REPORT: DAVID BROCK ILLEGALLY FUNDING EFFORT TO IMPEACH TRUMP
Media Matters chief desperate to derail Trump presidency
Dec 9, 2017 by Daily Caller
WASHINGTON — David Brock’s Media Matters for America [a George Soros organization] appears to be granting hundreds of thousands of dollars in charitable funds to political groups that are trying to impeach the president and unseat Republicans across the nation.
Brock’s Media Matters for America is a registered 501(c)3 non-profit organization that has tax-exempt status. That tax-exempt status comes with an important caveat: the non-profit is barred from participating in political activity–funding or otherwise–that is in support or opposition to a candidate for office.
Media Matters for America granted $200,000 in 2016 to a Brock organization, though it is unclear if it was American Bridge 21st Century Foundation or a super PAC sharing its name, American Bridge 21st Century PAC, according to the non-profit’s 2016 financial statements and filings with the IRS obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Both organizations have a history of engaging in political behavior, as TheDCNF exclusively reported in October. Brock’s organizations face a Federal Election Commission complaint detailing an alleged scheme to hide donor identities involving both the foundation and super PAC that allowed for the funneling of untraceable millions that can not be publicly traced to their donors toward initiatives against conservative and GOP causes around the nation.
Under the IRS code, all 501(c)3 non-profit organizations “are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”
If Media Matters is using money it receives in charitable donations to fund political activities directly impacting a candidate for office, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) would then have legal grounds for revoking the non-profits’ tax-exempt status.
The 2016 Grant From Media Matters…The Numbers Don’t Add Up
Media Matters reports the 2016 grant to AB Super PAC on its financial statements but never explicitly states what the funds are going towards. The non-profit says the grant is for something entirely different in its IRS filings.
The non-profit states in its 2016 IRS Form 990 that it granted the $200,000 not to the super PAC, but to the foundation for the purposes of “Educational Program(s).”
For its part, American Bridge 21st Century super PAC doesn’t report receiving $200,000 from Media Matters for America in 2016 in its IRS filings and the foundation hasn’t filed its Form 990, making it impossible at the current time to confirm the grant.
There is a contradiction in the reporting of the $200,000 amount in either Media Matters financial disclosures or with American Bridge super PAC.
David Brock and American Bridge did not respond to multiple requests for clarification about the reporting discrepancy of the grant.
American Bridge Super PAC is outwardly working on a campaign to impeach President Donald Trump and put progressives into elected office at all levels of government. If the $200,000 was granted to the super PAC and is not recognized in PAC’s filings, it calls into question what those funds were used towards (i.e. political activity for or against a candidate).
American Bridge 21st Century PAC is, simply put, a bastion of the Democratic Party and liberal organizations. It provides talking points, opposition research and rapid response to progressive candidates nationwide. Brock’s PAC places well over $300 million worth of its research in political advertisements and it has huge plans for the upcoming 2020 election cycle.
Brock personally laid out the PAC’s mission through the 2020 election cycle in the memo. The top initiatives include defeating Trump, “either through impeachment or at the ballot box,” and changing “the balance of power by measurably impacting US Senate, gubernatorial, and state legislative races.”
“American Bridge will make running as a Republican candidate in the next four years painful,” the memo reads. “We will not only damage Trump, but also the candidates who enable and support him.”
Regardless of the PAC’s stated goals, a 501(c) non-profit, like Media Matters, cannot give to political organizations for the purpose of defeating or electing a candidate. Doing that could cause them to lose tax-exempt status.
On the other hand, if the $200,000 grant Media Matters claims to have given to the foundation for “educational program(s),” is the correct reporting, then there is still a case to be made that Media Matters is giving money to outwardly political organizations. That would cause Media Matters to lose its tax-exempt status, if not a number of other Brock organizations.
A cursory glance at the foundation’s work shows it is producing politically motivated work in opposition to the president and Republicans’ across the nation.
Media Matters sells itself as the primary authority on what is correct and what is false in the media narrative and makes its mission to point that out to “offending media institutions.”
