Don't cry for me, 1A headline

It's hard to pick a favorite about this hard-hitting exclusive on the WashTimes's Thursday front. Is it the "while" in the headline? The alliteration? (""Self-described socialist who regularly rails against the rich.") The arithmetic -- the "$300 on hair" that becomes "nearly $300" but seems to add up (according to "sources familiar with the salon") to $260, not counting tip? Or the Evita reference?

Given the proximate threats of Nancy Pelosi and Schiffty Schiff in the House, the impertinence of the Fair 'n' Balanced Network, the level of intracult dissent, and everything else that's bedeviling journalism these days, it's nice to see the press remembering to make some room for the menace that is AOC.

Product placement fail

Is it just me, or is this particular diaper ad a singularly bad deal for the Washington Times, falling as it does after the lede on a story about a Trump twitter rant?

Always at war with Eastasia

Sounds like a pretty firm denial on the homepage there, Reagan's Favorite Newspaper! I wonder what the inside hed looks like.

Wow! The Big Guy must have really been giving it to the Fake News, huh?

... The White House was not commenting on the medical bill story, which was first reported in The Washington Post on Thursday, although the U.S. government has long had a policy of not paying ransom demands for American hostages.

Oh.

Who wants to bet that Axis Sarah can make things look even worse?

“We do not comment on hostage negotiations, which is why they have been so successful during this administration,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in statement.

It has to be rough out there in the party press these days, huh?

Today in public opinion reporting

And how do we back up our authoritative claim about whom Those Blacks are lukewarm on, Reagan's Favorite Newspaper?

Democrats have the highest-powered and most diverse potential presidential field in history, including two candidates who are black — yet two black leaders say none of them stands out so far.

And if you had Feb. 13 in the office pool for "day on which the Washington Times neglects to run screaming in fear at the mention of Black Lives Matter," you can retire to your tropical island now:

Sen. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat and former mayor of Newark, doesn’t have a great reputation with activists, said Hawk Newsome, president of Black Lives Matter in greater New York. Sen. Kamala D. Harris, a California Democrat whose parents were Indian and Jamaican, has a problematic background as a former prosecutor, he said.
...
Tanya Faison, a Black Lives Matter leader in Sacramento, California, is also dissatisfied with the two black senators. She said Mr. Booker is generally OK but could be doing more, whereas she doesn’t support Ms. Harris at all.

Certainly interesting points, but you can see why the WashTimes almost immediately thought better of its original hed:

OK, not much of an improvement, but you have to admit -- it is an improvement, right? OK, sorry. You don't. It isn't.

Of all the gun joints ...

Look, I know it must be busy up at the Washington Times these days, and the "u" and the "i" are right next to each other and all that, but still -- could we give the big type just ONE more look before pushing the button?

The enemy of the people

Q: How does the Washington Times revive the flagging spirits of the faithful after a potentially trying weekend?
A: With a picture of Emmanuel Goldstein, Enemy of the People George Soros in the centerpiece!

 Plagued by sagging ratings, player protests and fan outrage, the NFL has thrown a political Hail Mary by reportedly agreeing to dole out millions of dollars to two social justice groups connected to Democratic billionaire George Soros.

Under an agreement with the Players Coalition, NFL owners plan to funnel tens of millions of dollars to the Dream Corps, a leftist advocacy group led by former Obama adviser Van Jones and linked to Mr. Soros, which has called for saving the Clean Power Plan, cutting the prison population by half and providing “sanctuary for all.”

The $89 million, seven-year deal also carves out millions of dollars for the Players Coalition, according to ESPN, which has been advised by Soros-funded groups such as the Campaign for Fair Sentencing of Youth and the Center for American Progress, a leader of the anti-Trump “resistance.”

Could it get worse?

... Mr. Soros’ fingerprints can also be found on the Dream Corps, which merged in 2014 with Green for All, an environmental group founded by Mr. Jones in 2007 whose funders included Open Society as well as former Vice President Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection, according to Discover the Networks.

