Trump Media Bias Cartoons

'HANNITY': Trump says media 'poison the voters' by publishing allegations

Trump

Hannity

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump lashed out Friday at coverage of his campaign, saying that the press was attempting to "poison the voters" by publishing allegations that he had sexually assaulted women in the past.
WATCH: TRUMP SAYS MEDIA 'POISON THE VOTERS'
"Just so you understand, all that stuff it was fabricated, made up, never happened," Trump told Fox News' Sean Hannity on 'Hannity'. "It never happened. It’s not like a question of it may have, none of it ever happened."
WATCH: MEDIA SLAM TRUMP OVER CLINTON JOKES
Multiple women have come forward in recent weeks to accuse the real estate mogul of sexual misconduct. The allegations date as far back as 1979 and up through 2007.
Trump tied the accusations back to emails linked by Wikileaks that showed close professional ties between members of the media and high-ranking Clinton campaign officials.

Predictions Map

See the Fox News 2016 battleground prediction map and make your own election projections. See Predictions Map →

"Look at what came out today about the New York Times where they have reporters that are soft or safe or something," Trump said. "I have those same reporters and they are brutal. They’re not brutal, they’re dishonest."
"This is all stuff that doesn’t exist," Trump added. "This is dirty, disgusting stuff. And it’ll be revealed at some point ... And you know what, it’s no way that it should be. We’re supposed to be a great democracy."
The GOP nominee also weighed on secretly recorded footage showing Democratic operatives appearing to brag about inciting violence at Republican rallies.
"When you look at those tapes, it’s disgusting," Trump said, discussing a Chicago rally that was canceled due to a riot March 11 "They’re real thugs, by the way. Real thugs and they injured policemen, they injured people and they should be put in jail ... And who got blamed for it? Our rally people. Us. Me. We all got blamed for it and it had nothing to do with us."

Hannity Surges to #1 Rated Show on Fox News, KellyFile Plummets to a Dismal 5th (4 Days ago)

WOW…this is really bad news for Megyn Kelly and shows where Fox News viewers are in terms of what type of coverage they are looking for.

Donald Trump as GOP nominee has caused a Catch-22 for Fox from the start. On one hand, their viewers are over 90% right leaning, but on the other they are an “establishment” network channel and had no interest in an outsider like Donald Trump taking over the GOP party like he did.

Now, they have hedged, by allowing Sean Hannity to have a fair Trump coverage show and going forward with Kelly-file as a non-stop Trump bash-a-thon with the type of biased programming any Hillary Clinton SuperPac would salivate over.

As a result, Hannity has surged to first place and Megyn Kelly has PLUMMETED to a dismal 5th place.Once considered “the future of Fox News” by some, “Kellyfile”(2.104) was ranked BELOW

1. Hannity (2.471)
2. O’Reilly (2.231)
3. Bret Baier (2.168)
4. TheFive (2.155)

A pretty dismal 5th place when you consider she is the “darling” of Rupert Murdoch.Along with her OBSESSIVE HATE for Trump, Kelly may not admit it openly, but is clearly a Hillary fan and uses the same type of insulting verbiage to attack Trump supporters as Clinton did when she called us a “Basket of Deplorables”

Rush Limbaugh And Michelle Malkin Lead Conservative Attack Against Fox News (1st published Jan. 16th 2016)

If you’ve noticed Fox News becoming more of a shill for establishment candidates and liberal causes lately, well, you’re not alone. After a major shakeup at the network, several major conservative pundits — including Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin — have started to push back against the network’s leftward drift.
In an article published earlier this week by New York Magazine, Fox News insiders said that the conservative network’s architect, Roger Ailes, was being slowly pushed out of the picture.
“(Ailes) seems detached and removed,” an unnamed Fox News personality was quoted as saying.
“He’s not around as much,” a friend of Ailes added. “He doesn’t have as many meetings with talent.”
As Rupert Murdoch’s sons — Lachlan and James Murdoch — have taken over their father’s media empire, Ailes’ role has been relegated to a secondary one.
In addition, the once-conservative network has embraced establishment candidates like former Gov. Jeb Bush, Sen. Marco Rubio and Gov. John Kasich. Meanwhile, the network has either marginalized or been hostile to candidates like businessman Donald Trump or Sen. Ted Cruz.
“I can tell you, my base is fed up with Fox,” former Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin said. In her recent book “Sold Out,” Malkin went as far as to call Murdoch a “treacherous bedfellow.”
However, she pointed out that even though Fox was becoming less conservative, there still weren’t many other options for conservatives looking to escape mainstream media’s liberal bias.
“After the big brouhaha with Trump, there was all the apocalyptic talk of the ratings cratering. But there’s still nowhere else on TV to go,” Malkin said. “There’s a big opportunity. These people are sick and tired of seeing (South Carolina Sen.) Lindsey Graham all over Fox.”
Rush Limbaugh agreed. As the man who set the blueprint for much of Fox’s punditry, Limbaugh is in a unique position to judge the network. He’s also in a unique position to judge Roger Ailes, too — Ailes was his producer during Rush’s foray into television in the early ’90s and remains a close friend.
However, Limbaugh recently said he “no longer watches cable news,” a quote a Limbaugh friend told reporters was directed specifically at Fox News.
People within conservative political circles have noticed the drift as well, the article alleged.
“I’ve joked to people that they’ll be doing a segment about kumquats in China and somehow they’ll mention Rubio,” an unnamed associate of Ted Cruz’s is quoted as saying.

