ABC, CBS and NBC have joined CNN in refusing to air an advertisement that lists President Donald Trump’s accomplishments during his administration’s first 100 days while blaming the “fake news” media for not reporting on them.
A “fake news” graphic superimposed over the faces of news anchors was cited by CNN, ABC and NBC for not airing the ad. The networks contend that makes it inaccurate, and ABC said it represents a personal attack. CBS would not comment Friday on its reasons for the rejection.
The journalists whose faces are seen in the commercial are Andrea Mitchell of NBC, Wolf Blitzer of CNN, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, Scott Pelley of CBS and George Stephanopoulos of ABC.
“Apparently, the mainstream media are champions of the First Amendment only when it serves their own political views,” said Lara Trump, a daughter-in-law of the president who serves as a consultant to the Trump campaign. Already up and running for 2020, the campaign has used the refusal in fundraising pleas to potential donors.The campaign also submitted a list of examples for each network of what it contended were falsehoods by their anchors and reporters, according to a person with access to the documents. The person was not authorized to discuss the material by name and requested anonymity.
Some of the examples were more about how news was presented than about facts: Sean Hannity’s complaint about CBS’ editing of his “60 Minutes” interview and criticism of how Maddow reported on a Trump tax document.
The ad has run on Fox News Channel and the Fox Business Network. The Trump campaign did not seek ad time on the Fox broadcast network, which doesn’t have a regular newscast.
The Staff: Typical Liberal lying news, BOYCOTT ALL
You can believe whomever you choose in the alleged sexual-misconduct cases of Joe Biden and Brett Kavanaugh, but you can’t revise history to erase your partisan double standards.
One of the most egregious examples of revisionism can be found in a column by the New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg, who employs nearly every attack Americans were warned never to use against alleged sexual-assault victims during the Kavanaugh hearings — questioning their motivations, asking why they didn’t file charges, attacking them for not remembering specifics, etc. And yet, even if we adopt Goldberg’s new standards, Tara Reade still emerges as a more credible accuser than Christine Blasey Ford.
For starters, Ford was unable to offer a time or place or a single contemporaneous corroborating witness. Ford offered no evidence that she even knew Kavanaugh. Reade worked for Joe Biden. Reade has offered a specific time and place for the attack.
Goldberg contends that Ford’s case against Kavanaugh was bolstered by “four sworn affidavits” from witnesses whom she’d told that she’d been assaulted.
This is an especially misleading comparison since the charges against Kavanaugh, unlike the ones against Biden, were investigated by the FBI. The question is how many “affidavits” would there be in support of Reade’s allegations if there were an official inquiry into her claims — and one conducted by the authorities, not an “unbiased, apolitical panel, put together by the D.N.C.,” as Goldberg’s newspaper desires?
There are already reportedly at least four people on the recordwho maintain Reade told them about the Biden incident, including her mother, who reportedly called in to “Larry King Live” in 1993, right after the alleged sexual assault took place, looking for advice; her neighbor, who claims that Reade told her about the assault a few years after it happened; and a friend, who says that Reade told her about the assault in 2007 or 2008.
Every witness that Ford claimed had been at the suburban Maryland party where Kavanaugh allegedly attacked her had no recollection of the assault or even the gathering where it supposedly happened. This group included Ford’s longtime friend Leland Keyser.
If Goldberg’s standard of credibility is measured by the number of “sworn affidavits” in existence, then she should be calling for an investigation into Reade’s story so that the two allegations can be subjected to the same level of scrutiny.
Another reason Ford is a more credible accuser than Reade, argues Goldberg, is that the latter’s story has changed. Goldberg even insinuates that Reade’s neighbor might be lying because she has trouble recalling if Reade relayed the story to her in 1995 or 1996.
That’s another new and convenient standard. It should be mentioned that during the Kavanaugh hearings we were told that it’s normal for victims not to recall every detail about these unconscionable attacks — which makes a lot of sense.
Unlike Ford’s story, which had evolved — changing places, years, seasons, and the number of attackers — Reade’s story has hardly budged, other than in regards to some hazy recollections about when or how she filed a report about Biden. Then again, if having a consistent story is the new measurement of credibility, Reade is at least as reliable as Ford.
Another reason to doubt Reade’s allegations, contendsNew York magazine’s Jonathan Chait, is that she coordinated “her statements with Bernie Sanders supporters to maximize their political impact.” Others, such as NeverTrumper Charlie Sykes, have insinuated even uglier conspiracies to discredit Reade, pointing out that she once deleted a pro-Putin tweet. Apparently Reade has been working the long con for the Russians since 1993. (Ford, incidentally, deleted her entire social-media history before making her accusations public.)