Mr. Jones resigned as President Obama’s “green jobs czar” in 2009 amid reports of his earlier Marxist activism, including his oft-quoted declaration that he became a communist after the 1992 acquittal of Los Angeles police officers who beat up Rodney King.

Any further questions about which side the Washington Times would have been on in the 1930s?

Ho-Ho-Holidays!

No doubt you've all been waiting for the latest from renowned world-affairs analyst Piers Morgan on America's newfound return to international respectability:

... Trump also praised China for out-smarting America in business.

They don’t hear that very often, and certainly not from US presidents.

But it’s true, they have, and Trump’s made it clear he’s not going to make it so easy for them going forward.

Knowing the Chinese mentality a bit from filming a documentary in Shanghai a few years ago, I’d say this a very good strategy.

They respond well to a respectful carrot-and-stick approach, as indeed does Trump.

Let's zoom in for a moment on the cutline, though:

In Vietnam, Trump offered to mediate in the South China Sea dispute, and made encouraging noises about ‘fair and reciprocal’ two-way trade deal, both vitally important issues. Here is* Trump and Vietnamese President Tran Dai Quang in front of a statue of Ho Chi Mihn. The President managed to not criticize his hosts

My, my, my. Uncle Ho doesn't usually get off so lightly when American heads of state are involved. Indeed, the whole business of casually posing within camera range of icons of communist mass mayhem seems -- how's that, The Fox Nation?

As the Weekly Standard notes, "the Obama-Che photo was even worse than it looked":

President Obama boasted on his trip that he wasn't going to tell Cubans to "tear something down," a reference to President Reagan's famous exhortation to tear down the Berlin wall. Of course, there's no wall - only ocean - separating Cuba from the rest of the world to tear down. But Obama could have at least told Castro to tear down the monument to repression that he was happily photographed in front of.

Because that's what real presidents do! Right, Piers Morgan?

Throughout his tour, Trump avoided publicly criticizing any of his hosts.

For a man who delights in criticizing absolutely everyone, this must have taken quite extraordinary self-control.

But it paid off. The press coverage from this trip, both in the countries concerned and in the US, is the best Trump’s enjoyed since becoming President.

That must have been a relief. Just consider what happened when ...

Say it ain't so, The Washington Times! Did the Kenyan usurper indulge in another selfie?

For a President who wants to stand on the “right side of history” – posing in front of a mural of an Argentinian Marxist revolutionary during his trip to Cuba probably wasn’t the best choice.

In a photo-op Monday, President Barack Obama and his delegation stood near a massive mural of Ernesto “Che” Guevara, a faithful follower of Karl Marx, and solider** feared by many for his brutality. Mr. Guevara personally oversaw the butchering of Cuba’s Catholics.

So he "snapped" the photo by either -- posing or standing, take your pick.

It's probably true that we overreacted to the vermin press a little bit in 1942. A more appropriate remedy is public ridicule. Please, consider it your constitutional duty to go forth and make fun of these folks. Justice Brandeis wants you to!

* They is?

** [sic], if you're scoring along at home

Droolers and magic words

The droolers are all about the performative magic of  words these last few days! The is from the Town Hall piece linked at The Fox Nation above:

... As the investigation continues, the media once again showed how they’ve become a clown show. First, a New York Times columnist decided to give a hat tip to New York for having strong gun control laws - totally absurd since Saipov is not a New York resident. Also, he was still able to kill eight people. It was just a dumb remark and politicized the tragedy. This was a terror attack. It’s not the time to peddle gun control talking points.

Second, there’s still the allergic reaction to call things what they are on the Left. CBS News at least put it in their report, but CNN decided to go the old Associated Press route and say Saipov yelled “God is great” in Arabic. Granted, some reporters at the network said Saipov said “Allahu akbar,” but I guess Wolf Blitzer didn’t get the memo. In April, 39-year-old Kori Ali Muhammad opened fire in Fresno, shouting “allahu akbar,” as he was arrested by law enforcement.

