RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/08/time-magazines-iran-guide-for-parents-refuses-to-call-soleimani-a-terrorist/

Time Magazine’s “Time for Kids” publication issued a guide Tuesday for parents on how to talk with their children about the situation unfolding in Iran riddled with biased omissions.

The legacy outlet first refers to Qasem Soleimani, the recently slain Iranian general responsible for hundreds of American deaths, as a “top military leader in Iran,” rather than a terrorist. In the next line, the guide explains that President Donald Trump took action on Soleimani simply because Trump said Soleimani was a terrorist.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/07/media-reactions-to-soleimani-assassination-are-beyond-parody/

No one expected the U.S. media to take President Trump’s decision to rid the world of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani well, but the MSM’s outpouring of grief over the top terrorist kingpin’s death has reached Onion/Babylon Bee levels of parodic absurdity.

The media has played up Soleimani’s reputation as a brilliant military strategist beloved by his people, while downplaying his responsibility for the destruction of countless lives across the Middle East.

The fact is, Soleimani was a monster.

Qassem Soleimani was responsible for 11 recent attacks on U.S. facilities in Iraq even before the one that killed a U.S. contractor; Iranian attacks on neutral, civilian shipping in the Gulf; the attack on Aramco facilities in Saudi Arabia; IEDs that killed hundreds of American soldiers in Iraq. He was the architect of Iran’s strategy of mobilizing militias to destabilize neighboring states and the brutal strategy of bleeding Syria dry.

While we may not be at war with Iran, Soleimani has been at war with the United States for 15 years.

Soleimani was also notoriously brutal to his own people, as Iranian journalist Masih Alinejad pointed out in the Washington post.

This past November, thousands of Iranians took to the streets across the country to protest against the regime, in the biggest challenge to the clerical rule in 40 years. According to Reuters, more than 1,500 people were killed by security forces, including units of Soleimani’s Revolutionary Guard, and at least 7,000 have been arrested. The Internet was shut down for five days

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/01/ny-times-embarrasses-itself-again-iran-911-ties-kenneth-r-timmerman/

The sloppy New York Times is once-again embarrassing itself. In a prominent “fact-check” piece appearing on Friday, cub reporter Zach Montague ripped into Vice President Mike Pence for a series of tweets that described the terror-drenched record of the ex-Quds Force commander, Qassem Suleymani.

At issue was Pence’s account of Suleymani’s links to the September 11, 2001 attacks on America. In one tweet, the vice president noted that Suleymani and his terrorists “assisted in the clandestine travel to Afghanistan of 10 of the 12 terrorists who carried out the September 11 terrorist attacks in the Untied States.

Assisted in the clandestine travel to Afghanistan of 10 of the 12 terrorists who carried out the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States.

— Mike Pence (@Mike_Pence) January 3, 2020

This prompted the NY Times to snipe, “How Mr. Pence arrived at this number and this account is unclear” since there was nothing in “public United States intelligence” [sic] linking the two, or indeed, anyone in Iran to the 9/11 attacks.

Montague could have consulted former NY Times Philip Shenon, whose 2008 book about the 9/11 Commission reprised a story I revealed several years earlier about the discovery by Commission staff of some 75 highly classified NSA intercepts that spelled out in great detail the help Iran offered al Qaeda in furtherance of the 9/11 plot.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/04/softball-cnn-interview-with-iranian-ambassador-borders-on-propaganda/

For three years now, CNN has dedicated itself almost exclusively to attacking Donald Trump. It’s own laughable claim of being straight, objective news is clearly abject nonsense to anyone who has watched it for more than 5 minutes. And that’s all fine. All news outlets have their biases, and while it would be nice if CNN owned theirs, it doesn’t really matter if they refuse to. But last night something happened that didn’t just look like anti-Trump sentiment, but rather straight up Iranian propaganda.

Anchor Erin Burnett interviewed Iranian Ambassador to the United Nations Mavid Ravanchi, and what viewers were treated to was not so much an interview as a joint press release. From the first question, whether the US had committed an act of war by killing Qasem Solemiani, to the final one, whether this act of war “changes the game,” everything was framed as poor Iran being bullied by a President Trump who at best overreacted and who at worst is lying to the American people.

Not only was there no push back whatsoever in regard to any of the claims made by Ravanchi, several vital questions went completely unasked. How on earth can one interview the Iranian ambassador without asking about Iranian support for a violent attack on an American embassy last week? Or how about an attack on a base that left an American contractor dead? Or the shooting down of an American drone over international waters?

Time and again in the interview Ravanchi claimed that by killing Solemiani the US had moved from an economic war (pulling out of the Iran Deal) to a military war. But Iran has engaged in military actions against America and American interest for months now. The network that fatuously insists they are all about the facts allowed the ambassador to flat out lie to the their viewers without the least bit of resistance.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/02/washington-post-vs-the-steele-dossier/

In a compelling, if incomplete, account of some of the worst media actors in the Russian collusion hoax, the Washington Post neglects its own complicity.

