the leakers all have motivations of their own, known and/or unknown, yet are able to remain anonymous to the public, makes what they leak almost de facto dubious and unreliable, in fact dangerous (as well as illegal, obviously).

Yet the MSM reporters gobble them up, eager to scoop their competitors and at the same time — much like overweight, self-satisfied picadors — weaken Trump and his administration for the final kill, doing, in their own eyes anyway, good works while advancing their careers.

O’Keefe has revealed them to be fools, remarkably unsophisticated in their response to his revelations. (Jeff Zucker, et al., looked like dimwits walking into the most obvious trap by dismissing Bonifield as a mere “medical” producer with the famous Van Jones already queued up for humiliation.)  At this point, only the most naive believe what the MSM says. CNN is already a joke, but the NYT, WaPo, etc. are not far behind. We are all reading Pravda now.

Ironically, Woodward and Bernstein are responsible for a lot of this. They made a giant success off leaks, turning journalists into culture heroes (really false gods) to be portrayed by Redford and Hoffman in the movies. Generations of aspiring journalists sought to follow in their footsteps — to be these false gods. Only there was no there there. No Nixon to upend. So they turned Trump into the New Nixon and manufactured a crime to go along with it.

W & B also inadvertently encouraged a new kind of leaker that is endemic today. Call him or her the “score settler,” a loathsome character lurking in the bowels of the Deep State or intelligence agencies, a remnant of the previous administration, who thinks his or her reasons for telling a partial, misleading truth are justified, are for the public good, when they are almost invariably only for their own good or some supposed ideological good they wish to impose regardless of the wishes of the voters in a democracy. (These are both often enmeshed.)

This created an extreme, almost pathological, will-to-believe the leakers on the part of the MSM as illustrated by the recent firings (sorry, “resignations”) of three CNN employees in the face of a $100M lawsuit. One of these credulous employees, Eric Lichtblau, was once a Pulitzer Prize winner at the New York Times.

Woodward, to his credit, seems to have recognized how extreme the situation has become. He chided the NYT today, saying, “Fair-mindedness is essential.” His own paper, under Bezos, has become even worse. But never mind. Give him credit for a half-truth. (By the way, CNN’s Jeff Zucker is a working stiff compared to Jeff Bezos. What’s Bezos’ excuse?)

But more importantly — it’s over. Well, if not over, a new, positive rung has been reached. The MSM, as we knew it, is, if not destroyed, seriously wounded.  They are — channeling a phrase from the Vietnam Era — a “pitiful, helpless giant.”  The work begun in 2004 when many of us spoke out against Dan Rather’s deceitful promulgation of the forged Bush National Guard papers on “Sixty Minutes” has, thanks to O’Keefe and others, not to mention the irrationality of the MSM itself, finally reached a critical mass. If only Andrew Breitbart were here to see it.

Celebrate for ten seconds. But as another of the original group, Glenn Reynolds, keeps reminding us — don’t get cocky.

Van Jones: Russia is “Nothing burger”– American Pravda: CNN Part 2

June 28, 2017

Van Jones: Russia is “Nothing burger”– American Pravda: CNN Part 2, Project Veritas via Youtube, June 28, 2017

Project Veritas Captures CNN Producer Saying Russia Reporting Is ‘Mostly Bulls**t’

June 27, 2017

Project Veritas Captures CNN Producer Saying Russia Reporting Is ‘Mostly Bulls**t’, Washington Free Beacon, , June 27, 2017

(Please see also, Some accountability at CNN at last? — DM)

 

Project Veritas released an undercover video Monday showing a CNN supervising producer saying that reporting on the Russia investigation is “mostly bullshit” but leads to high ratings.

Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe introduced the video as the first in a series called “American Pravda” seeking to expose mainstream media outlets’ slanted coverage. In the video, CNN producer John Bonifield said the network’s focus on potential ties between President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia is based on ratings.

