#TBT: Congressman @TGowdySC owns media on questions surrounding #Benghazi (VIDEO)

Congressman Trey Gowdy

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-SC-4
Photo by Chris Maddaloni/CQ Roll Call

In honor of Throwback Thursday, I present to you this awesome video of Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-SC-4) – recently named Chair of a new select committee on Benghazi – taking the media to task (presumably) last October for their failure to ask important questions of the President and his administration on the Benghazi issue. My friend @KatMcKinley, from who I saw this video on Facebook, sets it up:

This is epic. Watch at the end when Trey Gowdy asks the media questions. Such a grand takedown that I hope all media there slithered away in shame. If you watch nothing else today, watch this. He basically drops the mic at the end. My respect for him just tripled.

I think yours will, too, after you watch it:

Doubly cool is the fact that Gowdy is ignoring recent reported threats against him and is pressing on for answers:

While appearing on Fox News Wednesday, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., laughed off a death threat he received after being tapped to head a select committee on the Benghazi terror attack, Newsmax reported. He also told Megyn Kelly he intends to subpoena former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

As we reported Tuesday, Politico said journalists had received emails saying harm would come to Gowdy over the Benghazi investigation. Capitol Police did not provide any details, but said “an active, open investigation” is underway.

“I was a prosecutor for 16 years. This is not my first death threat,” he said. “I’m always happy when it doesn’t come from my wife, and this one did not. So, I’m going to be fine, and it’s not going to keep me from doing my job.”

I really like this guy.

Oregon GOP Senate candidate catches editorial board disrespecting fellow candidate


And no surprise it’s a left-leaning newspaper’s editorial board.  Via Fox News:

A Republican Senate candidate was kicked out of a local Oregon newspaper’s editorial board meeting after daring to challenge a reporter who dissed a fellow candidate by writing “blah blah blah” in his notes instead of her actual quotes.

The entire argument was captured on video and posted online by the newspaper, Willamette Week.

The Republican candidate, Mark Callahan, told Fox News that the newspaper was on a “power trip.”

“It’s a fairly liberal paper. And they were basically trying to manhandle us Republicans,” Callahan said Sunday. “They were very condescending, very controlling.”

The video shows an editorial board meeting where the newspaper was interviewing Republican candidates for Senate. One of those candidates, Jo Rae Perkins, was responding to a question over the phone when Callahan noticed something was amiss.

“You want to talk about disrespect, I see what you’re writing down there,” he said, pointing at a reporter at the table. “You just wrote down ‘blah blah blah blah blah’ for everything that Jo Rae said. Jo Rae is a respectable woman. Why are you not respecting her by writing ‘blah blah blah blah blah’ on your notepad?”

The moderator tried to get Callahan to “move on” and answer a question about whether climate change is a “myth or a reality.”

Callahan said “myth.”

Then, the same reporter, later identified by the newspaper as Nigel Jaquiss, asked him a follow-up: “Where are you on the Easter Bunny?”

“What’s that?” Callahan said, and the reporter repeated the question.

The interview really went downhill from there.

Make sure to read the whole thing.  The paper acknowledged that Jaquiss wrote “blah blah blah” for an “answer” to one of Perkins’ questions, but they said it was because she wasn’t answering the question they asked.    I’m guessing they weren’t asked about his “Easter bunny” question, which to me was equally disrespectful.

I’m not saying the paper shouldn’t have been trying to get the candidates to focus on the actual questions, but Jaquiss’ lack of professionalism was unacceptable – and for the paper to try and justify his behavior by blaming it all on the candidates just shows how seriously you should take the editorial board. Which is to say … not at all.

Hot Air’s Jazz Shaw adds:

I’ve had to sit through a few of these over the years with candidates and they can be really infuriating events, but even in New York I’ve never run into one quite this bad. But we can’t let that discourage people from running for office. All we can do is return to the age old question which really spawned the evolution of modern blogging in the first place…

Why, oh why, can’t we have a decent media?

Why indeed?

(Hat tip: Memeorandum)

The anti-Southern bigotry of @NPR

**Posted by Phineas

Chattanooga VW workers, per MSNBC

A handful of Southern Democrats, per NPR

Jonah Goldberg listened to an NPR story about the defeat in the Senate of radical Leftist lawyer Debo Adegbile to head the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. Per NPR, a “handful of Southern Democrats” (1) voted with the Republicans to defeat Adegbile. Here’s the roster:

  • Chris Coons (Del.)
  • Bob Casey (Pa.)
  • Mark Pryor (Ark.)
  • Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.)
  • Joe Manchin (W.V.)
  • Joe Donnelly (Ind.)
  • John Walsh (Mont.)
  • Harry Reid (NV)

Apparently I’m not as knowledgeable about US History as I thought; I completely missed Pennsylvania and Indiana joining the Confederacy, and I didn’t realize the South butted up against Canada.