The prize, though, goes to the Washington Times's elite "Rapid Reactions" desk:

Jake Tapper, of CNN fame, spoke in the aftermath of the terror attack in New York City by saying — get this — that the phrase “Allahu akbar,” reportedly uttered by the suspected terrorist, is actually a phrase of beauty, in the right circumstances.

Yes — and, in that vein, so was Heil Hitler, depending on the source and context of the utterance.

But this is how the media rolls. When Islam meets terror, and Allah’s at the root, count on the mainstream, lamestream of the media world to find any which way possible to dig up a defense.

I suppose there's no use waiting for the copy desk to ask about those circumstances under which "Heil Hitler" is a phrase of beauty to the reporter. But we're about to get to the fun part:

Breitbart picked up the televised exchange, between Tapper and CNN’s crime and justice reporter, Shimon Prokupecz.

It went like this:

Tapper: Shimon’s got some breaking news on this “horrific incident.”

Shimon: “That’s right Jake. So what we’re told, I’m told by three sources now that the NYPD and the FBI are investigating this as a terrorism incident. Our understanding is that, according to witnesses … they’re telling police that they heard the driver saying, yelling, ‘Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar,’ during this incident.”

And Tapper’s response?

“The Arabic chant, Allahu Akbar, God is great, sometimes is said under the most beautiful of circumstance and too often, we hear it being said in moments like this,” he said.

Today's pro tip? If you have to quote Breitbart, stop before you get to the part the proves you're lying. But onward!

Oh please, make it stop.

It’s bad enough the leftists of the country can’t take even the most mundane and common sense of national security protections to stave off radical Islam terror attacks — like clamping the borders, for example.

But now we’ve got to listen to tripe like Tapper‘s, that uses a terror attack — a terror attack committed by an Islamic believer in the messaging and violent means of ISIS — to propel a politically correct view of the phrase “Allahu akbar?”

Sorry, Tapper. Allahu akbar is what it is. And what it is, at least in the minds of Americans wearied by Islamic-tied terror, is a rally call to violence. Calling it beautiful, especially in context of discussing the latest terror hit on American soil, is indicative of a mind blinded by political correctness, disconnected with reality — and even, sadly, a heart that’s apathetic and callous toward the innocent victims of the “Allahu akbar” terrorists.

Breitbart, in turn, tries to bail the writer out (apparently, there is honor among the foamy-mouthed):

But on top of misleading his viewers, there is the jaw-dropping  inappropriateness of Tapper’s imperious reminder that “Allahu Akbar” is “sometimes said under the most beautiful of circumstances.” As Cheryl K. Chumley of the Washington Times accurately points out, “so was Heil Hitler” said at weddings, funerals, family reunions, and children’s birthday parties. But who thinks offering that kind of context is anything but unseemly?

... Using one of his transparent semantic arguments, Tapper publicly freaked out and launched a hysterical Twitter crusade declaring his critics a liar, including those who quoted him directly, like Sean Hannity, who did nothing more than broadcast video of the segment in question:

Breitbart does us a real favor here, presenting a goodly catalog of its fellow liars. Should you be wondering, no. You should never miss a chance to mock these clowns.

Pesky grammar

Hey, kids! Who wants to be first to diagram this headless relative clause from the Washington Times?

Andrew C. McCarthy, a former assistant U.S. attorney who prosecuted Islamic terrorists and a National Review columnist, asked in a recent column how a probe created to explore any Trump-Russia collusion became what amounts to a large federal task force throwing all of its considerable power against one man who worked only briefly for the candidate.

As is so often the case, the grammar that gets you in trouble isn't "bad" grammar; it's perfectly "correct" grammar that's correct about more than one thing.

We seem to have missed the point

Naturally, you'll want to go read the whole excruciating thing, but meanwhile -- would somebody remind The Washington Times that talking about your stick is still, actually, you know, talk?