Media Matters posts rapid-response items as well as longer research and analytic reports documenting conservative misinformation throughout the media. Additionally, Media Matters works daily to notify activists, journalists, pundits, and the general public about instances of misinformation, providing them with the resources to rebut false claims and to take direct action against offending media institutions. – Media Matters for America’s website
Brock’s Political Network Is Extensive And Faces An FEC Complaint
Brock also draws a salary from all of the groups in his network, making him millions of dollars and one of the most powerful liberal political activists. Brock isn’t the only person getting wealthy from his political nexus–a few others are making millions along with him.
The Media Matters chief uses one of D.C.’s top Democratic fundraising firms to support nearly all facets of his network’s campaign to unseat Republican lawmakers, impeach the president and monitor conservative causes around the nation.
In late October, TheDCNF reported how Brock is making Mary Pat Bonner, a former aide and fundraiser for former Vice President Al Gore, millions of dollars a year in a system of interconnected contracts with Brock-affiliated groups.
Bonner heads an independent political consulting firm in Washington, D.C., that has annual contracts with a number of Brock’s organizations that pay her firm millions for fundraising services. In exchange for drumming up big donations, Bonner’s firm earns well into the seven figures.
Brock is currently facing an FEC complaint alleging he is using the foundation to effectively hide donors’ identities for contributions possibly intended for his political action group. (RELATED: David Brock Allegedly Running A Slush Fund)
Many of the groups in Brock’s network, including Media Matters and the various arms of American Bridge, are situated just over a mile from the White House and the U.S. Capitol, in two floors of an office building in Northwest D.C. These entities also have entered into cost-sharing agreements, which are at the center of the ongoing FEC complaint.
TheDCNF’s report on the FEC complaint isn’t the first time someone has called the way money moves around Brock’s political network into question.
Brock’s former domestic partner, William Grey, threatened the Media Matters head to expose “derogatory information about (Brock) and his organization to the press and donors that would be embarrassing to him and cause harm to the organization,” in a 2010 police report. The threat ultimately led to an $850,000 payout for Grey, according to a 2012 Fox News report.
Send tips to email@example.com
Mueller’s Plan To Indict And Impeach Trump Collapsing
MEDIA’S RUSSIA PROBE MELTDOWN: 3 SCREW-UPS IN ONE WEEK
Flynn testimony, Deutsche Bank subpoena, WikiLeaks email stories all crumbled under scrutiny
Dec 9, 2017 by Axios
The media is having a rough week when it comes to reporting on the federal government’s multiple ongoing Russia investigations. Three stories in the past seven days have crumbled under greater scrutiny.
Why it matters: In today’s hyperpolarized world, “fake news” has become a refrain to describe stories that observers on both sides of the spectrum decide that they don’t like.
These reporting issues by esteemed media organizations give credence to that ignorance, which further damages the value of insightful, impactful reporting — especially when it comes to one of the biggest, most polarizing stories of our political age: the Russia probe.
MORE FAKE NEWS: CNN MISTAKES TRUMP WH STAFFER FOR OBAMA OFFICIAL
Torched by Sarah Sanders
Dec 9, 2017 by Daily Caller
CNN had a rough Friday.
First, the network had to correct egregious, humiliating fake news in a report about Trump-Russia collusion.
Now, it seems CNN cannot get the identities right of White House staff. In a segment featuring a quote from current Trump deputy director of communications Raj Shah, CNN used in the image of another Raj Shah, who served in the Obama White House.
The network was torched by press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders for the failure. Sanders said, “CNN this is definitely not Raj Shah but it is #FakeNews.”
Bad way to end the week.
WATCH CNN TROT OUT REPORTER WHO PUBLISHED FAKE NEWS TO CORRECT HIS OWN FAKE NEWS
CNN pushed the fake story for hours
Dec 9, 2017 Daily Caller
CNN made an egregious reporting error Friday on the potential connection between Donald Trump Jr. and Wikileaks.
The story, which was touted by the network for many hours on broadcast and social media as a bombshell turned out to be factually incorrect and insignificant. CNN’s original report definitively stated that Don Jr. received access to secret Wikileaks information via email on Sept. 4, 2016. In fact, that email was sent on Sept. 14, after the said documents were released to the public.
CNN pushed the fake story for hours, even after the email in question was made publicly available to disprove the reporting. In a humiliating move, CNN decided to have one of the authors of the debunked story go on air to “correct” his reporting.
