Posts tagged "Clinton Derangement Syndrome"

h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW

Ben Dimiero at mediamattersforamerica:

Five years ago, Fox News expanded its online presence with “Fox Nation.” Early promos for the site told viewers that it’s “time to say ‘no’ to biased media and ‘yes’ to fair play and free speech,” while promising that Fox fans had finally found “a place to call home.” Similarly, the “Statement of Purpose” on the site announces that it is dedicated to “the core principles of tolerance, open debate, civil discourse, and fair and balanced coverage of the news.”

But after its launch, the site quickly turned into — in the words of former Fox News producer Joe Muto — the “seedy underbelly of the Fox News online empire.” Fox Nation has for years openly cheered Republican politicians and policies, actively organized for the tea party, smeared Democrats and progressives, engaged in blatant race-baiting on a near-daily basis, and routinely elevated nonsense from the conservative fringe.

So while Fox Nation is celebrating its fifth birthday and its self-proclaimed role as a “defender of the Constitution and the home of hot debates,” Media Matters looks back at some (but nowhere near all) of the lowlights from the site’s first five years.

"Hip-Hop BBQ"

Fox Nation’s most infamous moment, which garnered widespread attention and ridicule, was posting a story about President Obama’s 2011 birthday party with the following headline and image:


Obama’s “War On Marriage”

After President Obama declared support for marriage equality in 2012, Fox Nation attacked him for declaring “WAR ON MARRIAGE” (the site later changed the headline):


Fox Nation has repeatedly trafficked in conspiracies about the president’s birth certificate, highlighting numerous stories promoting the nonsensical theory. More than once in 2009, Fox Nation attached an image of Obama wearing Somali clothes to stories promoting birther claptrap:


The Impending Apocalypse

In February 2011, Fox Nation promoted what Fox & Friends Saturday co-host Clayton Morris described as an “incredible piece of video” showing a “greenish figure” in a crowd of Egyptian protesters. The site quoted fellow conspiracy website WND explaining that the green figure “resembles an erect rider atop a horse in Medieval-like barding.” The headline, which was pulled from Clayton Morris’ blog, asked:


A Vicious Smear Of Planned Parenthood

In 2012, Fox Nation proved how low they were willing to sink to smear their enemies. That December, a British charity for victims of domestic abuse released a video urging women not to conceal the effects of domestic violence. After Planned Parenthood posted the video to its Facebook page, Fox Nation highlighted a since-deleted article from that completely inverted the message of the ad, posting it under this headline:


"Fox Nation Victory!"

Fox Nation’s open campaigning for Republican and conservative causes has led the site to repeatedly declare things like a 2009 congressional delay of health care reform (which the site called the “health care rationing bill”) a “Fox Nation Victory!” This 2011 headline and image about the House voting to repeal Obamacare perhaps best captures the tone of the site’s health care reform politicking:


Obama Handing Land To Mexico

In 2010, Fox News show America Live embarrassed itself with a “ludicrous" story about how the Obama administration was responsible for a "massive stretch" of Arizona land being closed, with host Shannon Bream telling viewers, "Critics say the administration is, in effect, giving a major strip of the Southwest back to Mexico." (The entire story was painfully misleading.) Fox Nation ramped things up by posting a link to the America Live segment with a headline informing readers that Obama “Gives Back Major Strip of AZ to Mexico.”



Shortly after its launch, Fox Nation morphed into both a cheering section and a staging area for the tea party. The site even hosted a “virtual tea party” in 2009 for people who “can’t get to a tea party.” To give an idea of what Fox Nation’s early tea party coverage looked like, here’s a headline from March 2010:


Hillary’s “Communist” Clothing, “Macho” Putin, The “Nuzzling” President, And Other Lowlights

Other headlines that have appeared on Fox Nation throughout the years. May 2010:


July 2013:


January 2010:


March 2014:


August 2010: 


December 2009:


September 2009:


July 2009:


June 2009:


June 2009: 


May 2009:


Not to mention numerous instances during the five years of Fox Nation’s existence documented by that the FN comments routinely featured calls of death threats directed at President Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Eric Holder, Muslims, Hispanics, African-Americans, LGBTQs, unions, or basically any liberal/progressive in America. 

h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW

Will Mark Levin’s vulgar analysis of Hillary Clinton finally be enough to keep top GOP officials off his show?