Unlike Reade, Ford didn’t mention the alleged assault to anyone for around 25 years, until Kavanaugh’s name began appearing in the media as a prospective Supreme Court justice in 2012, and even then, it seems she only specifically cited the judge’s name after Donald Trump nominated him. If you want to maximize political impact, coming forward during a contentious Supreme Court nomination hearing after three decades of silence probably qualifies.
Both Goldberg and Chait also note that Ford’s therapist’s notes corroborate her claims. The notes do not exactly bolster her credibility, though. For one thing, Ford refused to turn over those notes to Senate Judiciary Committee investigators, instead handing snippets to a favorable reporter at the Washington Post. As far as we know, those notes conflict with her testimony regarding the number of attackers and the year. Moreover, why do therapist’s notes from 2012 speak to the credibility of an alleged victim more than a 1993 call from a mother?
It’s not a mystery why liberals want Ford to seem more credible. At first the media completely ignored Reade’s allegations. But once reporters began responsibly reporting the story — a professionalism that wasn’t afforded to Kavanaugh — the same liberals who had demanded we “believe all women” began flailing to rewrite history.
In USA Today, Kirsten Powers argued that “there is no ‘double standard’ in the way Kavanaugh was treated vs. Biden,” because Democrats had merely called for the accusations to be investigated. That, too, is revisionism. Almost everyDemocratic senator had called for Trump to withdraw the nomination over the assault charges — many of those calls, in fact, were based on even flimsier accusations, recklessly spread by the press and politicians.
It’s possible that Reade’s credibility would suffer, as did Ford’s, if an investigation took a deeper look. Yet, none of the Democrats who dispensed with due process and embraced Ford’s accusations have shown the slightest interest in speaking with Reade. They’ve simply adopted new guidelines for “believing women” and left liberal pundits with the job of justifying their actions — which they dutifully do.
Of course, none of the above is dispositive or unequivocal evidence of sexual assault on its own. We can never really know. But the notion that Ford is a more credible accuser than Reade doesn’t stand up to even the most basic examination. It’s just a flimsy excuse for hypocrisy.
House Democrats, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) are “forging ahead” with plans for a fourth coronavirus relief package, even though Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said the Senate will not entertain any spending bills until they can be sure the multi-trillion handouts won’t topple the precarious American economy.
The CARES Act 4, as it’s being called, definitely seems as if it will run afoul of McConnell’s requirements.
Politico reportsthat Democrats have decided to “go it alone” on the package, drafting the measure without Republican input and without Republican consent, even though House Democrats have yet to officially return from April recess. Pelosi and House majority leader Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) have called time on Democrats’ return, they say, over fears that the mostly elderly caucus would be at risk for contracting and spreading the coronavirus.
While they’re working from, though, key Democratic legislators are to compile “wish lists” and submit them to Pelosi who, Politico says, will compile them into a final document to be presented with Congress finally reconvenes.
“Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked her chairmen to submit their drafts for ‘CARES 2’ before the close of business yesterday, with the goal of releasing a sweeping proposal by Friday that could be ready for a floor vote as soon as next week,” the outlet noted.
And Pelosi doesn’t want small asks: “‘Think big,’ Pelosi instructed lawmakers on a Democratic caucus call.'”
McConnell is poised to refuse to bring a massive spending bill to the floor, but Pelosi seems to believe that, if Democrats compile a “policy Wishlist,” they can use the bloated draft to negotiate down to a suitable bill. For her part, she’s reportedly including items from her March “CARES Act 3” proposal, which sidelined that relief bill for days as Senate Republicans and Democrats, who’d previously agreed on a relief package, argued over Pelosi’s minutae.
Included there, and potentially in the CARES 4 bill, was a bailout of the United States Post Office, and major handouts to state and local governments. The latter, at least, is expected to be a major point of contention between Democrats and Republicans in the next round of negotiations, particularly as states like Illinois seek bailouts for financial troubles that long predate coronavirus lockdowns.
McConnell has already said he’d favor allowing states to declare bankruptcy before he’d allow taxpayer money, designed to help states and municipalities handle coronavirus-specific issues, to go to pay off unfunded pension liabilities and budget shortfalls.
Republicans, meanwhile, told Politico that any new relief package must include liability restrictions — something Democrats say they won’t support — and a payroll tax cut, which neither party wanted included in previous relief packages. The White House has been the main proponent of the payroll tax cut, which they say would help businesses, shut down by coronavirus lockdowns, make a quicker return to profitability.