Manu Raju went on and said his reporting was “incorrect” and is “not as significant as what we know now based on this e-mail.” Neither CNN or the reporter apologized for the error. His comments in full:
Here’s proof that 91 percent of DEMOCRATS are clueless dupes because all they watch and read is FAKE news
December 09, 2017 by: JD Heyes
(Natural News) As we have regularly documented on this site, the so-called “mainstream media” is replete with hucksters, frauds, liars, and phonies. In fact, truth be told, the vast majority of establishment media types are little more than far-Left hacks and shills for the Democratic Party.
That helps explain a rather remarkable finding in a recently-conducted survey by one of the very purveyors of misleading, false, and fake news: CBS News. [That wasn’t always the case, by the way, because CBS Newsused to employ crack investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson — who has reported the truth about the dangers of vaccines.]
The network conducted a poll claiming that Americans were “split” on the so-called “Russia” investigation being conducted by special counsel Robert Mueller (with a very Democrat-heavy, anti-Trump staff, by the way).
The poll found that most Republicans believe the Russian probe is nothing more than a politically-motivated witch hunt. But 91 percent of Democrats say that it’s a “serious matter” that ought to worry President Donald J. Trump.
This 91 percent of Democrats, by the way, most likely get 100 percent of their news from “mainstream” media sources that are working hand-in-hand with the Deep State and political establishment to undermine and even oust Trump.
“Americans divide in their views on the Russia investigation: eight in 10 Republicans call it politically motivated, while three in four Democrats say it is justified,” CBS News reported.
There you go. Knowing that Democrats watch Left-wing, anti-Trump media makes it easy to understand how they can be duped into thinking this “Trump-Russia collusion to steal the election from Hillary” thing is real, when clearly it isn’t.
But that hasn’t stopped the mainstream media from continuing to look for “proof” that it happened, as evidenced recently by CNN.
Those fools intentionally misreported a story last week claiming Donald Trump Jr. was offered “dirt” on Clinton from someone allegedly tied to Wikileaks, with the insinuation that it was really a “Russia” connection because everyone knows Russia “hacked” the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign (except that they didn’t).
The Fake News Network reported that on Sept. 4, an email offering the dirt was sent to Don Jr. from a person named Mike Erickson. In reality, Erickson sent Don Jr. an email on September 14, not the 4th. That is significant because on September 13 Wikileaks published that very same trove of data, so the organization could not have possibly offered it exclusively to the Trump campaign.
What’s more, the email from Erickson makes it clear that Erickson is only directing Don Jr. to a website where the data is stored because the trove is more than 400 megabytes and far too large to send as an email attachment.
The email is clearly dated Sept. 14. A tweet from Wikileaks is clearly dated Sept. 13.
Why would the initial report claim the tweet was sent Sept. 4?
The only explanation for CNN purposely misreporting the timeline is to leave its easily duped viewers and readers with the impression that ‘the smoking gun of collusion’ had been found!
When it hadn’t.
It’s this kind of routine fabrication of details that has led to nine of 10 Democrats still believing in the Trump-Russia collusion hoax.
That’s distressing not only because it’s false, but because the one person in last year’s campaign season who really did collude with the Russians was…Hillary Clinton. (Related: Trump calls for investigation into Clinton ties to ‘Russia dossier’.)
Her campaign, along with the DNC, bought and paid for the bogus “Trump dossier” used by the FBI to justify a FISA court surveillance warrant on Team Trump. The man who wrote the BS dossier, former British spy Christopher Steele, got information for the document from Russian operatives.
It’s not clear why anyone would continue to believe anything the so-called “mainstream media” reports that has anything at all to do with the Trump administration and last year’s campaign.
Virtually none of it is true, but for Democrats, virtually all of it is believed.
J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.