In the thick catalog of media players responsible for promoting the phony Russia collusion storyline, the Washington Post occupies a marquee spot. The Post arguably inflicted the most damage on the first few months of Donald Trump’s presidency by pushing the concocted collusion drama even before Inauguration Day.

The Post first published illegally leaked classified information about former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn in early 2017; articles detailing Flynn’s intercepted conversations with the Russian ambassador led to Flynn’s ouster in February 2017.

In April 2017, the Post first revealed the foreign intelligence surveillance warrant on Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page. Several unnamed government officials leaked the explosive news that a former Trump campaign advisor was under government surveillance for his suspected ties to the Kremlin. The purpose of the report was to legitimize the rapidly unfolding narrative that the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russians to hijack the 2016 election.

Since then, thousands of articles, columns, and editorials bolstering the hoax have dominated the paper’s website. In fact, Post reporters and editors met with dossier author Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson months before Election Day as they attempted to plant damaging stories about Team Trump’s canoodling with Russians.

After Steele’s name became public in early 2017, the Post routinely portrayed Steele as a trustworthy “former British intelligence officer” just trying to protect Americans from the Putin puppet running for president.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/27/the-liberal-medias-sordid-history-of-russia-ukrain/

It’s not been a good year for major media.

First, they were caught red-handed as shills for the fake Russian collusion narrative that convulsed the nation for nearly three years.

Then, they were exposed as barkers for the fake Ukraine scandal while the real thing — Joe Biden’s pay-for-play scheme and $1 billion “quid pro quo” while he was President Obama’s vice president — still goes largely unexamined.

Truth be told, this kind of slanted reporting involving Russia and Ukraine has a long pedigree.

In 1932, The New York Times’ Moscow bureau chief, Walter Duranty, won a Pulitzer Prize for his reporting on Joseph Stalin’s USSR. Duranty lied repeatedly, issuing reports that all was well, even as Stalin was killing millions, mostly in Ukraine, by starvation and executions.

“There is no famine or actual starvation nor is there likely to be,” Duranty wrote for The Times in November 1931. “Any report of a famine in Russia is today an exaggeration or malignant propaganda,” he wrote in August 1933.

More revealingly, he wrote, “You can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs,” in May 1933. These and more damning excerpts were reported by the Columbia Beacon, a student paper that has called on Columbia University’s Pulitzer Committee to revoke Duranty’s prize.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/al-sharpton-warns-democrats-over-impeachment-focus-deal-with-kitchen-table-issues/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=third
Al Sharpton Warns Democrats over Impeachment Focus: ‘Deal with Kitchen-Table Issues’By Tobias Hoonhout

Sharpton warned that a hyper-focused Democratic effort to impeach Trump could distract from a vision of “how we move forward.”

KEVIN WILLIAMSON….AN INVETERATE NEVER TRUMPER

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/12/trump-presidency-democrats-squander-case-against-him/
Trump Isn’t a Nazi. He’s a Failure. By Kevin D. Williamson

But Democrats can’t capitalize on the president’s broken promises.

Why doesn’t Williamson leave the N.R. again? rsk

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/12/trump-impeachment-debate-president-meets-four-tests-for-impeachment/?
Trump Meets the Four Tests for Impeachment By Ramesh Ponnuru

He is unwilling to distinguish between the common good that government is supposed to serve and his own narrow interests.

Does anyone with a pulse care what Ponnuru thinks about anything? rsk

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2019/12/31/cnn-is-not-a-news-network/

And Jim Acosta is no reporter

When ThinkProgress announced that it was going out of business, a few observers wondered aloud, “Why didn’t anybody buy it?” But why would they have, when we have CNN?

As a child, I was aware of CNN in part because its introductory bumper featured the sinister voice of Darth Vader, and in part because it was both the prototype and the stereotype of the 24-hour news channel. CNN showed up in movies, either as itself or in parodies that imitated its role. It was on in the airports and the hospitals and the hotel lobbies, and in the waiting room at the dentist’s office. When something bad or exciting was happening, you would tell your friends, “Turn on CNN.”

CNN was careful and self-consciously nonpartisan — or, at least, it was keen for viewers to believe that it was. Its slogans were “This is CNN” — well, yes — and “The most trusted name in news,” and it cultivated its position within the firmament in much the same way as does Wikipedia today. It could be sensationalist and intrusive at times, but it was sensationalist and intrusive in the way that the paparazzo is rather than in the way that protesters who bang drums in your face and insist that you give up gasoline are. In short, it was what it said it was: a news network.

It is no longer that. These days, CNN is a peculiar and unlovely hybrid of progressive propaganda outlet, oleaginous media apologist, sexless cultural scold, and frenzied Donald Trump stalkerblog. When news breaks, it is no longer useful or appropriate to tell someone, “Turn on CNN,” because if he did, he would be as likely to be presented with a wall of advocacy and obsession as with the headlines of the hour. Today, CNN does not broadcast the news; it broadcasts what it wants you to think the news is. At long last, it has become Fox.