Sunday, March 31, 2024

Shameless 'Journalist' Op-Ed Brags About Playing Race Card in Bridge Collapse—I Am 'Doing Precisely That'

Shameless 'Journalist' Op-Ed Brags About Playing Race Card in Bridge Collapse—I Am 'Doing Precisely That'

AP Photo/Matt Rourke

I wrote about how the almost demonic Associated Press waited mere hours before trying to inject polarizing racial politics into the disastrous Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse in Baltimore, even though the calamity has exactly zero to do with race. But that doesn’t matter to progressive journalists; they want to get their woke takes in regardless of what topic is actually at hand.

See: Repugnant AP Tries to Inject Race Into Tragic Baltimore Bridge Collapse, Drags Up Namesake's Slavery Past

It didn’t take much imagination to see where this was going—it was an obvious pre-game maneuver preparing for the future demand to rename the bridge, when it’s reconstructed, after somebody who more represents modern leftist culture—perhaps they’ll call for the Rev. Al Sharpton Bridge or the Hillary Clinton Crossing. Someone who is shrill, loud, and polarizing but who has done little to actually improve the lives of average Americans.

As many noted on X/Twitter, it won’t be long before someone at MSNBC demands that it be named “The George Floyd Memorial Overpass.”

And the hate-mongers didn’t disappoint, quickly forgetting about the dead bodies still at the bottom of the frigid Baltimore Harbor, the pain of their families and loved ones, or the reality that this collapse will bring intense economic pain for years to Baltimore and its residents.  

See: Will Baltimore Survive the Closing of Its Port?

None of that matters to them; what’s more important is dividing our country. Enter Wayne Washington, who the self-described black news website “The Root” called a “brilliant journalist based in Florida,” who proudly and unabashedly plays the race card in a nasty op-ed published to the Root’s cyberpages Wednesday. 

He makes no effort to hide his divisive intent:

I know there are those who are frothing now, pointing out that I’m “playing the race card” during this tragedy.

And my response is…yep, I am most definitely doing precisely that.

There you have it; neither shame nor decency seems to be in his dictionary. Only pushing hate between the races.

He trashes Francis Scott Key’s legacy and says that his 200-year-old mores are worthy of permanent cancellation. Key has a paradoxical past, that’s true; he went on record opposing the practice of slavery, but it’s undeniable that he also owned some. Yet what does that have to do with a cargo ship slamming into a bridge in 2024?

These names should be considered for the future bridge, argues Washington. 

So, when the new bridge spans the Patapsco [River], name it something other than the Key Bridge.

Lots of Americans — hell, lots of Marylanders — are far more worthy of the honor. Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass immediately come to mind.

Hell, we don’t even have to go back that far. What about Thurgood Marshall? Or the late congressman, Elijah Cummings?

Wait, what? The only decent Marylanders that should be considered for the honor are black Americans? The implication is that obviously white people should not even be looked at. 

It’s so tiring—and yet so predictable—that leftists try to divide us along racial lines at every opportunity. A horrific bridge catastrophe? Forget the dead people, let’s talk about racism!

"If, after this tragedy, we can focus on the urgent need to turn away from spit-in-the-face insults to Black Americans," he continues, "count me in on some of that." Wayne, newsflash: we are not at the point where we are "after" this tragedy; we are still right smack in the middle of it. Can't you have the decency to wait until at least we have the bodies recovered before you shove your racial polemic down our throats? 

Wasn’t Obama supposed to bring us a post-racial nation? It seems to me that he and his legacy have brought us nothing but outrage and a permanent distrust of each other among a citizenry that had been moving closer to unity and equality (not “equity”) before his arrival on the scene.

Washington’s words—and the AP’s—show a complete lack of empathy for the souls who perished at the bottom of the Patapsco River and a narcissistic obsession in reliving the past of two centuries ago. 

None of this does anything to improve the America of 2024, and yet, here we are, and a writer is proud of race-baiting in the midst of misfortune—"playing the race card... yep, I am most definitely doing precisely that."

This is progress?

Hoo Boy: Biden Campaign Steps on Rake in Midst of Trump Attendance at Service for Slain NYPD Officer

Hoo Boy: Biden Campaign Steps on Rake in Midst of Trump Attendance at Service for Slain NYPD Officer

AP Photo/Alex Brandon

There's "out of touch" and then there is Joe Biden-style out of touch, the latter of which is pretty epic when one considers the optics surrounding what's been happening Thursday in New York City.

