Jan 27, 2022
Fox News host’s inaccurate reporting leads to false right-wing speculation Breyer was forced out
This news has been received from: alternet.org
All trademarks, copyrights, videos, photos and logos are owned by respective news sources. News stories, videos and live streams are from trusted sources.
Contact Newsletter-online.com: [NewsMag]
Barely minutes before 12:00 noon on Wednesday NBC News’ Pete Williams broke the news that Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer was going to announce he is retiring, at the end of the term.
Hours later Fox News host Shannon Bream breathlessly tweeted, “Multiple sources tell me Justice Breyer was not planning to announce his retirement today.
They describe him as ‘upset’ with how this has played out. We still await any official notice from his office and/or the #SCOTUS public information office.”That was 2:41 PM.
Her tweet was inaccurate – based on her own reporting, about a half-hour later.
At 3:14 PM Bream “clarified” her reporting, making clear that Justice Breyer “firmly decided” to retire on his own, and was merely “surprised” that a top-notch veteran Supreme Court reporter broke the news:
A bit more clarity. I'm told Justice Breyer had firmly decided on his own to retire and that an announcement was due very soon. And while it appears someone jumped the gun on that, better to characterize him as surprised by events today than "upset". — Shannon Bream (@Shannon Bream) 1643228083Her first tweet has received thousands of retweets and likes and led to false speculation among many right-wingers (adding to the already false claims from the far right) that President Joe Biden forced Justice Breyer out the door – something impossible (unless you do over a billion dollars in business with a bank where the son of a Supreme Court Justice works.)
Too late, the damage is done. Ordinarily many reporters will delete tweets that are inaccurate or wrong, then post the reason why, and a correction. Bream did not.
Over at the right-wing National Review, senior writer Charles C. W. Cooke posted an article titled: “Did the Democratic Party Preempt Justice Breyer’s Announcement to Force His Hand?”
Its only content: Bream’s inaccurate tweet and the words, “It certainly seems possible.”
Here are more results of Bream’s inaccurate reporting:
Chief political correspondent, Washington Examiner and Fox News contributor Byron York:
A little nudge...https://twitter.com/ShannonBream/status/1486424088654630912\u00a0\u2026 — Byron York (@Byron York) 1643227555Another Washington Times columnist and a SiriusXMPatriot personality:
I called it! Liberals pushed it to media to try to play cover for Biden's absolute failures.https://twitter.com/ShannonBream/status/1486424088654630912\u00a0\u2026 — Tim Young (@Tim Young) 1643230707Former senior advisor to the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC):
Psaki putting this out earlier is interesting - Breyer was NOT given the opportunity to decide how he was going to announce it because either her colleagues in the White House or her allies from the liberal dark money universe leaked it to force his hand.https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/1486384652256522242?s=20\u00a0\u2026 — Matt Whitlock (@Matt Whitlock) 1643227437Blogger at right wing website Hot Air:
guess: he gave the WH a heads up privately as a courtesy and they couldn\u2019t resist leaking it to give their deeply demoralized base something to get excited abouthttps://twitter.com/ShannonBream/status/1486424088654630912\u00a0\u2026 — Allahpundit (@Allahpundit) 1643228500Radio talk show host:
The Biden Admin needed a narrative change and BAD.https://twitter.com/ShannonBream/status/1486424088654630912\u00a0\u2026 — Annie Frey (@Annie Frey) 1643226243 Report typos and corrections to: [email protected]#story_page_post_article Is Trump to blame for Jan. 6th? Understand the importance of honest news ?So do we.
The past year has been the most arduous of our lives. The Covid-19 pandemic continues to be catastrophic not only to our health - mental and physical - but also to the stability of millions of people. For all of us independent news organizations, it’s no exception.
We’ve covered everything thrown at us this past year and will continue to do so with your support. We’ve always understood the importance of calling out corruption, regardless of political affiliation.
We need your support in this difficult time. Every reader contribution, no matter the amount, makes a difference in allowing our newsroom to bring you the stories that matter, at a time when being informed is more important than ever. Invest with us.
Make a one-time contribution to Alternet All Access, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you.
Click to donate by check.