The Staff: This trash of a speaker is trying to tell We the People to go to hell and she will piss our money away on whatever this trash women wants and we can't stop it. I am sick to death of this spending while she eats her f-ing Ice Cream. Maybe she will choke on it. We can only hope the Senate has some balls and says NO to her wasteful spending.
Remember the millions that went to the F-ing KENNEDY CENTER. How did that help anyone?
Kilmeade grumbled about the closures, which Newsom ordered after tens of thousands of people flocked to the seashore last weekend.
“To go ahead and say, ‘I’m closing the beaches. I didn’t like the way you acted last week,’ when most of that state is perfectly fine, just some congested areas aren’t, this is the foundation for an overreach,” Kilmeade said.
Earhardt was more sympathetic to the governor’s plight, arguing that his main job at this point is flattening the curve and minimizing deaths.
“The governors have to make tough decisions, because they don’t want a relapse in all of this. That wouldn’t make them look good,” she added. “Their residents would be dying!”
Earhardt then tried to put a personal spin on the issue by revealing that her mother is very sick and at high risk should she contract the coronavirus.
“My mom is very sick,” Earhardt said. “And as much as I want to go out, ... I still want everyone to play by the rules, because when I finally do get to go home to visit her … ”
Kilmeade then interrupted her. “But is your mom going to the beach?” he asked.
Earhardt didn’t look impressed one bit, but gamely attempted to explain her situation in terms he might ― fingers crossed ― comprehend.
“No, but Brian, you know, eventually she’s going to be around family again,” Earhardt said. “I understand both sides, I really do. I just don’t want a resurgence of this. You know, I just don’t want us to go through all of this. It’s been — it’s been hard for everyone at different levels.”
The Staff: I saw this and Brian should have ceased, Bush League Brian.
What are you hiding creepy Joe? More items you hide the worse it will get. Your a lightweight and with your metal problems it is damn scary you could EVER be in charge. Sorry for saying that as you would only be an empty puppet and someone else would be in control. You no longer have the ability to lead and not sure you ever did. We all would like to review your past 40 year senate record but that scares the hell out of you because you can't remember what you said such as telling a man in a wheelchair to stand up. What an ass you made of yourself then and many other times. Your time has come and gone Joe and whoever is on the ticket with you would end up becoming the President. People need to remember that should more than a few people really vote for you.
China's military has said it "expelled" a U.S. navy vessel from the hotly contested waters of the South China Sea this week. It said the "USS Barry" had illegally entered China's Xisha territorial waters on Tuesday.
China's Southern Theater army command "organized sea and air forces to track, monitor, verify, and identify the U.S. ships throughout the journey, and warned and expelled them," said Chinese military spokesperson Li Huamin, in a statement.
"The provocative actions of the United States seriously violated relevant international law norms, seriously violated China's sovereignty and security interests, artificially increased regional security risks, and were prone to cause unexpected incidents," he said.
NBC News reached out to American officials who were not immediately available for comment overnight.
The South China Sea is a potentially energy-rich stretch of water and home to more than 200 specks of land. It serves as a gateway to global sea routes where approximately $3.4 trillion of trade passes annually.
The numerous overlapping sovereign claims to islands, reefs and rocks — many of which disappear under high tide — have turned the waters into a zone of competing diplomatic interests, embroiling neighbors. Beijing holds the lion's share of these features with approximately 27 outposts peppered throughout.
WATCH THE LIAR
Tension has been simmering in the South China Sea, of late, particularly between China and its Asian seafaring neighbors Malaysia and the Philippines.
This month Vietnam also lodged an official protest with China, following the sinking of a Vietnamese fishing boat it said had been rammed by a Chinese maritime surveillance vessel near the Paracel Islands, in the South China Sea. China denied the claims and said the Vietnamese boat had illegally entered the area to fish and refused to leave.
Earlier this month, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told his Southeast Asian counterparts that China was taking advantage of the world’s preoccupation with the coronavirus pandemic to push its territorial ambitions in the South China Sea.
"Beijing has moved to take advantage of the distraction, from China’s new unilateral announcement of administrative districts over disputed islands ... its sinking of a Vietnamese fishing vessel earlier this month, and its ‘research stations’ on Fiery Cross Reef and Subi Reef," Pompeo said in a video meeting with the foreign ministers of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) on April 23.
Pompeo also accused China of deploying militarized ships to intimidate other claimant countries from developing offshore gas and oil projects in the region.