Today in drooling racist paranoia

Shock horror outrage! How bad is it, elite Washington Times "Rapid Reactions" team?

London’s Muslim Mayor Sadiq Khan declared an end to any kind of advertising in the city that promotes “unrealistic expectations of women’s body image and health,” or, in layman’s, typical Western-style fashion spreads.

Sharia, meet London.

As the Gatestone Institute notes, this reminds of when ISIS took over Sirte in Libya a couple years ago and immediately set up sharia shop, ordering via billboards for all women to don baggy burka’d robes if they wanted to walk in the streets without, say, getting acid thrown in their faces, or raped.

Well, not quite. What it most "reminds of" is -- how did the Washington Times put it back in June 2016?

London’s first Muslim mayor is hitting the ground running with a ban on ads in the city that feature “unrealistic” body images.
 
Labor Party’s Sadiq Khan pledged before his May 7 election win to prohibit ads across Transport for London (Tfl) like those seen in a “beach body ready?” campaign by the company Protein World.

... The decision by Mr. Khan comes just months after the United Kingdom’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) began looking for way to “proactively regulate” images of men and women.

Well, that's at least marginally closer to the truth. As noted by professional media outlets, of course, it was a ban on body-shaming ads on the Transport for London network (whose ad policies, we noted at the time, are fairly easy to find), not "the city." And there's some flavorful irony in the link the Gatestone Institute* itself uses to illustrate its sharianoid babbling; it's a column in the Independent headlined "Sadiq Khan is right to ban objectifying ads from the tube -- we never consented to this sexist wallpaper." Much of the adult world, indeed, seemed quite capable of putting this into the general context of how commercial speech is regulated. (Hint: At least he isn't fining anyone half a million dollars for half a second of accidental breast at halftime of the Super Bowl.)

But of course that's not why we have deranged race-baiting fishwraps like The Washington Times, is it? Back to today's story:
Read more »

When spark plugs attack

See if you can guess where the Editor In Chief Emeritus of the Washington Times is going with this one:

The Donald finally caught a break in Paris, basking in rare Franco-American bonhomie as he joined the new president of France on Bastille Day, this year to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the American arrival on the battlefields of World War I.

A contingent of American troops even led the parade down the Champs-Elysees. Not even a president can resist a parade, especially a military parade with marching bands and serried ranks of fighting men. On Thursday, President Emmanuel Macron of France did not even try.

I think you've got the wrong "not even" -- is there some reason heads of state should be especially immune to the old blare of bugles and ruffle of drums? But we're about to get to the point:

Neither did Donald Trump, once a schoolboy at a military academy. Regimental flags floating on a peaceful breeze, despised as nationalist symbols to some, are but reminders to all that “greater love hath no man than this,” in the words of Christ as recorded by the Apostle John, “that a man lay down his life for his friends.”

So whatever his offspring have been up to with the Russians, the Bright Sun of the 21st Century is still reminding Europe who's the real defender of Western Civ. Which makes the Times's venture into period history all the more interesting:

... The 100th anniversary celebrations are particularly poignant reminders of Franco-American friendship when it was backs-to-the-wall time.  ... When the Germans, advancing through a grain field, got within a hundred yards, the Marines opened ferocious rifle fire, mowing down the ranks of the Bosch until the survivors fled into the woods.

Read more »

Arrest them, in the name of the people!

How many sources does it take to lead the front page, Reagan's Favorite Newspaper?

Trump administration officials believe that a Department of Homeland Security report that undercut the president’s position on his travel ban was drafted with the express intent of leaking it to the press, a source close to the department says.


"Close to the department."

The source said the report was drafted by those loyal to the Obama administration inside the department’s office of intelligence and analysis. The drafters relied solely on open source material, which meant it could be delivered to reporters without violating federal laws on mishandling classified information.

“This was not really a leak but sabotage,” the source said. “This report was commentary. This is insurrection. They all took an oath.”