Liberal journalist Glenn Greenwald writes at the The Intercept that CNN’s blatantly false report that Wikileaks (and thus Russia) had been caught attempting to collude with the Trump campaign before the release of the trove of DNC emails was the start of “one of the most embarrassing days for the U.S. media in quite a long time.” The fake news was hyped all over television and the Internet, especially by MSNBC. Outlets eventually corrected their respective reports, but how such a mistake was possible remains a mystery. From his article:
The spectacle began on Friday morning at 11:00 am EST, when the Most Trusted Name in News™ [CNN] spent 12 straight minutes on air flamboyantly hyping an exclusive bombshell report that seemed to prove that WikiLeaks, last September, had secretly offered the Trump campaign, even Donald Trump himself, special access to the DNC emails before they were published on the internet. As CNN sees the world, this would prove collusion between the Trump family and WikiLeaks and, more importantly, between Trump and Russia, since the U.S. intelligence community regards WikiLeaks as an “arm of Russian intelligence,” and therefore, so does the U.S. media.
It is, of course, completely plausible that one source might innocently misread a date on a document. But how is it remotely plausible that multiple sources could all innocently and in good faith misread the date in exactly the same way, all to cause to be disseminated a blockbuster revelation about Trump/Russia/WikiLeaks collusion? This is the critical question that CNN simply refuses to answer. In other words, CNN refuses to provide the most minimal transparency to enable the public to understand what happened here.
Is that what happened here? Did these “multiple sources” who fed not just CNN but also MSNBC and CBS completely false information do so deliberately and in bad faith? Until these news outlets provide an accounting of what happened – what one might call “minimal journalistic transparency” – it’s impossible to say for certain. But right now, it’s very difficult to imagine a scenario where multiple sources all fed the wrong date to multiple media outlets innocently and in good faith.
Read the full story here.
President Trump blasted the left-wing Washington Post’s Dave Weigel after the reporter taunted him with a fake photograph that falsely depicted a mostly empty auditorium at the president’s Friday night rally. After receiving an apology, the president said Weigel “should be fired.”
Although everyone knows (and any exceptions do not include political journalists) that Trump’s Friday night rally in Pensacola, Florida, was another jam-packed event with a near-capacity crowd of 12,000, Weigel appeared to be under the impression that the media has not already suffered enough of a black eye this week.
There is no other way to explain why Weigel would use his verified Twitter account to openly taunt Trump with photographic fake news:
The context here is crucially important…
1) The photo Weigel published was taken before the Trump rally began. And, as you will see below, Weigel knew he was publishing a photo not taken during the actual rally.
2) Weigel, who identifies as an objective reporter, is not only publishing a misleading photo, but the link at the top of his now-deleted tweet proves that he is responding directly to one of Trump’s tweets — in other words, he is publicly heckling the president personally.
3) By responding directly to the president in this way, Weigel is openly taunting Trump, even going so far as to troll the president with his own “packed to the rafters” comment.
Even if the photo had been a legitimate representation of the crowd-size, directly jeering the president in this way is still outrageous behavior from anyone who describes himself as a legitimate journalist.
The only problem is that Weigel’s photo was not legitimate, and Trump called him out on it:
Weigel responded quickly with an apology, the claim that he had already deleted tweet, and the excuse that he “was confused by the image of you walking in the bottom right corner” — which only proves that Weigel knew the photo was not taken during the rally.
Weigel is claiming that in his fake news photograph, this is Trump:
Well, even if that is Trump, it is a backstage photo. Therefore, Weigel has no idea what time that particular photo was taken, and no one with any sense of ethics or concern for accuracy would judge crowd size based on any photograph without Trump standing at the podium.
Trump was not interested in Weigel’s apology, and fired back with “FAKE NEWS, he should be fired.”
Naturally, the elite media responded — not by admonishing Weigel over his inexcusably inaccurate trolling — but with their favorite claim that Trump is the one man in America who does not have the First Amendment right to criticize the media:
Weigel publicly heckled Trump using what he knew was fake news.
But how do Weigel’s elite colleagues respond? No reprimands. No embarrassment. No reaction that indicates in any way that they are concerned with holding on to whatever residual integrity might remain in their discredited institution. Instead, they all make excuses for the inexcusable and attack the president as though he does not have his own free speech rights, as though the elite media is exempt from criticism.
If you wanted to destroy the media by planting confederates in newsrooms all around the country, over this last week, none of your saboteurs could have been anywhere near as effective as the self-destructive Weigel, Maggie Haberman, Brian Ross, Alisyn Camerota; and everyone at CNN, the Washington Post, Reuters, and PolitiFact.
3 Giant Lies That Threaten To Sink The MSM!