Accuracy in Media

During a CNN-produced segment on December 10 called, “Does the truth matter for Trump supporters?,” co-anchor Alisyn Camerota tested this proposition with the help of a focus group of handpicked Trump supporters.

“Next topic. The truth, and Donald Trump’s relationship with the truth,” said Camerota before the break leading into the segment.

She then questioned those supporters’ responses to Donald Trump’s statement about having seen “thousands and thousands” of Muslims celebrating in Jersey City, New Jersey immediately after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Trump’s memory failed him this time: He clearly didn’t see “thousands and thousands” celebrating in New Jersey while watching television after those terror attacks. However, he did likely see reports, and some images, of people celebrating, both across the Middle East and in the New York and New Jersey areas.

In fact, The Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler, who fact-checked this claim, initially failed to find the Post’s own article from September 18, 2001, which reported that “authorities detained and questioned a number of people who were allegedly seen celebrating the attacks” and holding “tailgate-style parties” while viewing the “devastation.” It was found, instead, by Powerline blog. Of course, it becomes quickly apparent that some reports don’t actually cite exactly how many people were celebrating, which has allowed Kessler to repeatedly update his fact-check and maintain that there weren’t “thousands and thousands” of Muslims celebrating within the United States.

The “alleged” part is not whether some Muslims were “detained and questioned,” but whether or not they were seen “celebrating the attacks” on and after September 11. The local CBS New York City affiliate aired a segment back in 2001 referring to a “swarm” of people celebrating 9/11 on a rooftop in Jersey City, and saying that people were waiting and watching with binoculars as the planes crashed into the World Trade Center. Breitbart reported that with this and other reports of similar celebrations, Trump’s figure may not be so far off, and they argue that Trump is vindicated.

This observation is not to defend Trump, so much as to criticize the mainstream media’s decision to focus on Trump, a derangement syndrome that brings so much attention to Trump because it gets them ratings. They also likely hope they can be active participants in so dividing the Republican Party as to produce an independent run, either by Trump if he fails to win the Republican nomination, or by someone else if Trump wins the nomination. Trump, however, announced during Tuesday night’s debate on CNN that he won’t run as an independent if he fails to get the nomination.

So was this a big lie on Trump’s part, or a confused but largely accurate—except for the numbers—account of the actual response by some number of Muslims in New Jersey and elsewhere? Rudolph Giuliani, the then-mayor of New York City, said there were a number of arrests that were made in that city because of people celebrating the attacks, but that Trump was exaggerating.

But the real question is this: Why doesn’t CNN also do a segment asking, “Does the truth matter for Hillary Clinton supporters?” with a group of Hillary supporters, and ask about their thoughts on how Hillary’s statements match the truth?

Instead, on November 12 Camerota said that Mrs. Clinton’s claim that she wanted to join the Marines is “one of those anecdotes that a candidate kind of throws out and we often move on.” Kessler awarded Hillary’s suspect story only two Pinocchios. Kessler gave her four Pinocchios for one that he labeled as one of “The biggest Pinocchios of 2015.” That was her claim that “DOMA [the Defense of Marriage Act] had to be enacted to stop an anti-gay marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution” in 1996.

The investigation and questions into Mrs. Clinton truthfulness could go back a few years. Why not test American responses to Hillary’s claim about being named after Sir Edmund Hillary, who had not yet scaled Mt. Everest? He successfully reached Everest’s peak more than half a decade after Hillary was born.

Also, what about her false claim about coming under fire in Bosnia? Are those examples not enough to also pillory Hillary in the press?

Maybe not, but some of her more recent grand lies demand attention. Mrs. Clinton claimed at her October 22nd hearing before the Benghazi Select Committee that she did not see any of the 600 emails that came to the State Department from Libya, the ones which sought beefed up security.

Mrs. Clinton also claims that she didn’t tell the family members of the Benghazi victims that “We are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of your son,” though several maintain that she did.

Mrs. Clinton claims to have had no knowledge of the flow of arms to al Qaeda-related groups in Libya, although her own public emails contain an admonishment from a fellow State Department employee, Ann-Marie Slaughter, warning against providing arms to the Libyan rebels. This dishonest candidate also claimed that she never sent or received classified materials on her unauthorized private server, another statement that has been proven false, and confirmed again this week.

Mrs. Clinton has also been caught in another number of lies about how she had told her daughter, Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Kandil, and the President of Libya that she knew the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack perpetrated by an al-Qaeda related group. Yet she still conspired with President Obama and Susan Rice in claiming that a YouTube video critical of Islam sparked the 2012 Benghazi attacks.

A Quinnipiac Poll from a few months ago found that 61 percent of voters found her neither “honest” nor “trustworthy.” But the media don’t want to emphasize that.

The greed and dishonesty coming from the Clintons are unlike anything we have previously witnessed. Earlier this year the book Clinton Cash cited numerous conflicts of interest, such as the owner of Laureate Education, a George Soros backed company, receiving tens of millions of dollars from Hillary Clinton’s State Department through a non-profit he controlled, and, in turn, paying Bill Clinton more than $16 million, plus donating generously to the Clinton Foundation. The mainstream media, if possible, appear to be vetting Mrs. Clinton as inadequately as they did former presidential candidate Barack Obama. They turn a blind eye to these sorts of activities.

