On Thursday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke at the United Nations. As described by George Jahn at the Associated Press, it was “an impassioned speech interspersed with bouts of dramatic silence.”
Jahn failed to report the absence of U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power and Secretary of State John Kerry. So did Rick Gladstone and Judi Rudoren at the New York Times. An unbylined Reuters report drily noted that U.S. representation at Netanyahu’s speech consisted of “Ambassador Samantha Power’s deputy, David Pressman, and U.S. Ambassador to Israel Daniel Shapiro.” Breitbart also noted the presence of “Richard Erdman, Alternate Representative to the UN General Assembly.” Reuters uniquely explained why Power and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who was in town, did not attend (bolds are mine throughout this post):
Apparently, the establishment press is waiting for its marching orders on how to handle what an Investor’s Business Daily editorial has already called a “scandal.”
This one’s a joint effort involving Hillary Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal, a recently deceased former CIA operative named Tyler Drumheller who worked with Blumenthal — and CBS News. As Mark Hemingway at the Weekly Standardreported Tuesday afternoon (i.e., now approaching two overnight news cycles ago), “Drumheller, the former chief of the CIA’s clandestine service in Europe who was working directly with Blumenthal as a member of Clinton’s spy network, was concurrently working as a consultant to CBS News and its venerable news program 60 Minutes. IBD’s question, reacting to Hemingway’s report: “Who is more corrupt, Clinton or the mainstream media?”
Sunday’s New York Times story by Joseph Goldstein appearing on Page A1 above the fold in Monday’s print edition contains absolutely appalling news.
Goldstein’s report — originally headlined and appearing in print as “U.S. Soldiers Told to Ignore Afghan Allies’ Abuse of Boys”, and currently carried online as “U.S. Soldiers Told to Ignore Sexual Abuse of Boys by Afghan Allies” — asserts that “American soldiers and Marines have been instructed not to intervene — in some cases, not even when their Afghan allies have abused boys on military bases, according to interviews and court records,” in known instances of “sexual abuse of children,” particularly young boys. In excerpts following the jump, we will see that Goldstein describes that stance as a “policy” several times (bolds are mine):
“Never forget”? Sometimes one wonders if they even remember — or want to.
Both the New York and National versions of the New York Times print edition contain no mention of the anniversary of the terrorist attacks 14 years ago in New York and Washington which brought down the World Trade Center buildings, seriously damaged the Pentagon, and killed almost 3,000 people in four different locations: the two WTC buildings, the Pentagon, and in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
Obama Was Negotiating Deal for Years Ever Since He Released Iranian Nuclear Scientist
In July Barack Obama lashed out at CBS reporter Major Garrett after he asked him about the four Americans the administration left behind to languish in Iranian prisons.
… Of course, that is exactly what he did.
The Obama administration did nothing to free American hostages during their talks with the Iranian regime.
Obama was negotiating with Iran for several years.
Obama released a top Iranian scientist as part of the deal but left the Americans to rot in hell in Iranian prisons.
Now that the deal is done – with 34 Democrats supporting Iran over Israel – the Khamenei regime is leaking information on the deal to humiliate Barack Obama.
… The Iranians say Obama was desperate for a nuclear deal.
The way I see it, Obama doesn’t care. As far as he’s concerned, he’s got his “legacy,” American prisoners in Iranian jails be damned, while the United States and the American people are the ones who get to absorb the humiliation.
In the past week, several pundits and alleged “experts” have been on a mission to tell us rubes that Hillary Clinton’s email and private-server controversy doesn’t rise to the level of being a scandal. They have absurdly argued that even if she “technically” violated State Department protocols and even broke some pesky laws in handling her communications while she was Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton’s actions weren’t serious enough to warrant prosecution.
In making that argument in an August 27 column (“The Hillary Clinton e-mail ‘scandal’ that isn’t”), Washington Post columnist David Ignatius heavily relied on one Jeffrey Smith without revealing Smith’s political connections to Bill and Mrs. Clinton and his professional advocacy on behalf of Democrats. After getting caught, while never recognizing his critics’ existence, Ignatius incompletely disclosed Smith’s obvious lack of objectivity in a manner which would have been barely tolerable during newspapers’ dead-trees era, and which is completely unacceptable in the digital age.
On Thursday, the Associated Press published the equivalent of press release promoting a pro-Muslim billboard campaign orchestrated by the Islamic Circle of North America.
The writeup’s author, Rasha Madkour, failed to get any kind of skeptical comment from anyone about the nature of the campaign, and utterly failed to tell readers anything about the Islamic Circle’s or its spokesperson’s past (and possibly still-present) terrorist ties. Instead, readers were given the equivalent of a feel-good story about members trying to “reclaim the message” of Islam.
This is obviously sarcasm: Right behind all the positive racial healing we’ve seen during Barack Obama’s presidency is the vast improvement in the degree of civility seen and heard in leftist discourse.