“I mean, it’s mostly bullshit right now. Like, we don’t have any big giant proof,” Bonifield said of the Russia story. It is unclear when he made the statement.

“And so I think the president is right to say, like, ‘Look, you are witch-hunting me. You have no smoking gun. You have no real proof,'” Bonifield said.

He explained that ratings motivate CNN’s focus on the Russia story. Asked why the network aired so much Russia coverage, Bonifield said, “It’s ratings.”

“Our ratings are incredible right now,” he added.

Bonifield said that the emphasis on Russia came from upper management. He detailed a meeting in which President Jeff Zucker advised staff to focus on the Paris climate accord for a day and a half before returning to Russia.

“The CEO of CNN said in our internal meeting, he said, ‘Good job everybody covering the climate accords, but we’re done with it. Let’s get back to Russia,'” Bonifield said.

Bonifield also described a jaded business culture at CNN and in cable news generally.

“All the nice cutesy little ethics that used to get talked about in journalism school, you’re just like, ‘That’s adorable, that’s adorable. This is a business,'” he said.

“They gotta do what they gotta do to make their money,” Bonifield added. “And so I love the news business, but I am very cynical about it. At the same time, so are most of my colleagues.”

Bonifield said that CNN would have turned off its liberal viewers if the network strongly scrutinized former President Barack Obama, but Trump is “good for business.”

O’Keefe said in the video that this exposes CNN’s “editorial bias and anti-Trump agenda.”

O’Keefe concluded the video by discussing CNN’s retraction of a recent story tying a Trump associate to a Russian financial group. He called the journalists who resigned as a result “victims of fake news.”

In February, O’Keefe released undercover audio from CNN employees discussing haphazard reporting of poll numbers, insulting Fox News, and claiming the “primary role of a journalist” is to “aid the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.”

New Lawsuits Could Determine Not Only The Legal Status Of The Comey Memos But The Legality of Comey’s Actions

June 18, 2017

New Lawsuits Could Determine Not Only The Legal Status Of The Comey Memos But The Legality of Comey’s Actions, Jonathan Turley’s Blog, Jonathan Turley, June 18, 2017

Of course, if these documents were viewed as FBI information at their creation, there remains the question on who would take the lead in investigating Comey as a possible leaker. The Justice Department [h]as cut Robert Mueller a great berth. Yet, Comey is now a witness for Mueller — as the recent leak confirmed by telling the media that Trump is now being investigated for obstruction. It is not clear if Mueller would view Comey’s possible violations are falling within the scope of his mandate or whether he would be willing to investigate his own key witness in the obstruction investigation.

*****************************

Last week, CNN filed a lawsuit seeking the famous Comey memos from the FBI, which is discussed in the column below in The Hill newspaper.  The lawsuit could produce an official characterization of the status of the memos as either personal or FBI information.  After this column was posted, Judicial Watch also filed a lawsuit seeking the memos which it maintained were the property of the FBI.  The lawsuit states “Upon learning that records have been unlawfully removed from the FBI, you then are required to initiate action through the Attorney General for the recovery of records.”  These lawsuits could prove vindicating or implicating for Comey.

Here is the column:

The lawsuit this week by CNN seeking the memoranda of former FBI director James Comey created something of a curiosity for viewers. In court, CNN is arguing that the memos are “FBI records” and should be turned over under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). On the air, CNN legal and political analysts have been insisting that these memos belong to Comey and are akin to his personal diary. The irony is that the CNN litigation could answer some of the underlying questions over the status of the memos and whether Comey was a leaker in the unauthorized dissemination of FBI information.

On Thursday, CNN filed for the release of the documents as “FBI records” in “unredacted” form and “without further delay.” There are two copies of these memos in FBI possession this week. First were the original versions created by Comey while he was FBI director. The memos were prepared on an FBI computer during the course of Comey’s investigation of the Russian matter. The memos were made in direct relation to the ongoing investigation and shared with his top staff as potentially relevant to the investigation. Second, there are the copies of the memos that were collected from Comey’s friend, Columbia Professor Daniel Richman, who received the memos from Comey to leak to the media.