Arrest them, in the name of the people! But the plot's about to thicken:

The leak to The Associated Press appears to follow a pattern of suspected Obama loyalists still inside the government releasing draft documents that are immediately refuted by the White House, such as a supposed plan to mobilize the National Guard to arrest illegal criminal immigrants.


It must be a slow Sunday when you can't even get someone to go on the record to denounce the enemies of the state. Perhaps we'll hear more later in the week.

Today in framing

Judging from Wednesday's centerpiece, bb dayorder was received and understood at the Washington Times*: Massster speaks and the Times listens!

For all of President Trump’s celebrated battles with the media, he is also allowing the press more extended access to some of his White House meetings than previous presidents did.

Did you ever wonder about how the president's celebrated openness looks elsewhere? Say, at Military Times?

White House officials held their first listening session on problems with the Department of Veterans Affairs on Tuesday, but without inviting prominent members of the veterans community to the event.

What fun could be had at White House briefings if topics like this came up! In the good old days, you'll recall, the president would occasionally bring things like the Iron Cross to bestow on particularly offensive tools of the far-right press. Perhaps those days could return.

* How quickly things change. The reporter seems to be vastly less interested in how often the president plays golf than he was a few months ago.

The black guy's about to not play golf again!

You really do wonder if the Times has a policy of letting the print edition look all mature -- if incomprehensibly boring, headline-wise -- while saving the cask-strength stuff for online readers:

That explains why Trump is in the 1A print headline but doesn't appear anywhere in the frontpage text -- this is a story about an "Obama snub." Of what, you ask?

Of all the perks of the presidency that Barack Obama will miss as he leaves the White House, it’s a good bet that Camp David won’t rank high on the list.

Compared with his predecessors, President Obama has spent little downtime over the past eight years at the secluded presidential retreat in the mountains overlooking Thurmont, Maryland. In total, Mr. Obama has visited Camp David 39 times, spanning all or parts of 93 days — barely 3 percent of his two-term tenure.

By contrast, President George W. Bush made 149 visits to Camp David in two terms, covering all or parts of 487 days, said Mark Knoller, the CBS News White House reporter who keeps meticulous records of presidential comings and goings.

In other words, this is more or less the same story that the same reporter wrote in May 2014:

President Obama differs from his predecessor on more than just policy.

Compared with President George W. Bush, Mr. Obama has rarely visited Camp David, the sprawling, secluded retreat in northern Maryland that has become a regular getaway spot for presidents over the past 70 years.
Read more »

The black guy's playing golf again!

Give us the good news first, The Washington Times!

For the last time, taxpayers are paying for a Hawaiian Christmas vacation for President Obama and his family, an annual luxury getaway that has cost the Treasury easily more than $35 million over eight years.

Golfing on oceanside courses, dining at high-end restaurants and frolicking on stunning white-sand beaches where security guards keep other tourists at bay, the president and his family are in the midst of a 17-day holiday that requires dozens of Secret Service agents, military personnel and other government employees to guarantee their safety and ease of travel around Oahu.

The Obamas are once again renting a multimillion-dollar oceanfront home in Kailua, a town on the northeast side of the island where houses in the neighborhood fetch around $10 million. It’s near golf courses and a Marine Corps base where the president goes for morning workouts at the gym.

Well, that can't be fake news. It has verbs and objects and adjectives, and -- Christmas comes early! -- lots of things that look like actual facts. Still, it has a couple of features that help the larger project of distinguishing the People's Right to Know from the People's Right to ... best two out of three? We were so close that time.

Read more »

Wandering comma of the month

No doubt it's busy days at The Washington Times, but -- do you suppose that first comma in the second graf might want to go before "with Washington"? Just so we know who's fighting with whom and what's being dragged into which?

Alas, it's fixed -- after a fashion -- online:

Five months later that Libyan offensive has stalled amid heavy urban fighting with Washington finding itself being dragged further into the conflict, a development that analysts claim will loom large over the Iraqi-led offensive to take Mosulfrom the Islamist terror group, also known as ISIS and ISIL.