The wake for slain NYPD Officer Jonathan Diller was held on Long Island earlier, with former president and presumptive 2024 GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump in attendance. 

After the service, Trump gave brief remarks to the press, where he talked about the senselessness of Diller's murder, about meeting his wife and infant son, and the need to restore law and order.

WATCH: Somber Trump Speaks Following Wake for Slain NYPD Officer - Emphasizes Need for Law and Order

The 31-year-old Diller, as RedState previously reported, was killed during a Queens traffic stop Monday, allegedly by career criminal Guy Rivera, 34. Rivera reportedly had 21 prior arrests (with nine of them being felonies) and allegedly also attempted to murder Diller's partner, Sgt. Sasha Rosen, amid a struggle over the gun. Rosen ultimately returned fire against Rivera, sending him to the hospital.

In the aftermath of Diller's murder, an understandably outraged New York City Sergeants Benevolent Association President Vincent Vallelong suggested city council members "who are vehemently and inexplicably against public safety" not bother coming to Diller's funeral, which is scheduled for Saturday. 

Asked Wednesday about Diller's murder, the Biden White House, which to date has not put out a single formal statement about the tragic loss of Diller's life, turned it into an argument for... gun control. Even more infuriatingly, it was also learned that on the day of Diller's wake, Biden and former Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton would also be in NYC... for a celebrity-packed swanky fundraiser that includes an "interview" with late-night talk show host and Biden apologist Stephen Colbert:

And this will not just be any old fundraiser. This one will be for the big bucks:

In what will be his most high-profile fundraiser so far this election cycle, Biden will join Obama and Clinton for a high-dollar fundraiser at Radio City Music Hall in New York, as the two former presidents enter a general election campaign that Biden has said will determine the future of democracy in America.

The three presidents will sit for a conversation with late-night host Stephen Colbert. Tickets for the fundraiser range from $225 to $500,000. Some of the highest-dollar guests will have their photographs taken with the three presidents by famed photographer Annie Leibovitz.

But if one didn't think the optics could get worse for Joe Biden on this issue, think again.

In a rather stunning display of tone-deafness, the Biden campaign tweeted out the following doctored "calendar" graphic on Thursday afternoon... as Biden, Obama, and Clinton were all prepping for the big event and as Trump was honoring Diller's service:

The graphic is saved here in case they delete it.

Can't say Laken Riley's name (correctly, anyway), can't be bothered to make a public statement on the loss of Officer Diller's life, but absolutely can be bothered to call in reinforcements including his former boss and Hollywood elitists.

As I said earlier, the Joe Biden version of "out of touch" is pretty epic, and he and his campaign deserve the bad publicity they get over this. Every bit of it.

'60 Minutes' Gets Caught Red-Handed After Interview With 'Misinformation Expert'

'60 Minutes' Gets Caught Red-Handed After Interview With 'Misinformation Expert'

CBS via AP

Leave it to "60 Minutes" to bring on the leader of a "misinformation research group" and then fail to disclose all the pertinent details of her background. The left-wing news program was caught red-handed when it was revealed that Kate Starbird isn't actually an unbiased arbiter of truth and fiction. 

The background of this story involves the following interview, in which Starbird and "60 Minutes'" Lesley Stahl complain that X (formerly Twitter) wasn't at their beck and call to censor content they deem to be "misinformation." 

RELATED: Ted Cruz Taunts '60 Minutes' With Infamous Trump-Stahl Pre-Election Clip 

What is with left-wing operatives and taking their style cues from Rachel Maddow? All that's missing is a streak of purple in her hair. Regardless, on the merits, what Starbird says is derived from either dishonesty or stupidity. 

To clarify, Community Notes on X is not run by the social media company itself. As the name suggests, users of the platform suggest notes, and only notes with enough consensus are placed on posts to add context or offer a correction. There is no system whereby self-proclaimed "misinformation researchers" get to "flag" posts and then have their commentary added on demand by the powers that be. 

