Bias Media Cartoons

EpiPen price hike puts bipartisan heat on Democratic senator's daughter

Good Old Democrats

The mounting congressional scrutiny of pharmaceutical giant Mylan over its 400 percent price hike for EpiPen has created an awkward situation on Capitol Hill for Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin -- his daughter runs the company at the center of the scandal. 
Colleagues on both sides of the aisle, as well as Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, are now slamming Mylan and demanding investigations into why prices were jacked so high on the lifesaving allergy treatment drug.
The uproar over the increase has become a public relations nightmare for Mylan, CEO Heather Bresch and Manchin, who finally broke his silence on the subject Thursday.
“I am aware of the questions my colleagues and many parents are asking and frankly I share their concerns about the skyrocketing prices of prescription drugs,” Manchin said in a written statement. “Today I heard Mylan’s initial response, and I am sure Mylan will have a more comprehensive and formal response to those questions.”
Manchin, a former West Virginia governor who has served in the U.S. Senate since 2010, said he would work with his “colleagues and all interested parties to lower the price of prescription drugs and to continue to improve our health care system.”
But his comments come days after his colleagues called out his daughter’s company.
Several senators – including Amy Klobuchar, whose daughter uses an EpiPen – have pressed the Food and Drug Administration for answers and asked if alternatives to the EpiPen are in the works.
Klobuchar also wants the Senate Judiciary Committee to hold a hearing to investigate the enormous increase in the price of EpiPens. The Minnesota senator sent a letter to the Federal Trade Commission to look into whether Mylan violated antitrust laws. 
For its part, the company said Thursday it is voluntarily reducing the patient cost of EpiPen through savings cards which will cover up to $300 for a two-pack of EpiPen, but some say it’s not enough.
Admittedly, Manchin is in a tight spot. In the past, he has taken the lead in going after pharmaceutical companies.
He played a big role in pushing to get controversial painkiller Zohydro ER permanently shelved despite the FDA approving the powerful opiate.
Manchin, whose home state leads the nation in prescription overdoses and abuse, worked with both Republicans and Democratic lawmakers to overturn the approval.
At the time, some questioned his motives, since his campaign to kill Zohydro could benefit his daughter’s company.
Though the Mylan epi-scandal hits close to home, Klobuchar believes the senior senator’s connections in Congress won’t deter his colleagues from pursuing answers.
“I think we have an obligation to the American people to do our job regardless of who is related to who at a company,” she told reporters Wednesday. “And I have never seen Senator Manchin intervene himself in any of these cases involving this company. I’ve never seen that happen. I know him very well.”
On Monday, Sens. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and Mark Warner, D-Va., also sent a letter to Bresch demanding an explanation. 
Bresch tried to defend the company's pricing in an interview with CNBC. She seemed to struggle to justify the jump in price but said lowering the price wasn’t an option.
“Had we reduced the list price, I couldn’t ensure that everyone who needs an EpiPen gets one,” she said. She argued that much of the $608 price for a two-pack goes to other middle men in the health care consumer chain. 
But Grassley said in a statement that the price is still what Medicare and insurers have to pay, regardless of the pledge to offset the cost for some patients. 
Another fact not lost on angry customers is that as the price for EpiPens grew, so did Bresch’s own compensation, which spiked more than 671 percent to $18.9 million last year.
The price hike debate has also made it to the campaign trail.
Clinton called the company’s pricing strategy “outrageous” and a “troubling example of a company taking advantage of its consumers.”