NPR: “National Public Reactionaries.”

(1) Hint to the Morning Edition producers —  Jim Crow ended a long time ago.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

CNN decides to dump @PiersMorgan

Piers Morgan

Will a spot on MSNBC be in Piers Morgan’s future?

The Politico reports that after three years of disappointing ratings, CNN has decided to give the Piers Morgan show the boot (via):

CNN President Jeff Zucker has decided to bring an end to Piers Morgan’s low-rated primetime show, network sources told POLITICO on Sunday. “Piers Morgan Live” could end as early as next month, though Morgan may stay with the network in another role.

Morgan, a former British tabloid editor, replaced Larry King in the 9 p.m. hour three years ago, prior to Zucker’s tenure as president. His show earned consistently low ratings, registering as few as 50,000 viewers in the 25-to-54 year-old demographic earlier this week.

“CNN confirms that Piers Morgan Live is ending,” Allison Gollust, head of CNN communications, told POLITICO on Sunday after an earlier version of this post was published. “The date of the final program is still to be determined.”

Earlier on Sunday, Morgan told The New York Times that the show had “run its course” and that he and Zucker “have been talking for some time about different ways of using me.” Sources who spoke to POLITICO said the decision to end the show was Zucker’s.

Zucker took the helm at CNN at the beginning of 2013 and has since brought incremental change to the network, including revitalized news programs and a new emphasis on films and documentary shows. Primetime remains the one area where Zucker has yet to impliment substantive change, a new 10 p.m. roundtable program with Anderson Cooper notwithstanding.

In October, Zucker hired Nightline anchor Bill Weir from ABC News, raising speculation that Weir might replace Morgan in the nine o’clock hour. CNN sources denied those reports at the time.

It’ll be interesting to see what CNN does with that slot after Morgan departs the network.

As to Morgan himself, while I certainly don’t advocate someone losing their jobs, Morgan has been a frequent mocker of the ratings of other TV shows in spite of the fact that his were consistently low.  To say the guy’s lack of self awareness was strong would be the understatement of the week.  I suspect Morgan was often a frequent embarrassment for the network, as he would have guests on frequently to talk about gun rights (his pet issue) and the Constitution and they usually ended up pretty much destroying his arguments with ease.

I look for Morgan to be offered a spot on MSNBC somewhere, somehow in the near future – considering they’ve all but declared themselves the “liberal” alternative to Fox News (which, in turn, hasn’t helped their ratings one iota). Something tells me the network would be perfect for Morgan and his ultra left wing views on gun rights and that pesky little thing called the Constitution.

As they say, stay tuned.

#NCPOL: USA Today issues big #MoralMarch story correction after ST inquiry

NC NAACP President / Rev. William Barber

NC NAACP President / Rev. William Barber, NC’s version of Al Sharpton.

Last week, I wrote to you about Moral Mondays and the prominent, opportunistic liberal demagogue behind the movement – Reverend William Barber, the President of the NC chapter of NAACP and NC’s version of Al Sharpton. There was a big march that took place this past Saturday called “Moral March”, an extension of the Moral Monday movement, and which saw liberal activists from around the state and bused in from out of state join Barber in a “call to arms” of sorts to rail against the state GOP for “racism, sexism”, etc. You know, the usual progressive “complaints” about the right.

The supposed ‘big news’ to come out of the march was that “80,000 to 100,000” people were in attendance at the Raleigh rally, a number which – if accurate – would have allegedly made it the biggest civil rights march since Selma according to the left, a bragging point Barber and his devotees would love to be able to credibly use in order to help raise more money for future events and to, of course, rally the faithful. However, anyone who knows anything at all about Raleigh could look at the pictures and see there was no where near close to that amount of people there, even though the crowd was indeed a large size.

What was the source of the 80-100K number? Originally, the NC NAACP tweeted this number out, and – according to conservative talk show host David Webb, who was at the event and tried to talk to Barber – it was given also given out in a speech Rev. Barber himself made to attendees of the march. Not long after that tweet, USA Today writer Jon Ostendorff – who also writes for the Asheville [NC] Citizen-Times – tweeted out that “Organizers” said there were that many at the march. Two hours later, in a piece he wrote on the march for USA Today, he used the number without attribution:

Rev. William Barber II made the promise before a crowd of between 80,000 and 100,000 people during the Moral March on Raleigh.