Obviously, that’s not so. Hillary Clinton calls GOP presidential candidates “terrorists” and invokes Nazi-era images of illegal immigrants being “loaded into boxcars.” The press — which would treat either utterance as front-page news if said by a Republican or conservative — gives her a pass, and some of its members are virtually cheering her on. Barack Obama calls his opponents “crazies,” arguably even including some Democrats on matters on the Iran “deal,” aka the “orchestrated surrender to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.” Former Bill Clinton administration and current Hillary Clinton insider Paul Begala joined the parade today as he attacked Dick Cheney:
One of the odder pieces appearing during the past week in connection with the Hillary Clinton email and private server scandal was David Ignatius’s attempt to deny that it’s a scandal at all in Thursday’s Washington Post.
Ignatius devoted four of his first five paragraphs to relaying the allegedly expert assessments of Jeffrey Smith, who Ignatius described as “a former CIA general counsel who’s now a partner at Arnold & Porter, where he often represents defendants suspected of misusing classified information.” Sounds like an arms-length guy, doesn’t he? He’s not. He has been a security adviser to Hillary Clinton’s previous presidential campaign, defended John Kerry against criticism of the Massachusetts senator’s national security negligence in 2004, and served on Bill Clinton’s presidential transition team in late 1992 and early 1993.
The establishment press is all over revelations by Fox News Friday morning that the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails involves a “section of the Espionage Act is known as 18 US Code 793,” and that “the focus includes a provision of the law pertaining to ‘gathering, transmitting or losing defense information,’” according to “an intelligence source.”
Just kidding. The only reaction I’ve seen thus far is at the Friday evening version of “The 2016 Blast” collection by Henry C. Jackson at the Politico. The fifth item covered — after a snippet on “John Kasich’s Aerial Attack” and three snoozers on Mrs. Clinton’s predictable dissembling — reads as follows (bolds and italics are theirs):
I’m sure we all feel better now that Hillary Clinton, as reported by the New York Times late Wednesday afternoon, “took responsibility” for “her decision to use only private email while she was secretary of state.”
Well, no — and Times reporter Maggie Haberman should (and probably does) know why that doesn’t cut it. Mrs. Clinton still maintained on Wednesday that investigations currently in process “will prove that I never sent, nor received, any email that was marked classified.” Information already known shows that contention to be false, and the noise about “markings” is irrelevant in any event.
Over at the Associated Press this afternoon (later updated), Ken Dilanian, with the help of four other reporters, prepared a lengthy dispatch attempting to defend 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s email and private-server practices. Boiled down to its essence:Boiled down to its essence: “[D]iplomats routinely sent secret material on unsecured email during the past two administrations.”
Nice try, guys, but there are two problems with your “many others did it” defense. First, in the course of attempting to defend her, Dilanian and his team quietly admitted that Mrs. Clinton has been lying when claiming that she never sent any classified emails. Additionally, they ignored a December 2009 Executive Order from President Obama which, as Catherine Herridge at Fox News reported this morning, specifies that only “intelligence agencies who own that information in the first place have the authority to declassify it.”
You can tell that the left is getting nervous about a scandal when they invoke the Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth campaign of 2004 against John Kerry.
As I noted on Saturday, Maria L. La Ganga at the Los Angeles Times did that as she described Planned Parenthood’s attempts to fight back against the Center For Medical Progress’s exposure of their baby body parts business. On Friday at the New York Times, in a story about how Hillary Clinton was “interrupting” her Martha’s Vineyard vacation, Amy Chozick found a Clinton contributor who characterized her email and private server scandal as “somewhat of a tempest in a teapot” and also described it as “their (Republicans’) Swift boat issue of 2015.”
11-1/2 years ago, we had the “Dean Scream.” After finishing a disappointing third in the Iowa caucuses, 2004 Democratic presidential candidate and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean attempted to further fire up his strangely giddy supporters by telling them about upcoming state primaries they would fight to win. After finishing his list, Dean told them: “And then we’re going to Washington, DC to take back the White House!” — and shouted out the scream heard ’round the world which ended his electoral viability.
Sunday on Meet the Press, we saw the “Dean Pipedream.” Asked by host Chuck Todd how well Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has handled the scandal over her use of a private server for personal and government emails while serving as Secretary of State, Dean blamed her situation “partly … (on) a press that’s bored.” Contrary to Dean’s assertion, the intrepid folks at NewsBusters and the Media Research Center who monitor the Big Three networks and other establishment press outlets have chronicled a consistently determined reluctance to report on newsworthy scandal-related developments.
Comments are welcome, but are moderated.
Posting of comments is not immediate, and may take up to 24 hours.
Comment posting, as well as possible deletion, is at the sole discretion of BizzyBlog.
Allowing a comment to be posted does not constitute agreement with it, or endorsement of it.
SOB Alliance posts
"(ACORN) says it provide lots of services for poor people, but a recent NewsBusters post by Tom Blumer exposes the hollow facts behind the claims."