BIAS ALERT: Media looks inward, deems slanted Trump coverage warranted

BIAS ALERT: Media consumed with Trump

Donald Trump’s claim that the “crooked media” has it in for him has prompted much soul-searching with the Fourth Estate, and its conclusion appears to be that he's right -- and that's just fine with some news organizations. 
“I’m not running against Crooked Hillary,” Trump told a crowd in Fairfield, Conn., last week. “I’m running against the crooked media.”
Lately some, including The New York Times, Vox and Bill Moyers’ website, have not only owned up to Trump's accusation, they've embraced it.
“If you deplore media cowardice, you might think this is a good thing, not because Trump is a mortal danger to this country, although he is, but because it means the press is doing its job,” Neil Gabler wrote on the journalism website of Moyers, the longtime PBS newsman who cut his teeth as a spokesman for Democratic President Lyndon Johnson. “Call it partisan bias if you like. I call it journalism.”
Ezra Klein, the Vox writer who as a Washington Post staffer organized a secret society of left-wing reporters dubbed “JournoList” that was shut down after it was exposed in 2010, acknowledged that the press is not giving Trump traditional treatment.
“The media has felt increasingly free to cover Trump as an alien, dangerous, and dishonest phenomenon,” Klein wrote last week.
New York Times’ media critic Jim Rutenberg wrote that journalists who personally oppose Trump had an obligation to “throw out the textbook” when it came to coverage of The Donald.
“If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him?” Rutenberg wondered in a front-page article earlier this month.
When it comes to covering Trump, it’s only fair to be unfair, according to The Atlantic.
“All things considered, the press has responded defensibly to the unusual challenges of covering a brazen, habitual liar,” Conor Friedersdorf wrote in a recent column titled, “The Exaggerated Claims of Media Bias Against Donald Trump.”
If Trump is confused by the media’s stance that it has been fair by being biased, he can take comfort in a new study on his treatment by the press since he entered the political arena.
Harvard University’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy tracked his coverage by CBS, Fox, the Los Angeles Times, NBC, The New York Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. It concluded that through its coverage of Trump, both good and bad, the media helped him get the Republican nomination.

Republican calls grow for second look at Clinton case

More than seven weeks after FBI Director James Comey’s July 5 announcement closing the case on Hillary Clinton’s personal email use, Republican calls are growing for prosecutors to take a closer look – at everything from perjury questions to the tangled dealings with Clinton Foundation donors during the candidate’s tenure leading the State Department.
And on Thursday, Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy pointed out another potential problem with the bureau’s original email investigation.
After viewing the FBI’s tightly held file on the case, the South Carolina congressman told Fox News it doesn’t appear investigators asked Clinton about the issue that was the basis for not pursuing charges – known as “intent.”
During Comey’s congressional testimony last month, he said while Clinton was “negligent” and “careless” in her use of personal email for official business, “What we can’t establish is that she acted with the necessary criminal intent.”
But Gowdy said that in reviewing the FBI’s interview file, “I didn’t see any questions on the issue of intent.”
Meanwhile, Donald Trump has steadily racked up endorsements from fellow Republicans for his call earlier this week to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the ties between the family foundation and her State Department.

2016 Election Headquarters

The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →

Rep. Tom Marino, R-Pa., a Trump supporter, was the latest to back that call late Wednesday, saying in a statement “we need an independent prosecutor to investigate the corrupt Clinton Foundation.”
The newest calls follow an Associated Press report Tuesday that more than half of the non-government people with whom Clinton met as secretary of state donated to her family foundation.
The Clinton campaign said the AP relied on “utterly flawed data” and “cherry-picked a limited subset of Secretary Clinton's schedule to give a distorted portrayal of how often she crossed paths with individuals connected to charitable donations to the Clinton Foundation.” 
Asked Wednesday about the calls for a special prosecutor, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest suggested there was little need.
“President Obama and the administration have complete confidence in the independent career prosecutors at the Department of Justice and the FBI who devoted significant time and attention to investigating Secretary Clinton's email practices,” he said. “… I just think it's hard for anybody to make a very persuasive case that somehow there hasn’t been enough investigating, particularly when you layer on top of that all of the congressional hearings and testimony that's gone on with regard to Secretary Clinton's tenure at the State Department.”
The calls for a special prosecutor come after House Republicans already were looking to the FBI to examine whether Clinton committed perjury during her 2015 congressional testimony on her email practices.
In a letter obtained by Fox News, House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, and Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., asked U.S. Attorney Channing D. Phillips to look at “four pieces of sworn testimony” they claimed were “incompatible with the FBI's findings.”
Among those discrepancies, they said Clinton testified there was “nothing marked classified” on her emails, yet Comey said a “very small number” of emails had markings indicating classified information.
The Justice Department Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs, Peter Kadzik, confirmed in an Aug. 2 letter to both committees they had the perjury investigation request and the department would "take appropriate action as necessary."

Assange vows Clinton email release, as storm clouds gather for candidate

Assange

With 75 days before voters pick their new president, email revelations are threatening to overtake Hillary Clinton’s campaign – with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange hurling another log on an already raging fire with a vow to release “significant” Clinton documents.
In an exclusive interview Wednesday night with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly, Assange was asked whether new information culled from Clinton emails would be released before the general election: "Yes, absolutely.” 
Asked whether it could be an election game-changer, Assange told Kelly, “It depends on how it catches fire."
Dana Perino, former White House press secretary under the George W. Bush administration and co-host of Fox News’ “The Five,” predicted Assange would release the files before the third presidential debate, since “it is the one everyone pays attention to.”