If he got that number from the NC NAACP’s tweet, Barber, or someone else affiliated, I don’t know because not only did he not note it in his report – which led readers to believe that the count was “official”, but he didn’t respond to repeated requests for clarification. After failing to get a response from one USA Today editor, I went to USA Today’s site on Tuesday and found the email and contact information for the standards editor and emailed and tweeted him. This time, I got a response:

The next day, a correction was issued, in huge letters, at the top of the story:

Corrections and clarifications: An earlier version of this story should have attributed the crowd estimate to the Rev. William Barber II, president of North Carolina’s NAACP. The Raleigh Police Department has declined to provide an estimated number of march participants.

Questions, however, remain – not from USA Today but from local news outlets like Raleigh-Durham’s WTVD, whose Moral March coverage included this odd tidbit:

Rev. Barber expected up to 25,000 people from the Triangle and bused in from all over the state. Yet, NC NAACP logistics expert estimates between 80,000 and 100,000 people attended Saturday’s march. Last year the numbers were between 17,000 and 20,000.

“Logistics expert”? Really? I’d be interested in finding out who that “logistics expert” in the NC NAACP was. Was it Barber? I suspect WTVD wouldn’t be too keen on giving out the answer, seeing as they didn’t source the number to begin with beyond stating it came from a “logistics expert” within the NC NAACP. But it might be worth trying to contact them to find out. Whether they would answer is another matter, considering how sympathetic they and other local media outlets appear to be with Democrats and their left wing allies in NC.

In any event, a big thank you to standards editor Brent Jones for promptly addressing the issue and having the correction posted where readers wouldn’t be able to help but see it. As a daily reader of the USA Today’s online edition, it’s comforting to know that they’re willing to at least review correction requests if not act on them later. Now if we could just get the “progressive” sites that gleefully ran with the 80-100k number – insinuating it was an official estimate – to do the same …

(Via @NCPlottHound)

NBC journo: Story of severely wounded veteran at #SOTU “could apply to Obama”

Obama's media cheerleaders

”2, 4, 6, 8 – who do we appreciate?!”

Banging my head up against the wall this morning already. NBC News’ senior political editor Mark Murray tweeted this this morning about Army Ranger Cory Remsburg, the severely wounded veteran/hero President Obama introduced to America in last night’s State of the Union (via @Matthops82):

And just in case you’re thinking 140 characters can’t possibly sum up Murray’s hero-worshippy position on Obama, think again (bolded emphasis added by me):

*** “America has never come easy”: Last night’s speech also ended on an emotional — and upbeat — note when Obama recognized Army Ranger Cory Remsburg, who was almost killed in Afghanistan and continues to recuperate from a brain injury. “My fellow Americans, men and women like Cory remind us that America has never come easy,” the president said. “Our freedom, our democracy, has never been easy. Sometimes we stumble, we make mistakes; we get frustrated or discouraged. But for more than 200 years, we have put those things aside and placed our collective shoulder to the wheel of progress.” That story could also apply to Obama himself: Nothing in his seven years on the national political stage (2007-2014) has come easy. The 2008 race for the Democratic nomination. Even that general election. The health-care law. The re-election campaign. And now the president’s current situation in which he finds himself bloodied and bruised after the botched health-care rollout. Perseverance is an important quality for any president. Bill Clinton was usually able to talk his way out of sticky situations. But Obama’s M.O. is to grind it out. That, more than anything else, was the message he wanted to send last night — both he and the country are grinding it out.

Transition: Cut Dear Leader some slack, you guys! He’s putting himself on the out there on the political battlefield, taking all those bruising and bloody political risks, all for you!

MSNBC’s “Lean Forward” motto has somehow never seemed quite so fitting … until now. SMH …

Journo QOTD: “This is the most secretive WH I have ever dealt with”

Obama's media cheerleaders

”2, 4, 6, 8 – who do we appreciate?!”
… in spite of the secrecy.

Alert the media! Oh, wait, this gal IS part of the mainstream media (hat tip):

New York Times Executive Editor Jill Abramson says that President Obama’s White House is the “most secretive White House” that she’s covered during her long tenure as a political journalist.

“I would say it is the most secretive White House that I have ever been involved in covering, and that includes — I spent 22 years of my career in Washington and covered presidents from President Reagan on up through now, and I was Washington bureau chief of the Times during George W. Bush’s first term,” Abramson told Al Jazeera America in an interview that will air on Sunday.

“I dealt directly with the Bush White House when they had concerns that stories we were about to run put the national security under threat. But, you know, they were not pursuing criminal leak investigations,” she continued. “The Obama administration has had seven criminal leak investigations. That is more than twice the number of any previous administration in our history. It’s on a scale never seen before. This is the most secretive White House that, at least as a journalist, I have ever dealt with.”