Facebook employees fume after push to censor Trump posts rebuffed

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg

Some of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s posts on Facebook have set off an intense debate inside the social media company over the past year, with some employees arguing certain posts about banning Muslims from entering the U.S. should be removed for violating the site’s rules on hate speech, according to people familiar with the matter.
The decision to allow Mr. Trump’s posts went all the way to Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg, who ruled in December that it would be inappropriate to censor the candidate, according to the people familiar with the matter. That decision has prompted employees across the company to complain on Facebook’s internal messaging service and in person to Zuckerberg and other managers that it was bending the site’s rules for Trump, and some employees who work in a group charged with reviewing content on Facebook threatened to quit, the people said.
“Facebook has never contacted us about employee complaints and has never removed a post,” a spokeswoman for Trump’s campaign said. “We are not concerned about the liberal Clinton elites who are so intolerant of conservative ideas that they would seek to censor the Trump campaign’s enormously successful Facebook engagement.”
In a statement provided Wednesday evening, a Facebook spokeswoman said its reviewers consider the context of a post when assessing whether to take it down. “That context can include the value of political discourse,” she said. “Many people are voicing opinions about this particular content and it has become an important part of the conversation around who the next U.S. president will be.”
On Friday, senior members of Facebook’s policy team posted more details on its policy. “In the weeks ahead, we’re going to begin allowing more items that people find newsworthy, significant, or important to the public interest—even if they might otherwise violate our standards,” they wrote.

Obama Care Cartoons

President pushes ObamaCare despite double-digit rate hikes

Stupid Democrats?

Despite rate and deductible increases, President Obama on Thursday defended his namesake health care program and said millions of Americans “now know the financial security of health insurance” because of the Affordable Care Act.
His remarks came as  ObamaCare sticker shock is getting even worse in some parts of the country, as more and more states are approving soaring rate increases for next year- with one Arizona town seeing a 75 percent hike and another in Minnesota seeing a 190 percent increase in deductibles over the course of four years.
“It’s absolutely unaffordable,” Minnesota Republican House Speaker Kurt Daudt told FoxNews.com. “I don’t even consider that health coverage.”
With some families forced to shell out $2,000 a month for insurance that comes with a whopping $13,000 deductible, Daudt said for some the only option is to pull their coverage and pay a fee for not having insurance, which in 2016 came out to $695 per adult and $347.50 per child (up to a maximum of $2085.)
“It’s catastrophic,” Daudt said, adding that he’s talked to Minnesotans who are being forced to financially drop their coverage, pay the fine and save money on the side for medical emergencies.
However Obama, speaking in Miami, maintained “It’s worked,” but admitted the program wasn't perfect. “No law is.”
Obama was in south Florida to trump up support for the ACA before the Nov. 1 start of the enrollment period.
Problems with rising premiums in many parts of the country as well as major insurers calling it quits have left consumers with few or in some cases no choices next year.
The hikes are fueling criticism of the law, though the White House is now openly pushing the possibility of a public option.
The troubles have bolstered arguments of Republicans and added some top Democratic allies to the crowd of critics, including former President Bill Clinton, who called ObamaCare “the craziest thing in the world,” while Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton said it’s “no longer affordable.”
In Arizona, after months of health insurer exits from the Affordable Care Act marketplace, state regulators have approved plans from two companies that will be the only marketplace insurance providers in 2017.
Maricopa County residents' only health care option will be Centene Corp., which said it will sell its “Ambetter” plans at a 74.5 percent increase next year.
The amount people pay will vary on their age, coverage levels and income, which in turn will determine whether an individual qualifies for subsidies that help offset the cost of monthy premiums. Nearly 70 percent of Arizonans with a marketplace plan get subsidized coverage.
Jumps in finalized rates for big health insurance plans around the country illustrate the challenge the Obama administration faces as it seeks to stabilize the president’s landmark health care legislation before he leaves office.
According to a roundup by The Wall Street Journal, market leaders continuing to sell coverage through HealthCare.gov or a state equivalent are seeking premium increases of 30 percent of more in Delaware, Hawaii, Alabama, Mississippi, Kansas and Texas.
In Montana, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Pennsylvania, the approved rate increases for the market leader top 50 percent.
Blue Cross Blue Shield in New Mexico agreed to start selling plans through the online exchanges after pulling out last year. They agreed to return to the state only if they would be allowed to increase rates 93 percent of their 2015 level.