Just a reminder that you can't save the world if the world can't tell what you're doing to save it.

His master's voice

Hey, kids! What do you suppose is the top story at The Washington Times this morning?

The Trump campaign is bringing up Monica Lewinsky and Gennifer Flowers to push back against criticism of Donald Trump’s treatment of women, as the battle for female voters turns into a mud-slinging contest.

Could it be ... the same thing as the top story at the Fair 'n' Balanced Network?

Donald Trump’s campaign is signaling that Bill Clinton’s history of affairs and alleged sexual misconduct – as well as Hillary Clinton’s treatment of the women involved – is now fair game, after his Democratic opponent took the first shot by calling out his own negative comments toward women at Monday’s debate.

Amazing how that works. It's as if an unseen hand ...

'Hunters can sense the inauthenticity'

Apparently there went out a degree from Caesar Augustus again: Show us who's the real American here! Bottom of the front page would be good.

From George Washington’s flintlock pistols to John F. Kennedy’s M1 rifle, presidents have shared a long tradition of proud gun ownership.

That heritage would be far more likely to continue under a President Donald Trump than it would under a President Hillary Clinton.

As is so often the case, the point is clearer in the online hed (and the URL):

How does he aim to do that?

Mr. Trump, the Republican nominee, has a concealed carry permit in New York, owns at least two handguns and professes a “tremendous passion” for hunting with his sons. He laments that his schedule rarely affords him time to hunt.

In an interview with The Washington Times in 2012, Mr. Trump said he owns a Hechler & Koch .45 pistol and a .38-caliber Smith & Wesson.

“I own a couple of different guns, but I don’t talk about it,” he said at the time.

In the good old days, kids, there were people called "copy editors," whose job it was to point out that -- especially if you're going to pick on the libruls for how little they know about GUNZ -- you should look up stuff like the spelling of Heckler & Koch. That points to a larger concern with this story, but first I have to break ranks and tell a newsroom joke:

Q: How do you hide a $20 bill from a reporter?
A: Put it in the "weapons" section of the stylebook.

Hence the mild skepticism with which you might greet the WashTimes's claim about what "hunters" think:

Broadly, that's true -- especially when a top-drawer political writer demonstrates his authenticity by expecting his audience to believe in the ".12-gauge shotgun."

Read more »

Theoretical Thursday: Bluff-calling and eye-gazing

Do you get the impression every now and then that the Washington Times is just kidding around with the print edition -- that it's saving the single-malt crazy for the folks who enjoy it online?  The story's the same in both cases; the differences remind us that there's more to the framing process than just poking keywords into database searches.

At top is the print treatment of a fairly straightforward story:

Russia said Wednesday that it will deploy three newly created military divisions to protect its southern and western borders, days after U.S. and NATO military leaders unveiled plans to stand up a 4,200-member force in Eastern Europe to counter Russian aggression there.

... and the actors are more or less the ones you'd expect from the hed: Russia, NATO and the US. Notice how things change for the homepage, though:

 Notice how it's not just personalized but individualized: It's Putin staring down Obama, not Russia staring down NATO (hence the four-year-old filer of Putin aiming "a replica of the AK-47 assault rifle," rather than the undated shot on the front). It doesn't tell you what to think, but as Bernard Cohen put it, it's stunningly successful at telling you what to think about -- say, that extra jar of Survival Seeds for the bunker.

It's not as if the print Times doesn't lavish attention on the usurper; in the offlede, after all, the Justice Department is "President Obama's Justice Department." But this one seems a little stronger on the special sauce than usual, given what the older right-wing press seemed to make of the matter.

The real question the Times might want to ask is: Can't anybody here play this game? As in, wouldn't you have to know which player has the weaker hand to know who's bluffing? Is the Washington Times telling Putin what cards the pitiful, helpless giant is holding? Why does the Washington Times hate America? Why does the Washington Times hate freedom???