Now, keep in mind that the NYT will still coddle the hell out of the administration.  What they’re doing here is saying, essentially:  “Hey, y’all, would you cut us some slack please?”  ObamaCo won’t, to be sure, and also to be sure, the NYT will move on from this, continuing to comment only in the abstract while still by and large promoting the agenda of the Obama administration both on their editorial pages and in their straight reporting.

Just callin’ it like it is. :)

Selective Outrage: #NCPOL media plays favorites on Nazi comparisons

Raleigh-area media

Selective outrage alert.

Two elected officials make ridiculous comparisons between Nazism and modern day policy. One is a Democrat. The other is a Republican. The media, predictably, focuses on the Republican.

Stop me if you’ve heard this one before.

Well, no, don’t, because we have another instance of this routine double standard to talk about – and it happened right here in NC, courtesy of the usual suspects in the Raleigh-area mainstream media who, to put it charitably, lean left (as I’ve written about previously). Frankly, so does much of the media in the rest of the state, but the heaviest concentration is in our state capitol.

Anyway, over the weekend State Senator Bob Rucho (R) posted the following tweet:


As you might have guessed, this generated a lot of outrage across the political spectrum here in NC, and – naturally – beyond our borders, as the story also went national (surprise!). State and national journos, politicos, pundits, activists, etc all called on Rucho to apologize for the tweet, to explain himself, etc – some have even called for Rucho, an elected official, to resign, especially seeing as he won’t back down from nor apologize for it, claiming it was ‘misinterpreted.’ Whatever the case may be, the standard rule of thumb in politics is Godwin’s Law: First one who makes Nazi/Hitler comparisons automatically loses the argument, and Rucho clearly broke Godwin’s Law here and desperate Democrats in this state – including their bored media allies – jumped all over the tweet, and even played the “Six Degrees to Kevin Bacon” game by tying as many politicians to Rucho as they could, including NC Governor Pat McCrory as well. The McClatchy-owned liberals at the Charlotte Observer, unsurprisingly, led the way in this tactic. Editor Taylor Batten tweeted:


Rucho – who is not well-liked by the media here anyway – likely will continue to stand by his remarks, while local media types, analysts, politicos will still marvel over the fact that Rucho won’t retract them. With the massive outrage over Rucho’s tweet – his same-day explanation at his Twitter account didn’t make things any better – you’d think the North Carolina media (not to mention state Democrats) would have a standing rule that anyone making such types of inflammatory remarks be immediately rebuked, with apologies demanded. But – and I know you knew this was coming – here in NC, that is simply not the case.

Flashback to September 2011. Then NC State Senator Doug Berger (D) didn’t just take to Twitter to express his opinion on an issue with which he disagreed with Republicans, he stood on the floor of the NC Senate for SIX MINUTES, comparing the North Carolina Republican Party to … Nazi Germany and Hitler. Why? Because the elected Republicans were pushing to put Amendment One, the amendment that effectively banned alternative forms of marriage in NC, on the ballot the following May:

Democratic North Carolina state Senator speaks very passionately and thoughtfully about the vote the North Carolina state Senate took Wednesday that will un-constitutionally allow voters to decide whether or not to write a ban on same-sex marriage directly into the state constitution. North Carolina already has a law on the books banning gay marriage. North Carolina Senator Doug Berger spoke for over six minutes, explaining his Jewish heritage, and detailing Hitler’s rise to power, and closed with the famous poem, “First They Came,” attributed to pastor Martin Niemöller.

“Some of you might not realize that Adolf Hitler came to power through the ballot box,” Senstor Berger said. “And even though he was elected by the people, he was able to use the instruments of government to take away the rights of individuals. And it wasn’t simply communists, it wasn’t simply socialists, it wasn’t simply trade unions, it wasn’t simply Jehovah witnesses, it wasn’t simply Jews. One of the target groups that the Nazi regime went after were gay people. In fact, if you were gay, you were required to wear a pink triangle, to signify that you were a member of that despised group.”

“I believe if we pass this motion to concur, we are essentially putting a pink triangle into our state constitution,” he added.

Audio of his comments:

Whatever people thought of Amendment One, which was very controversial here at the time (currently now playing out in court) – dividing Republicans and Democrats alike (it eventually passed in May 2012) – the comparison Berger (not to be confused with current NC State Senator Phil Berger – a Republican and Senate Leader) made was disgusting and reprehensible …. and got little to no coverage nor outrage from the local media and the other usual suspects who would have been screaming at the top of their lungs for days had it been a Republican who said that.