On the March 21 edition of his radio show, Levin highlighted a Gallup poll showing that the majority of respondents, 18 percent, feel Clinton’s gender is the most positive aspect of her potential presidency. Levin summarized the results by asking "Hillary Clinton’s gender? Do they mean her genitalia is her top 2016 selling point? Is that what that means?" Levin later said "But the key is it’s her genitalia. That’s why so many people would vote for her. I wonder if Bill Clinton would vote for her because of that. He seems to — well, he likes genitalia but maybe not hers."

Levin has a long history of offensive commentary on his radio show. He has accused President Obama of abusing children, compared marriage equality to incest, polygamy, and drug use, compared supporters of the Affordable Care Act to Nazi “brown shirts,” and advocated for Obama to be impeached.

Despite this rhetoric, prominent conservatives have given tacit approval to Levin’s views by appearing on his show. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) called into his show as recently as February. Levin hosted House Budget Committee chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) to talk about the new budget agreement reached in December. Levin criticized Ryan’s budget deal with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) later that month.

Levin’s hateful rhetoric has also earned him praise from the conservative community — he was recently named the winner of the Conservative Political Action Conference’s Andrew Breitbart Defender of the First Amendment Award. He is also listed as one of the speakers on the NRA’s “Leadership Forum” in April, speaking alongside other prominent conservative GOP leaders like Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) and Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Marco Rubio (R-FL).

From the 03.21.2014 edition of Premiere Radio Networks’ The Mark Levin Show:

h/t: Olivia Marshall at MMFA

See Also: RWW’s Brian Tashman: Austin Ruse, while filling for Sandy Rios, advocates “left-wing professors to be shot.”

h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW

h/t: Elise Foley at the Huffington Post

Fox News will host discredited smear merchant Kathleen Willey tonight to attack Hillary Clinton. Willey is not credible — she has repeatedly been caught contradicting her own sworn testimony and has pushed absurd conspiracies that the Clintons killed her husband and former White House aide Vince Foster.

The website for Fox’s The Kelly File currently features the following tease for tonight’s episode: “She claimed Bill Clinton sexually harassed her, but former aide Kathleen Willey now says Hillary is the bigger danger to women! Don’t miss this explosive interview.” Megyn Kelly’s interview will likely cover the same ground as anappearance Willey made on WND reporter Aaron Klein’s radio program, during which she claimed that “Hillary Clinton is the war on women.”

Willey’s claims about Bill Clinton’s supposed harassment have been thoroughly discredited. In 1998, Willeyalleged on CBS’ 60 Minutes that President Clinton fondled her against her will in 1993 during a private White House meeting in which she asked for a paid position in the administration (she was working as a volunteer at the time). Clinton denied making any sexual advance toward Willey, both at the time and in his memoir. The allegations were explored during discovery of Jones v. Clinton, the lawsuit in which Paula Jones claimed that Clinton sexually harassed her, and reviewed by Independent Counsel Robert Ray.

Ray’s report found that “Willey’s Jones deposition testimony differed from her grand jury testimony on material aspects of the alleged incident,” noting that Willey “said at her deposition … that [Clinton] did not fondle her.” Ray also pointed out that — despite Willey’s subsequent claims that she had been intimidated near her home shortly before giving her Jones deposition in 1998 — in her Jones deposition, she “testified no one had tried to discourage her from testifying.”  


Willey’s husband, Ed Willey, committed suicide on November 29, 1993 — the same day on which she claims Bill Clinton sexually harassed her after she asked him for a job. At the time, Edward Willey owed the IRS $400,000, had stolen $275,000 from a client, and was being threatened with disbarment. Kathleen Willey has since insinuated that her husband was actually murdered at the behest of the Clintons, and suggested a possible parallel to the death of Foster. Fringe conservatives have for years claimed that Foster was murdered in spite of numerous investigations proving that he took his own life.

In her 2007 autobiography, Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Willey wrote that her husband is on a list of “former Clinton associates who had died abruptly — and conveniently for the Clintons,” and claimed, “it has not escaped my notice that, less than five months after the left-handed Vince Foster drove to a wooded area in Virginia and used both hands to put a .38 caliber pistol into his mouth, so did my husband.” (The claim that the gun a left-handed Foster used to take his own life was found in his right hand is a common falsehood used to promote the conspiracy — Foster was actually right-handed.)