I have previously written how these memos fit the broad definition of “FBI information” contained in federal rules and regulations. As such, the transfer of the memos to Richman and the sharing of the information with the media constituted a serious violation of legal and professional standards by Comey. Tasked with finding leakers, Comey became a leaker himself in order to strike back at the president.

Worse yet, Comey was fully aware that these memos would inevitably be collected as evidence by both the congressional committee and any special counsel — in addition to his own former team of investigators. Indeed, Comey was aware that he was being called to testify and could have shared these memos in a legal and professional way. Instead, he chose to use a friend to leak the memos early to the media.

CNN analysts came out immediately after Comey’s admission in his testimony, saying that first, this was not a leak because leaks are only classified (something I previously explained as entirely and facially incorrect), and second, these memos were like personal diaries that Comey had a right to disclose. Former FBI special agent Asha Rangappa on CNN balked at the suggestion of any leak as absurd because these were just Comey’s “personal recollections” like a personal diary. Others referred to the memos as being a private record or account of a private conversation.

By filing the lawsuit, CNN could force the FBI to legally identify the status of the memos. There should be multiple copies of these memos unless Comey deleted copies on his FBI computers (itself a potential violation of federal law). Each copy could be addressed in any FOIA production.

previously noted that Comey’s suggestion that these memos belonged to him (and thus could be leaked to the media) would likely not pass muster with folks at the FBI who have to make such decisions. Indeed, it would not have passed muster under FBI Director James Comey. Leakers were pursued under his tenure as FBI director, and many of those investigated may be rather perturbed by the image of someone who went from chief law enforcer to high-profile leaker when it was to his advantage.

The FBI restricts material generated in relation to investigations “FBI information.” The agreement Comey presumably signed clearly encompassed these memos as FBI material and he swore to comply with their bar on “unauthorized disclosure” — not just during his time at the FBI but “following termination of such employment.”

FBI rules cover any “documents reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated.” He is not at liberty to remove such documents after termination by the FBI, let alone leak them to the media. He also agreed that violation would terminate his security clearance and subject him to both criminal and civil liability, including injunctive relief.

Weeks ago, I raised the issue of whether the FBI would have turned over these documents under FOIA if they were demanded by the media. I expressed considerable doubt over such a notion as someone who has dealt with FOIA fights with the FBI for years.

The FBI would likely deny the requests under a number of exceptions. First, it could object that the documents were “related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency,” under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(2). Second, they could claim that they fell under  documents which are “records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes,” (assuming they fell into one or more of six categories), under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7). Third, and most importantly, they would also likely claim that the documents were “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandum or letters” which would be privileged in civil litigation, under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5).

The FBI specifically would rely on the deliberative process privilege in making such a finding. It has insisted that the release of such information is harmful to “the integrity of agency decision-making by encouraging both full and frank discussions of policy proposals and to prevent premature disclosure of policies under review.”

Any of these claims would seriously undermine Comey’s suggestion (and those of many at CNN) that these were his personal notes and that he was free to leak them to the media.

It is possible that the FBI could dodge this thorny issue by releasing copies received from Richman or finding a way to finesse the status of the original memos. However, the lawsuit could prove highly illuminating on not just the legal status of the memos but the lawfulness of Comey’s conduct. He could be vindicated or implicated by the results. On one end of the spectrum is the suggestion by many that these memos are like diary entries by Comey.

As I have said before, that seems rather hard to square and treats the account like some eHarmony date gone bad (with awkward dinners and uncomfortable silences). On the other end of the spectrum are field reports, often called 302s, where agents memorialize meetings with potential witnesses or important discoveries. This clearly falls somewhere in the middle.