Clinton's debate reference to nuclear response rekindles judgement questions

The beginning of the Clinton email scandal

Hillary Clinton’s latest mishandling of sensitive information may have occurred before an audience of 70 million.
Speaking at the presidential debate Wednesday night, Clinton noted that it takes four minutes from the time the president makes the call to use nuclear weapons to their actual launch. The remark came amid questions about the fitness of Clinton and GOP candidate Donald Trump to hold the nation’s nuclear codes, but critics, including former intelligence operatives, told Fox News that level of detail about nuclear response times is “protected information.”
“The bottom line on nuclear weapons is that when the president gives the order, it must be followed,” Clinton said. “There’s about four minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so.”
"Whether the four minutes is accurate or not, anything having to do with response capability is generally classified," Dan Maguire, a former strategic planner with Africom, and with 46 years combined service, told Fox News. "She has a tendency to use previous access and her position as secretary (of state) to give an appearance of knowledge to show she has the answers, rather than protect the information."
The reference to a four-minute timeline between the order and the launch was seen by former intelligence officers and military operatives as a possible violation of operational security, known as OPSEC.
A former Navy SEAL officer said the statement appears to be a "direct violation of US national security protocols and governing law. Our country has no greater secrets than those that protect our strategic nuclear deterrence capability."

Predictions Map

See the Fox News 2016 battleground prediction map and make your own election projections. See Predictions Map →

Clinton, who was investigated by the FBI for a year for “careless” handling of sensitive and even top secret emails on her private server, went on to say that 10 people who have had the responsibility of carrying out such a presidential order are backing her.
A senior official in the Clinton campaign rejected claims the former secretary of state revealed any secret information, and provided Fox News with multiple published reports detailing the response time. In one Bloomberg News article, Bruce Blair, a former Minuteman missile-launch officer and research scholar at Princeton University’s Program on Science and Global Security, spelled out the step-by-step procedure that follows an order from the president. The procedures include conferring with military and civilian advisers in Washington and around the world including the head of all U.S. strategic nuclear forces at Strategic Command in Omaha.
That meeting can be as deliberative and lengthy as the president wants, but if the decision is prompted by the knowledge that a hostile nation has launched nuclear weapons at the U.S., it could last a matter of seconds, according to Blair.
“About five minutes may elapse from the president’s decision until intercontinental ballistic missiles blast out of their silos, and about fifteen minutes until submarine missiles shoot out of their tubes,” the news article stated. “Once fired, the missiles and their warheads cannot be called back.”
Intelligence experts, including the former Navy SEAL and a former senior intelligence official told Fox News that the mere fact the response time has been reported in academic documents does not authorize government officials who hold a security clearance, or had previous access to classified information, to discuss it publicly.
Clinton’s statement "now validates with specificity something of great sensitivity that has long been speculated by our adversaries and others in the national arena, including academics and think tanks, " the former SEAL officer said.
At a Pentagon press conference with South Korean defense minister Han Min-Koo, Defense Secretary Ash Carter avoided the issue when asked about this by CNN’s Barbara Starr.
"I’m sorry but I’m not gonna answer your first part because it is cast in terms of the ongoing presidential campaign,"  Carter said. "I’ve said repeatedly I’m not going to not answer questions in that context."
Two senior defense officials reached by Fox News highly doubt Clinton was read into any nuclear response plans as secretary of state and think the “four-minute” comment was an estimation on her part, not a classified number she revealed.
"While the excuse has been given that there has been previous 'talk' in the media and in academia regarding the 4 minute response time, it was just that – talk – it was informed speculation or assumption – it was not confirmed or stated by any official U.S. government official or stated as policy," Tony Shaffer, Vice President for Strategic Initiatives and Operations at the London Center for Policy Research, told Fox News.
"There is uncertainty  - for a reason – maintained by the Department of Defense- so that adversaries do not know what our capability is or what to expect – that has been blown here by Ms. Clinton," Shaffer added.