Let’s recap: Rucho’s comments were posted on Twitter. Berger made his on the floor of the state senate. Both should have been called to the carpet, but only one was. Did Observer editor Taylor Batten make any judgment calls as to what state Democrats and their muted outrage and condemnation regarding Doug Berger’s remarks said about their party?? Nope.

What’s the explanation as to why the differing levels of coverage and media saturation? I’ll speculate: 1) Doug Berger is a Democrat. Rucho is a Republican. That in and of itself is enough for the double standards in these parts. But there’s another component I suspect was at play here: 2) Berger was a staunch opponent of Amendment One, and so were state Democrats as a party, as were most major newspapers here in NC. The NC media, and Democrats (but I repeat myself), probably looked the other way on his speech either because they didn’t want to make a major scandal out of it – which would have hurt the party (already hobbled by various scandals), agreed with Berger, or both. On the other hand, Berger made a Nazi comparison with Obamacare, and liberals in our state (including the media) strongly support President Obama’s signature legislation. Insulting Obamacare is a big no no to them – especially if you’re a Republican, and you only compound it when you make stupid Nazi analogies to try and prove a point.

In other words, same sh*t different day here in NC as it relates to the local media coverage and their corresponding, enduring narratives. Move along here, nothing new to see ….

**Hat tip for the Berger quote to WWNC talk radio host Pete Kaliner**

PS: If anyone out there can find substantial contrary evidence to what I’ve written here about the muted reaction to Doug Berger’s comparison, please let me know. Google searches found very little, and searching specific news sites found nothing.

NY Post columnist: The NY Times and their constant shilling for Obama hurts America


Bad for America.
Image via the Examiner.

Spot on, Michael Goodwin (hat tip):

Poor Barack Obama. Ending his fifth year as the world’s most powerful man, he is running out of scapegoats and fairy tales. Blaming George W. Bush has lost its punch, and the ObamaCare debacle is shredding the myths he is competent and honest.

Still, before he rides off into that sunset of self-pity and low poll ratings, he ought to invite his remaining friends over for a heart-to-heart. That way he can tell The New York Times that its fanatical support does him no favors.

Instead, it feeds his arrogance and reinforces his belief that he can solve any problem with another speech. The unflattering truth doesn’t stand a chance — ­until it is too late.

Not that the president would admit any of that, of course, but the Obama Protection Racket, led by the Times, cuts both ways. It is a key reason he has defied political gravity for so long, and also why he is now in deep trouble. As watchdogs became lapdogs, the presidential bubble grew impenetrable, isolating him from ordinary Americans and the trickle-down pain of his policies.

From the broadcast networks to MSNBC and most large papers, Obama got the benefit of every doubt. The double standards were a daily disgrace so routine, they mostly provoked a shrug instead of outrage.

The ObamaCare debacle is the exception that proves the rule. Wall-to-wall complaints are forcing the media to report that the law’s Web site is a lemon and that its rules are causing millions of people to lose insurance plans they liked.

The mainstream media is acting only because the story is too big to ignore. Had it been mildly skeptical sooner, it could have exposed the law’s destructive rules and prevented the disaster.


Make sure to read the whole thing.

Highly critical NBC story on #Obamacare disappears, then mysteriously reappears


This story, posted on the NBC Investigations page earlier Monday night, was taken down without explanation – and then reposted about an hour later. Click the picture for the original cached version – assuming it still works.

Several hours ago this story was published at the NBC News site, but mysteriously disappeared – after serious social media pushback on it from the White House. Coincidence? Here’s a snippet:

President Obama repeatedly assured Americans that after the Affordable Care Act became law, people who liked their health insurance would be able to keep it. But millions of Americans are getting or are about to get cancellation letters for their health insurance under Obamacare, say experts, and the Obama administration has known that for at least three years.

Four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC NEWS that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”

Read the original full version – screencapped and preserved – here.  Or here.

At the time of this writing, NBC has provided no sensible explanation as to why the story – accessed in the tens of thousands of times by curious readers – was initially pulled.  They’ve since re-posted the story, but I haven’t had a chance to sift through to see if changes were made. They didn’t note any corrections at the bottom of the page.  I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but this is definitely one of those things that make you go” hmmm.”  BTW, don’t put it past the WH to try to seriously intimidate journalists. It has happened before.

If no changes WERE made to it, was it due to complaints from readers angry that it had been taken down? Was there really a “URL issue” as their Twitter page is now claiming?  Weasel Zippers is currently comparing the original versus the fresh posting so stay tuned them for potential further developments. It’s late, and I’m about to hit the pillow. :)