Of course, if these documents were viewed as FBI information at their creation, there remains the question on who would take the lead in investigating Comey as a possible leaker. The Justice Department as cut Robert Mueller a great berth. Yet, Comey is now a witness for Mueller — as the recent leak confirmed by telling the media that Trump is now being investigated for obstruction. It is not clear if Mueller would view Comey’s possible violations are falling within the scope of his mandate or whether he would be willing to investigate his own key witness in the obstruction investigation.

Ironically, Comey may have preferred for this to remain somewhere in the middle — undefined and uncertain. CNN could have just taken a critical step toward removing that ambiguity by forcing the FBI to classify the status of the documents. It is the type of clarity that could prove exceptionally helpful or harmful for James Comey.

The Anonymous Sources of Washington Post and CNN Fake News

May 18, 2017

The Anonymous Sources of Washington Post and CNN Fake News, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, May 18, 2017

Media fake news is everywhere.

No, the new health care bill does not treat rape as a pre-existing condition and Republicans did not celebrate its passage with beer. 

The latest media outrage is driven by a Washington Post story about intelligence disclosures based on claims by anonymous sources. The Post’s big hit pieces are mainly based on anonymous sources.

Its latest hit piece runs a quote from, “a former senior U.S. official who is close to current administration officials.” That’s an anonymous source quoting hearsay from other anonymous sources.

This isn’t journalism. It’s a joke.

Last week, the Washington Post unveiled a story based on “the private accounts of more than 30 officials at the White House.” The fake news story falsely claimed that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein threatened to resign.

Rod had a simple answer when asked about that piece of fake news. “No.”

So much for 30 anonymous sources and for the Washington Post’s credibility.  But the media keeps shoveling out pieces based on anonymous sources and confirmed by anonymous sources while ignoring the disavowals by those public officials who are willing to go on the record.

The Comey memo story is based on, according to the New York Times, “two people who read the memo.” And then “one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.”

And his dog.

The supposed memo contradicts Comey’s own testimony to Congress under oath.

The Times hasn’t seen the memo. No one has seen the memo except the anonymous sources that may or may not exist. The media’s fake news infrastructure relies heavily on anonymous sources. And anonymous sources are the media’s way of saying, “Just trust us.”

The question is why would anyone trust the media?

Comey fake news is popular on the left because it is convinced that he is the key to reversing their election defeat. Recently CNN got its fake news fingers burned with a story claiming that the former FBI Director had asked for more resources for the Russia investigation before he was fired.

Where did CNN get its story from? Anonymous sources. Or, as the story put it, “two sources familiar with the discussion.”

Sources “familiar with the discussion” is up there with “a former senior U.S. official who is close to current administration officials.” And their neighbor’s dog who barks exclusively to CNN.

Rod Rosenstein and Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe both shot down CNN’s fake news.  CNN’s headline was, “New Acting FBI Director Contradicts White House on Comey.” Its fake news was referenced only as, “Amid reports that Comey had asked for more resources for the Russia investigation, McCabe testified that he believed the bureau had adequate resources to complete the job.”

CNN did not acknowledge that the fake reports had come from it. It phrased it in passive and vague language. And it left out a crucial part of McCabe’s response. “When we need resources, we make those requests here. So I’m not aware of that request and it’s not consistent with my understanding of how we request additional resources. That said, we don’t typically request resources for an individual case. And as I mentioned, I strongly believe that the Russian investigation is adequately resourced.”

CNN didn’t just push fake news. It covered up its crime. And it’s the cover-up that proves the crime.

Media outlets like CNN and the Washington Post often knows that they’re pushing lies. WaPo’s fact checkers shot down the claim that rape is a pre-existing condition. But the paper ran a piece titled, “I Was Raped. Thanks to Republicans, I Could Be Denied Insurance.” The editors know quite well which of these pieces will have more of an impact.

But the Post has a dozen stories mentioning the Comey resources fake news.