So is Starbird lying about the Community Notes system or is she just ignorant of how it works? Either way, the fact that she's complaining on "60 Minutes" about it as an "expert" does nothing for her credibility. Sure enough, it has now been revealed that Starbird is actually a Joe Biden donor who has received grants from his administration and worked with the DHS on censoring so-called "misinformation."

Shock of shocks, "60 Minutes" "forgot" to mention that in their report.

CBS’ “60 Minutes” failed to disclose that a prominent “misinformation” researcher it featured on its Sunday program received funding and collaborated with President Joe Biden’s administration.

University of Washington professor and researcher Kate Starbird was featured on the program about “misinformation” proliferating on social media. Starbird spearheaded a project that Biden’s National Science Foundation (NSF) granted $2.25 million in 2021, and the researcher collaborated with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) by serving on an advisory committee under its Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which CBS did not mention.

Far from an unbiased observer, Starbird is a hack who targets information she doesn't like and labels it "misinformation." Worse, she's receiving taxpayer money to do so while serving on DHS boards. "60 Minutes" didn't want that to be known, though, and instead made it seem as if Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), who has criticized her, was unfairly targeting a random citizen.

The mainstream press wants to live in a dictatorship so badly. They just want it to be a dictatorship run by people they approve of. There is no role for "misinformation researchers" to censor online speech based on the words of faux "experts" like Starbird. Just as absurd is a show like "60 Minutes" pretending to be an authority despite its own history of spreading misinformation

This isn't complicated. People should be allowed to say what they want, and self-appointed elites should not be curators. Starbird is nothing but a leech, suckling at the government teat to push a political agenda, and "60 Minutes" remains a joke for not being honest about her background.

Saturday, March 30, 2024

NBC News And Exactly What They Deserve

NBC News And Exactly What They Deserve

Derek Hunter

Townhall Media

Imagine being Chuck Todd. Sorry if you just ate, but that’s kind of the point, isn’t it? Todd is a left-wing toady and former staffer to Iowa Democratic Senator Tom Harkin, just in case you didn’t know where he’s coming from. His wife makes a fortune consulting for extremist progressive candidates like Bernie Sanders, but don’t worry, Chuck remains above it all and is an honest broker when it comes to the news. Actually, no, he’s a complete fraud and activist with a press pass.

Remember when he declared no one would be invited on Meet the Press to discuss climate change if they disagreed with the left-wing’s orthodoxy on the subject? It was because he cares so deeply for journalistic integrity that he forbids differing opinions, that’s how journalism works. 

Why pick on the Ginger Avenger? Because he threw the equivalent of a temper tantrum on Meet the Press Sunday because his employer, NBC News, dared hire former head of the Republican National Committee, Ronna McDaniel. 

I’m no fan of McDaniel; the GOP has managed to lose dozens of winnable elections on her watch, but that a former party Chair would get a contributor gig is nothing new – Howard Dean was hired by NBC News after his tenure at the DNC without any drama, and he’s a certifiably insane lunatic who spews some of the dumbest words ever assembled into sentence form. 

But McDaniel is different because of Donald Trump.

It’s easy to say Trump broke these people, but they were damaged goods right out of the box. There isn’t a single honest person at NBC News, on air or behind the scenes, in their editorial process, and they have zero standards. If there were, Joy Reid not only would be fired immediately, she never would have been hired in the first place.

But she has a show. Conspiracy theorist and noted fabulist Rachel Maddow has a show, albeit only one day per week for $30 million per year. Chris Hayes would have a show simply because you have to employ someone to do it and, while he’s as much of sociopath as the rest, he’s easily ignored by people who agree with him as well as those who don’t. 

There are no standards at NBC News, there are only orders from the Democratic Party. It’s the video version of Yellow Journalism – random YouTube channels have higher standards. 

Chucky started off his segment on the panel of a show from which he was fired by saying, “Look, let me deal with the elephant in the room.” He then went on to apologize to his replacement for having to interview McDaniel because “she is now a paid contributor by NBC News. I have no idea whether any answer she gave to you was because she didn't want to mess up her contract.”

In what room is this an “elephant”? The coffee room at the DNC, I mean, NBC News. Was there anyone who isn’t a committed leftist fuming over having McDaniel on as a guest who cared? The answer is no.