Willey then speculated that her husband could have been killed because he may have “illegally borrowed” money from the Clinton campaign to pay the IRS and other bills. Claiming that a medical examiner provided a “full report” in which the examiner “suggested that he [Ed Willey] held the gun with both hands but pulled the trigger with his right,” Willey added: “That’s exactly how Vince Foster is said to have killed himself.” Willey also wrote: “Despite the unanswered questions, I reconciled in my mind, long ago, that Ed killed himself. In my heart, I don’t want to think so and I still wonder, How could he possibly do that? I go back and forth. And, as I do, the possibility lingers, logical or not, that Ed was murdered.”

Extensive excerpts from Willey’s book are available here. She offered similar claims in a 2007 interview with conspiracy website WorldNetDaily promoting the book.

h/t: MMFA


Rand Paul seems to have cracked the code.

The Kentucky Republican senator and possible 2016 presidential candidate has found a winning formula for staying in the headlines this winter: dredging up decades-old Clinton scandals and talking about Monica Lewinsky. It seems an unlikely script for a politician who supposedly wants to address America’s future.

But what Paul has figured out, and sooner than any other potential Republican presidential candidates, is that every time he (indirectly) references Lewinsky and Oval Office sex, television producers start assembling panel discussions and editors quickly assign articles. It’s like sending out the Bat Signal inside the Beltway; a transmission that cannot be denied or ignored.

Paul’s attacks this week were boosted by the revelation of  personal, decades-old correspondences between Hillary Clinton and Diane Blair, a close friend and confidant to the former first lady. With contemporaneous notes and letters that addressed the Lewinsky scandal and other trials from Bill Clinton’s two terms, the newly uncovered archives were presented as big political news. They also gave the media an excuse to wade further into Clinton tumult nostalgia.

For Clinton critics, there appears to be no downside to the strategy. Any fear Paul might have had about the press condemning him likely evaporated weeks ago. Instead of scolding Ryan for looking backwards and attacking a female politician for her husband’s distant, personal indiscretions, as well as accusing him without evidence of “violence" against women in the workplace, much of the press has celebrated Paul’s Lewinsky star turn. According to CNN’s Candy Crowley the Kentucky senator is on a “roll lately.” Why? Because he called the former president a “sexual predator.” (Crowley dubbed the low-blow maneuver “smart politics.”)

Points are rarely deducted for taking the low road against the Clintons. For the press, Clinton name-calling passes for political momentum.

And those lobbying the insults are depicted as savvy. CNN political reporter Peter Hamby claimed Paul’s attack on Clinton’s personal life represents “a potent message for Republicans at the moment.”

Hurling personal attacks against the Clintons might be potent message for Republicans as long as there are Republicans who vote. But in terms of boosting Paul’s political aspirations? The strategy doesn’t seem to be working. In a national poll released on Tuesday, a McClatchy-Marist surveyed Republican voters and just nine percent of them said Rand Paul was their pick to be the GOP’s nominee in 2016. (Rand loses to Clinton by double digits in the poll’s hypothetical 2016 match-up.) Even some Republican leaders think the Paul strategy is an electoral loser

h/t: MMFA

In an interview on the Steve Malzberg Show yesterday, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky claimed that if Democrats want “any consistency” in fighting for women’s rights, they should “disown” former president Bill Clinton, who he called “gross,” an “unsavory character” and a “sexual predator.” Paul specifically urged Hillary Clinton to disown her husband: “All the time, candidates are asked to return money if an unsavory character gives them money. What if that unsavory character is your husband?” 


Paul’s argument that the “War on Women” consists not of large-scale legislative attacks on women’s health, reproductive freedom, and rights in the workplace, but on individual instances of sexual harassment by Democratic politicians, has become popular among Republicans. It’s the same laughable argument that conservatives made last summer when they pointed to San Diego mayor Bob Filner and New York City mayoral hopeful Anthony Weiner to claim that it’s Democrats who don’t care about women’s rights. 

h/t: Miranda Blue at RWW

Just shut the fuck up already, Mr. Nugent!


Ted Nugent: Obama is a ‘subhuman mongrel’ and deserves ‘just due punishment’ for treason (via

By David January 22, 2014 9:47 am Conservative rocker Ted Nugent said recently that he wouldn’t rest until President Barack Obama — who he called a “subhuman mongrel” — and of the all “liberal Democrats” had gotten the “just due punishment” that they…


Fox News can’t seem to talk about the Chris Christie bridge closure scandal without invoking Benghazi.