Last week, the U.S. Navy said it had partnered with the Australian navy for operations in the South China Sea, which began April 13.
"To bring this much combat capability together here in the South China Sea truly signals to our allies and partners in the region that we are deeply committed to a free and open Indo-Pacific," said Rear Adm. Fred Kacher, commander of the America Expeditionary Strike Group, in a statement.
The U.S. 7th Fleet is the U.S. Navy’s largest numbered fleet and routinely conducts operations in the Indo-Pacific area. It has said that all of its interactions during freedom of navigation movements have been in accordance with international norms.
The U.S. Navy has previously stated that sweeping maritime claims in the South China Sea posed a serious threat to freedom of the seas and the right of innocent passage of all ships.
Image: RRoyal Australian Navy helicopter frigate HMAS Parramatta (top right) conducts officer of the watch manoeuvres with amphibious assault ship USS America, guided-missile destroyer USS Barry and guided-missile cruiser USS Bunker (Australia Department Of Defence / Reuters)
China has maintained that it has historical sovereign rights in the South China Sea, which neighboring countries have disputed. In this latest interaction, China said the U.S. was not acting "in line" with the wishes of other countries in the region, which want to "maintain peace and stability in that area."
Spokesperson Li also urged the U.S. to instead focus on its national COVID-19 crisis.
"We urge the United States to focus on the prevention and control of its national epidemic situation, do more useful things for international anti-epidemic efforts, and immediately stop military operations that are not conducive to regional security, peace and stability," he said.
The coronavirus pandemic has been a growing source of tension between the world's two largest economies, with both Washington D.C. and Beijing heaping criticism on each others' handling of the outbreak.
Li added that Chinese forces would continue to "resolutely perform their duties" in the South China Sea to "firmly maintain peace and stability."
The Staff: This is to all RED CHINA LEADERS, "PISS OFF" McArthur should have finished you off and you allowed a Plague to infect most countries and then lied through you teeth about it. The world community needs "BOYCOTT RED CHINA" as they have shown the entire world what they think of everyone else. Now we will see if talk is cheap from other leaders whop kiss China Ass.
American Bridge is a pro-Biden research group and super-PAC. In 2018, the organization accepted a donation of stock in the Chinese internet giant Baidu worth 100 000 dollars. Baidu is Google’s main competitor in the Chinese market and provides many of the same services, such as its flagship search engine. Naturally, like Google, Baidu is deeply involved in collecting, analyzing and selling its users’ private data. The difference is that Baidu has close ties to the Chinese Communist Party and operates mainly in a market characterized as a communist police state where individual rights and privacy mean nothing.
Given its ties to the state, Baidu is deeply involved in controlling and restricting the flow of information in China. All businesses in China, like the state apparatus itself, are subordinated to the Chinese Communist Party hierarchy. no organization of any description is allowed to exist in China without direct Communist Party oversight.
China-funded PAC to become main backer of the Biden campaign
America Bridge’s PAC recently joined forces with another pro-Biden super PAC, Unite the Country, to spend 175 million dollars to get Joe Biden elected in November. The alliance aims to be the largest independent backer for the Biden campaign. They have set up a ‘dark money group’ that could see tens of millions of dollars in additional funding supporting Joe Biden.
The Chinese Communist Party has made its preference for Biden over Trump crystal clear. Biden’s ties to the Chinese state go back decades. Joe Biden was responsible for pushing through China’s entrance to the World Trade Organization despite concerns about China’s flaunting of international law. Biden’s son Hunter joined his father on a state visit to China in which he cut a multi-billion investment deal for a firm on the board of which he sits.
President Trump has recently commented that China will do anything they can to keep him from getting re-elected. Trump has placed heavy pressure on China in the field of trade and over China’s origination and handling of the COVID-19 crisis. Recently, Trump announced that he would make China pay for the impact that COVID-19 has had on America and its economy. China is one of the world’s top holders of US sovereign debt. The US government could decide to deduct a certain amount from that debt as compensation for COVID-19.
The difference in positions on China between Trump and Biden illustrates a broader rift among American decision-makers over which is the greater threat to American interests, Russia or China. China is home to nearly a quarter of the world’s population. China’s military has less advanced technology than Russia’s, but China’s economy is nearly the size of America’s. Russia’s economy is similar in size to that of New York State or South Korea.
The Staff: If accurate, we can call Sleepy Joe, Dirty RED Joe instead. Don't forget what his son did with Red China, made millions for a fund while having ZERO experience running one.