Weirdly, Chucky has no such qualms about Ginger Goebbels being hired by NBC News to host a show, not just appear occasionally. Former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, born on 3rd base and failing up ever since, negotiated her contract while still working in the Biden White House, then continued in that position for two more months before leaving to become a “journalist.” Chuck has never once publicly, or privately (because it would have leaked), questioned whether or not Psaki is expressing her own opinions or simply parroting what she was told to by handlers in the administration. Honestly, it’s impossible to know – she says the same things, spending most of her time defending Joe Biden from his failures and lying about Republicans. That’s a requirement to work for NBC News, so the origination point of those spewings are irrelevant, really. 

Chuck Todd is the personification of everything wrong with NBC News, but he can’t be confronted as such by his bosses because they made him, they made all of them. You can’t lecture your kid against smoking with a Marlboro hanging out of your mouth, and can’t scold anyone for lying when you employ, well, literally everyone at NBC News. Not in any credible way, at least. Lucky for NBC News, credibility hasn’t been an issue or a goal for at least 10 years.

Why the Transgender Craze Is Coming to an End

Why the Transgender Craze Is Coming to an End

Madeline touched upon this earlier this month when the United Kingdom issued a total ban on puberty blockers for minors. The National Health Service took a significant step in ending the “transanity” that’s engulfed the Western World. It became a liberal war cry, but what’s happening across the pond will inevitably be exported here. There’s something about minors undergoing genital mutilation surgeries and competing in sports where they didn’t belong that doesn’t sit well with most Americans. Once again, the cultural bastions of the United States overplayed their hand. That’s the thing about echo chambers—the noise dissipates precipitously when most see through the nonsense. Michael Shellenberger and Alex Gutentag have a new lengthy post on their Public Substack that exposed why the craze is ending. Yet, they warned, the most damaging aspects could take years to roll back. 

This issue has now sunk governments like Nicola Sturgeon’s in Scotland. Her downfall was over a transgender law concerning biological males being sent to women’s prisons. You already know about the fiasco Lia Thomas has caused concerning trans women competing with biological females. The overwhelming consensus is that this practice should be banned, a rare win for common sense. 

Even the UK’s Labour Party said banning trans women from female sports protects the integrity and safety of the competition. Such words would have led to an outcry and cancellation campaigns—no more. One thing that’s helped blow up the transgender craze is the mounting reports of medical abuse emanating from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), the leading transgender healthcare organization, according to Shellenberger and Gutentag. 

Yet, besides whistleblowers within WPATH, new reports are showing that transgender medicine isn’t grounded in science. Moreover, the treatments haven’t led to any decrease in suicidal tendencies, which has been the linchpin for pushing gender mutilation surgeries for minors. Second, for those becoming trans-men, the injections of testosterone have shown increased levels of tumors in the liver, which functions differently based on gender. It almost seems as if sex isn’t a social construct but a defined scientific one that cannot be altered (via Public): 

A big part of the reason for the end of the trans craze is the accumulation of scientific studies, patient testimonies, and the testimonies of gender clinicians themselves.

The WPATH Files themselves should be seen in a broader context of revelations and confessions from the whistleblowers and employees of the gender medicine industry itself. The UK government shut down its leading gender clinic at Tavistock Hospital after its own employees blew the whistle. A St. Louis gender clinician last year similarly blew the whistle. One of the founders of gender-affirming care in Europe recently denounced the overuse of drugs and surgeries. Dr. Erica Anderson has argued for years that too few guardrails protect children, adolescents, and vulnerable adults. 

Meanwhile, medical journals are publishing a growing number of scientific articles debunking the leading trans myths. A major Finland study found gender medicine to offer no benefits in terms of reducing suicide and suicidal feelings among people with gender dysphoria. And earlier this week, journalist Ben Ryan resurfaced a 2021 study that found that trans women who underwent genital surgery had twice as many suicide attempts after the surgery than before. 

Defenders of gender medicine are responding to these revelations. In response to the WPATH Files, StatNews claimed we had exaggerated the link between hormones and cancer in trans-identified natal females. 

But even a cursory review of the evidence shows that testosterone has already been linked to cancer. A 2020 paper in the Lancet found that a 17-year-old trans-identified natal female had developed liver tumors in connection to testosterone use. Although the research has been inconclusive (as we noted), another 2023 paper found multiple cases of liver tumors linked to testosterone use. 