Fox & Friends devoted five segments during its January 10 broadcast to the growing scandal surrounding Republican Gov. Chris Christie and his administration’s involvement in deliberate traffic gridlock across the George Washington Bridge as political retribution against the mayor of Fort Lee, NJ.

But in every segment purporting to discuss Christie, the hosts and guests used the story to attack President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by bringing up the September 2012 attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya.  

h/t: MMFA

From the 01.09.2014 edition of Courtside Entertainment Group’s The Laura Ingraham Show:

From the 01.02.2014 edition of FBN’s Lou Dobbs Tonight:


Last week, this man endorsed the assassination of the President. 

This week, he was on Fox Business as an “expert”—and accused Hillary Clinton of effectively murdering the Americans who died during the 2012 attacks on Benghazi.  

This week, South Carolina state senator Larry Grooms introduced a bill similar to the one recently passed in Texas that would require any doctor performing an abortion in the state to have “admitting privileges at a local hospital.”

Five states have recently passed similar bills. Publically, advocates claim that the purpose of such bills is to protect women’s health; in unguarded moments, some activists have admitted that these provisions are actually meant to force abortion clinics to close by pressuring hospitals to deny the required privileges to abortion doctors.

According to one pastor who claims to have had a hand in the drafting of Grooms’ bill, that is the goal of the proposed provision in South Carolina. At an event in September at his church – which it appears that Sen. Grooms was attending — pastor Bobby Eubanks explained that he planned to “help” the senator write a bill imposing a number of abortion restrictions so that he could “introduce it under his name.”

“My plan is to regulate the industry not to end it,” he said, explaining that regulations such as waiting periods and mandatory sonograms raise costs and therefore make abortions less affordable for the “girls” who are seeking them. “How you get the costs to go up is you regulate it,” he said, telling the story of a woman he met who said she was barely able to scrape up $500 for an abortion.

He also touted the admitting privileges provision, claiming that abortion clinics won’t help women who experience complications: “The girl, if she’s down there and she starts bleeding when she comes out, she’s on her own.”

But he also made clear the real reason he was pushing the provision, saying, “not a hospital in South Carolina” would actually grant the required privileges.

Eubanks then announced that he would track down any legislator who opposed his bill and “stand in front of their church and say, ‘You have a member of your church who promotes killing babies.’”

We left a message with Sen. Grooms’ office asking if Eubanks did in fact have a hand in writing the bill, and will update this post if we hear back from them.

It appears that the two are at least occasional collaborators. On the day that Grooms filed his bill, he joined Eubanks and his fellow state senator Lee Bright – currently the top-polling primary challenger to Sen. Lindsey Graham – at a protest in front of a Charleston hospital that provides reproductive medicine training to its residents.

Eubanks has some other notable views about abortion and other issues. At an event in July also attended by U.S. Sen. Tim Scott and Sen. Bright, Eubanks declared that he would “be in jail” if Hillary Clinton became president, suggested that Clinton had Ambassador Chris Stevens killed in Benghazi “because he knew stuff he was trying to move up the ladder,” claimed that “abortion continues to be because people don’t want biracial children,” warned that marriage equality would lead to “Braveheart”-style government destruction of marriage, and explained that slavery was “not about racism” but instead was “an accepted way of economics throughout the world.” In fact, when it comes to slavery, he said, “the real fault lies with Africa for selling their people to slave traders.”

h/t: Miranda Blue at RWW

Conservative media are citing an article in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons (JPandS) to attack legitimate research on the causes of gun violence. While its title suggests that it is a serious research publication, the journal is published by a conspiracy-minded right-wing organization and has printed articlesquestioning the link between HIV and AIDS and theorizing that undocumented immigrants are spreading leprosy in the United States.

JPandS is published by conservative non-profit Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), an anti-healthcare reform advocacy group that opposes almost all government involvement in healthcare. The National Library of Medicine, which bills itself as “[t]he world’s largest biomedical library,” has twice declined to index JPandS in its database of medical reports. 