The Washington Post isn’t in the news business. After its takeover by Amazon boss Jeff Bezos, it’s in the business of manufacturing viral Trump hit pieces. It got a viral fake news hit with its lie that Press Secretary Sean Spicer was hiding in the bushes to avoid them. There was an equally snarky correction issued that was largely irrelevant. Having manufactured a piece of fake news fit for a Saturday Night Live skit, the Post then dutifully reported  on the Saturday Night Live skit featuring its fake news item.

In the past there would have been a world of difference between the Washington Post and Saturday Night Live. Today they are part of the same lefty echo chamber. The media, all the various parts of it, is now one big influence operation. The machine works by developing and taking fake news attacks viral. WaPo and SNL are in the same business. There isn’t even much of a stylistic difference.

The Washington Post’s “Trump fired Comey because he’s taller” could easily have come from Saturday Night Live, The Onion or the Daily Show.

The truly damning epitaph of American journalism is that there isn’t much of a difference. Saturday Night Live isn’t doing comedy and the Washington Post isn’t doing journalism. They’re both manufacturing viral Trump attacks.

Getting your news from the Washington Post is as worthless as getting it from Saturday Night Live.

While more respectable papers like the Post and the Times occupy the top rung of the fake news ladder, CNN has become the National Enquirer of Trump bashing. No story is too petty or fake to get airtime or site space. Recent examples that have gone viral include, “Is the President Afraid of Stairs” and “President Gets 2 Scoops of Ice Cream, Everyone Else 1.”

CNN’s fake news is constantly being shot down by the facts. But it just doubles down on its lies.

“We will not insult your intelligence by pretending it’s legitimate. Nor will we aid and abet the people trying to misinform you,” CNN’s Don Lemon had blustered when trying to suppress the Rice spying story.

CNN insults the intelligence of its viewers every minute that they watch it. It offers up a stream of misinformation while trying to suppress legitimate news. Much of this misinformation takes the form of spreading lefty fake news memes whether it’s rape as a preexisting condition or Republican beer.

And even when corrections appear, they exist only for the purpose of plausible deniability. The original fake news gets rolled into multiple news stories, blog posts and editorials that never get updated or corrected.

And even if they were to be, the damage would be done. That’s the way fake news works.

CNN and the Washington Post are throwing mud and assuming that some of it will stick. And even when it’s officially corrected, it still sticks around. Months later, the Post site still carries an uncorrected reference to the AP fake news story which claimed that Trump had threatened to invade Mexico even after it had been denied by both governments and had been pulled for being unverifiable.

It’s a safe bet that rape as a preexisting condition and Comey’s Russian resources will also stick around.

“Applying the fake news label is an attack on the truth. It’s reckless and corrosive to democracy, and elected officials attempt to deliberately and systematically erode the credibility of news organizations because they object to factually accurate reporting,” the CEO of the Washington Post insisted last month.

But it’s the media that is reckless and corrosive to democracy. It has eroded its credibility with fake news. Factually accurate reporting has become too difficult and unrewarding. The idea of waiting months or years for an investigation to pay off is alien to the nanosecond news cycle. That’s why every fake Trump scandal is the new Watergate. And fake news is constantly being manufactured.

News organizations are throwing away their credibility to reverse the results of a democratic election. And it’s not only their own credibility that they are throwing away. The marketplace of ideas was based on reason and objectivity. Without them, there was no longer a public square we could all live in.

Media bias began to corrupt the marketplace. But bias meant the selective reporting of facts. Falsehoods could creep in. But generally the media would not just casually run stories that were completely false. It would happen from time to time. But it wouldn’t be a constant practice.

And then a tipping point was reached.

Historians of journalism will argue over when the dam broke. Was it the age of Obama or of Trump? But the day arrived. The sun rose over the CNN Center in Atlanta, the K Street digs of the Washington Post and the offices of other media organizations. And it was no longer a question of selective reporting. We were no longer arguing about the injection of opinion into news stories or journalistic double standards.

The age of fake news had arrived. We no longer have a free press. All we have is a fake press.