What’s more, we were not the ones to make the cancer link from the WPATH Files –  it was suggested by WPATH-affiliated doctors themselves. And it turns out that testosterone can cause far worse damage to livers than we had realized. The liver is a sexually dimorphic organ, meaning it exhibits major differences in males and females.


One of the main reasons the trans craze is coming to an end is because of the coalition of feminists, conservatives, liberals, and non-ideological professionals, intellectuals, and activists who fought for years against it. We should feel gratitude toward these individuals, particularly those who suffered greatly for their service. Trans activists destroyed the careers of journalists, academics, administrators, and anyone else who stood in the way of their agenda to transform medicine, sports, prisons, and much else. People lost their jobs in universities worldwide, particularly in North America and Europe. And many of those same people fought heroically. 

While there are medical and political reasons why transgenderism is coming to an end, the underlying reason is that gender-affirming care has no basis in science. The idea that someone can change their biological sex is ungrounded from reality. 

Shellenberger and Gutentag ask if anything should be done to accelerate the rollback. They concur that something should be done since a natural retreat doesn’t guarantee that this craze will end completely, quickly, or well. Progressives in legislatures will dig in, but they cannot overcome the public tide that’s rapidly turning against this nonsense. Keep in mind, the writers said that the UK news has yet to strike the liberal bubbles in America. When it does, expect a meltdown over some very weird stuff.

The Question No One Is Asking About Trump's New York Criminal Trial

The Question No One Is Asking About Trump's New York Criminal Trial

AP Photo/Chris Carlson

Monday was a day of highs and lows for Donald Trump. Things started with a bang after an appellate court slashed the required bond in his New York-based civil case from $454 million to $175 million, ensuring an appeal will now take place. They ended with a whimper when the judge handling Trump's New York-based criminal case rejected further delay attempts and set an April 15th trial date. 

Read: Trump Responds to April 15th Criminal Trial Date, Slams Joe Biden

It was a jolt back to reality for Republicans who were hoping the various prosecutions targeting the presumptive GOP nominee would fade away until after November. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg will get to test his ridiculous legal theory of upgrading misdemeanors to felonies, and he'll get to test it in an area with a jury pool that is overwhelmingly left-wing. 

That's led to a mountain of speculation about how a criminal conviction of Trump would play in the minds of voters. Would it represent a red line for too many, sending him into a spiral toward defeat? Or would it further rally support around him given the preposterous nature of the prosecution? 

But there's one question no one seems to be asking: What happens if he's acquitted? 

Admittedly, it's hard to imagine how a trial held in one of the most far-left parts of the country could end in anything but a conviction of Trump. No one hates the former president more than the types of people who populate Manhattan. It's easy to assume the facts won't matter and that a negative outcome is assured. 

Perhaps that's true, but what if it's not? It only takes one juror to blow up any possible conviction of Trump, and Bragg's case is objectively ludicrous. It relies on the notion that state prosecutors can make felonies of misdemeanors as a way to punish alleged federal crimes that even the DOJ rejected as valid. That is one of the dumbest and most abusive legal theories to ever grace an indictment. What if one or more jurors simply don't buy it? It's at least possible, right? 

The repercussions of an acquittal are hard to overstate for Democrats. Lawfare is their plan to defeat Trump, and if he manages to secure victory over their first attempt (and possibly the only one that happens before election day), it could take him from a tight polling lead in March to an electoral college blowout in November. That's the risk Democrats took in pursuing this third-world, banana republic-esque strategy. 

Which brings me to another inquiry: Did Bragg want this to go to trial before the election? 

There's reason to believe he didn't. Throughout this process, he's shown deference to the federal charges Trump is facing, all but signaling he didn't want to be the first in the ring. After all, out of the four criminal indictments of the former president, Bragg's is the weakest and most likely to fail. His entire political future is now riding on a conviction, and if he doesn't get it, he'll not only blow himself up, but he could take the entire Democratic Party with him regarding the 2024 election. 

For Trump, all he can do is plow forward, and perhaps not even he has contemplated what an acquittal would look like, but there's ample reason to believe it could represent the nail in the coffin for Joe Biden (politically speaking, of course). Democrats are playing with fire, and sometimes people who play with fire get burned. It's not out of the realm of possibility.