Still, an article by AAPS Executive Director Dr. Jane M. Orient has been cited by conservative media to attack calls for more research into the causes and prevention of gun violence by the Obama administration and the medical and scientific communities. AAPS aided the gun lobby in its successful endeavor to block the Centers for Disease Control from studying gun violence during the 1990s. 

In a September 23 op-ed for The Daily Caller, National Shooting Sports Foundation Senior Vice President and General Counsel Larry Keane cited Orient’s article to attack the scientifically supported claim that “fewer guns equals less violence”:

One of the anti-gun lobby’s leading arguments is that fewer guns equals less violence. This seems like a logical argument, and is often passed on as fact. But, as with most of the arguments the anti-gun left recycles over and over, the facts simply do not back it up.

In the fall issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons , Jane M. Orient, M.D. argues there is no evidence-based support for more gun control measures. Rather, the statistics gun-control proponents cite are cherry-picked from larger data sets that show no correlation between more gun laws and less violence.

Orient’s article was also approvingly cited by’s AWR Hawkins and promoted by During a September 4 appearance on the National Rifle Association’s media arm, NRA News, Orient attacked “organized medicine” for calling for gun violence research and stated that “the best evidence we have” on gun violence “was collected by John Lott.” Lott, whose research on gun violence was cited in Orient’s JPandS article, has been widely discredited

Beyond relying on Lott’s disproven research, Orient cites a claim that “all 10 of the most violent cities, in which the population is predominantly black, have an enormous rate of out-of-wedlock births and illiteracy — and decades of rule by Democrats, often black and presumably always liberal,” to set up her question, “Is the liberal welfare state partly to blame for lawlessness and violence?”

Orient also theorizes that “organized medicine is determined to achieve federal control of firearms, with the potential, even likely consequence of enabling eventual confiscation,” and lists the threat of a “tyrannical government” as one of the “serious reasons for an armed citizenry.”

JPandS and AAPS promote a host of unscientific theories — medical and otherwise — and have delved into conspiracy theories about the Clinton presidency.

  • A 2005 JPandS article used incorrect data to claim that “[l]eprosy now is endemic to northeastern states because illegal aliens and other immigrants brought leprosy from India, Brazil, the Caribbean, and Mexico.” That research was later parroted on Lou Dobbs’ since-canceled CNN program.
  • The medical blog Science-Based Medicine has identified a number of JPandS articles that question the link between HIV and AIDS and noted the journal has published ”glowing reviews of two HIV/AIDS denialist books.”
  • In 2005, JPandS published an article that noted “[h]istorically, homosexual behavior has been viewed as both criminal and sinful ever since Judaism first defined it as an ‘abomination’ — along with incest, adultery, and bestiality.” The article purported to prove that “the ‘gay’ male lifestyle significantly increases the incidence of infectious disease and shortens life expectancy by about 20 years,” while furthering the myth that being gay is a choice.
  • Beyond medical research, JPandS publishes articles that deny the consequences and causes of climate change. Orient is listed as an “expert” by The Heartland Institute, one of the most insidious purveyors of climate denial.
  • A 2011 New York Times article described how in 2003 AAPS asked the Supreme Court to release death photos of Clinton administration Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster, who committed suicide in 1993. The AAPS legal brief sought to advance the conspiracy theory that Foster was murdered.
  • In a 2003 JPandS article, Andrew Schlafly, who has served as AAPS’ general counsel, suggested that the government bears some responsibility for the September 11 terrorist attacks because of its support for bans on the use of asbestos in buildings. Schlafly theorized that the substance’s fire-retardant properties would have saved lives during the attack and challenged science linking asbestos to cancer. His article claimed that government-funded studies on the collapse of the World Trade Center “are designed to exonerate government,” and that “[a] researcher would risk his career and future funding by asserting that government negligence or malfeasance contributed to the WTC collapse.” 
  • A July 2005 AAPS newsletter described embryonic stem cell research as “a weak pretext for picking taxpayers’ pockets.”

Orient previously pushed baseless claims as the author of an article for conspiracy website WND thatpurported to offer a scientific defense of former Rep. Todd Akin’s “legitimate rape” comment. After Akinengendered controversy in 2012 after claiming that pregnancy as the result of rape was rare because in cases of “legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” Orient published a column titled, “Akin Not Far Off Base In Rape Comment.” She claimed the congressman’s remark was backed by “some pro-life physicians.”

h/t: MMFA