It’s clear that most of the media are determined to wreck the Republicans’ chances of winning the White House, at any cost. But the political winds are blowing in a conservative direction in many countries, such as France, Argentina and Venezuela. Already, as a backlash against Obama, the Republicans have made tremendous electoral gains since he was first elected in 2008. As The New York Times had to acknowledge last month, in addition to Republican control of both the U.S. Senate and House, “the president today presides over a shrinking party whose control of elected offices at the state and local levels has declined precipitously. In January, Republicans will occupy 32 of the nation’s governorships, 10 more than they did in 2009. Democratic losses in state legislatures under Mr. Obama rank among the worst in the last 115 years, with 816 Democratic lawmakers losing their jobs and Republican control of legislatures doubling since the president took office…”

If only CNN had the courage to examine both parties equally, instead of perpetuating its own Trump derangement syndrome while working to help elect a Democrat for president next year. Don’t count on it.



Comments

  • Austinniceguy

    The truth is that Hitlery’s supporters simply don’t care about the truth. All they focus on is what she’s going to do to give them free everything. She is a confirmed and documented liar and still, they follow her like a bunch of whipped puppies. Just this year alone she has promised free college tuition, tuition loan forgiveness, FREE high speed internet to EVERY home in the nation by 2020 and, a 350 BILLION dollar package for roads and bridges. The total for just those plans is well North of a trillion dollars and she claims she’ll just raise taxes and close loop holes to pay for it all. The morons just nod their delusional heads and smile. Here is the video she banned in 2008 because it would have damaged her campaign. It is an absolute MUST SEE!!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SblebuoNpmc

  • Steven Barrett

    Hillary had all her loyal soldiers lined up well before this campaign got rolling and Bernie Sanders even gave serious thought to finally tossing his hat in the ring. She had ’em in the press, the unions and elsewhere before the first vote was counted in November 2008. Clintons, always plotting, always. Hell, I’ll bet Chelsea’s thinking of what Mom n’ Dad might both have pulled off. Never underestimate this family. Never.

  • Ron

    Watching Megyn Kelly’s post-debate show on Fox last night, I observed yet another example of the Democrat mindset in this election. During a panel discussion a Democrat panel member (a former Obama deputy press secretary) opined with a smirk on his face that if Mrs. Clinton faced Donald Trump, Clinton would win “49 or 50 states.” I thought my head was going to explode! Have these people no shame, or are they just as delusional as their beloved POTUS? I know that there are a number of dark blue states in this country that will give their electoral support to Hillary no matter what she does, but I am stunned by the left’s belief that people in our nation’s bright red heartland will vote to put her in the White House. Hopefully, Director Comey will be allowed to do his job on the email investigation and this question will forever remain in the realm of a high school political science class discussion.

  • Maria-Erlinda Martinez

    No, it does not matter to them…and some even celebrate it.

    If hardcore-Left doctrinaire/ideologue militants at the ideological nucleus of the Democrat Party, they consciously adhere to lying and to be lied, for they see it beneficial to their cause: the progress of their journey toward Marxist socialism and toward Marxist communism or even toward Leninism of the Cultural Communist kind. E.g., Obama, most of the members of the Congressional “Progressive” Caucus, etc.

    If opportunistic scabs at the high hierarchical strata of the Democrat Party, they consciously adhere to lying and to be lied; it all is for the sake of lining their pockets with venal money…usually done through their spouses or through other relatives. E.g., Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, etc.

    If just mere useful fools at the foot-soldier level, they don’t have a clue, living in the land of the living dead. They are the bamboozled ones; they see no lies at all.

  • disqus_smWiOrvPtd

    John 8:44 KJV Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

    G. Edward Hunter’s interview with Norman Dodd, Wayne Hays betrays the Reese investigation. Years later Hays is caught in a sex scandal, proving his character. Yet, the tax free foundations continue unabated toward collectivism at the 50,000 ft level.

    https://youtu.be/YUYCBfmIcHM

  • LaTisha Jackson

    I hope everyone understands that all evil on Earth originates from a single source – the inferior, including kay-gee-bee, clin-tones, stalins, hitlers, communists, unions, chief executive agent, hollywood, democRATS…all of them, with NO EXCEPTION are inferior. DEATH TO THE INFERIOR.

  • Peter

    That’s the secret of climbing your Mt Everest of politics to the Presidency – lie your way to the top. That’s why she claims her name ‘omen linked’ to Sir Edmund Hillary. One small thing has escaped her though. Unlike Sir Edmund, she doesn’t have the balls to make it to the top and become America’s first female President. That takes a lady with balls. According to the late Joan Rivers: – maybe Michelle (Michael) Obama – perhaps? The first, ‘First Lady with balls’, has not told the litany of lies that Hillary has. Whereas hen Hillary hatches her lies – she a liar, the rooster Michelle lays his eggs – Himalaya.

  • Jackie Dukes-Strey

    That is true; however, I know several strong, professional, successful women who are more than willing to overlook the truth of Hillary, the danger she represents to the country & a litney of evils because she’s so strong on “women’s issues!” I find it so hard to believe that supposedly intelligent people could zero in on one trait at the expense of our nation, but that’s how it goes. And, always remember the “yellow dog Democrats” who would vote for the old yellow dog in the street before voting for ANY Republican no matter the cost to America.

  • cbj

    Poor Hilary, she was temporarily shot at and had to temporarily run for cover when her plane landed in Bosnia. I say temporarily because it was all a lie that she passed off as, “I miss-spoke.”

  • Otha45

    Your right, it does not matter to them. All they care about is the progress of their march to socialism. Lying, cheating, voter fraud, are nothing to them. They have no morels, no right or wrong. The end justifies the means. Their is nothing, I mean nothing, they won’t do to get the Hilabeast in the white house.

  • IAEH

    besides being the biggest liat ever to runfor president, she is also very mean spirited, calling her secrety service detail, the military guards pigs, and in poor mental health (stroke).
    Not a good candidate at all.

  • IAEH

    i know several women who would have voted for her 8 years ago, but definitely wont now, after all her lies and scandals, especially Benghazi. That was just too much.