- george conway
- noam chomsky
- civil war
- Kayleigh mcenany
- Melania trump
- drudge report
- paul krugman
- Lindsey graham
- Lincoln project
- al franken bill maher
- People of praise
- Ivanka trump
- eric trump
News Source: alternet.org
Tags: religious right a biden supreme court supreme court justice the importance broke the news justice breyer fox news host shannon bream your support white house
Pensioner in his 70s fighting for his life being attacked near famous London hotel, as suspect held by copsNext News:
Jen Psaki Says Ultra-MAGA is The Presidents Phrase, But New Reporting Blames Six Months of Focus Groups For It
During her last week as press secretary, Jen Psaki sold the legend that Joe Biden invented the term “ultra-MAGA” because he wanted to tack “a little extra pop” onto his burns. But new reporting suggests it’s branding concocted by committee over a period of months. Or just plain borrowed.
Like “Big Lie” or “Don’t Say Gay” over the last year or two, the phrase “ultra-MAGA” – along with descriptors like “extreme MAGA” and more – went directly from a Democrats lips to the media’s ears and pens. It became ubiquitous seemingly overnight following President Biden uttering it out loud for the first time on May 4th.
“Let me tell you about this ultra-MAGA agenda. It’s extreme — as most MAGA things are,” said Biden in a fired-up speech about the leaked draft opinion from the Supreme Court. “This MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that’s existed in American history — in recent American history.”
Biden repeated elements of those remarks several times that day in the days after, and messaging from the Democrats and the White House, in general, are embracing the use of MAGA in attacks on Republicans. And MAGA was immediately on board. Donald Trump and Steve Bannon quickly adopted and embraced it as the right on social media alternated between calling it a new “Deplorables” moment and praising it as a perfect sobriquet.
Jen Psaki has been asked about it more than once this past week or so. She was pressed by several reporters on Tuesday of this week after the term had begun to pop up all over, and attributed its provenance to the President’s creativity.
ABC News White House correspondent Mary Bruce asked, “Who came up with this phrase ‘Ultra-MAGA’? Why the need to kick it up a notch? MAGA wasn’t enough? I mean, why now use this phrase?”
“I will tell you, it is — it is the President’s phrase, said Psaki, “And the President made those comments himself just last week, as you know.”
She also said that “to him, adding a little ‘ultra’ to it, give it a little extra pop.”
Democrats like it. MAGA likes it. The media like it. But was it really an off-the-cuff effort? Not so much, judging by new reporting from Ashley Parker and Michael Scherer at the Washington Post.
They write:
Biden’s attempt to appropriate the “MAGA” brand as a political attack was hardly accidental. It arose from a six-month research project to find the best way to target Republicans, helmed by Biden adviser Anita Dunn and by the Center for American Progress Action Fund, a liberal group.
The polling and focus group research by Hart Research and the Global Strategy Group found that “MAGA” was already viewed negatively by voters — more negatively than other phrases like “Trump Republicans.”
Hardly an organic utterance for added oomph. It seems more to be calculated effort ahead of the midterms, arrived at through months of research-mph.
The Washington Post further reports that it has been tied to Sen. Rick Scott:
Biden has repeatedly tied the term to Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, who in February released a controversial 11-point policy plan. Its proposals include taxing many Americans who currently pay no taxes, as well as “sunsetting” all federal laws every five years, apparently including those authorizing Medicare and Social Security.
Although Scott’s plan been disavowed by some Republican leaders, Biden regularly describes it as the “MAGA agenda” of the “MAGA Republicans.” Since the Republican leadership has not offered any other plan, the White House argues, the public platform of its Senate campaign chief is fair game.
“I call it the ‘ultra-MAGA’ plan — Make America Great Again plan,” Biden said Wednesday, speaking to electrical workers in Chicago.
An interesting note. Parker and Scherer later refer to “Biden’s decision to dub Republicans as ‘ultra MAGA'” in the article. That decision may have been the result of Anita Dunn’s six-month research project. But it could have another influence, too.
In Biden’s May 4th speech, his first mention wasn’t as quip, it was more an attribution. Most articles quote the remark beginning, like it is typed above, with the words “let me tell you about this ultra-MAGA agenda.”
But he actually said this: “Senator Rick Scott of Florida, a United States senator who is leading the Republican National Senatorial Campaign Committee, released what he calls the ‘Ultra-MAGA Agenda.’ It’s a MAGA agenda all right. Let me tell you about this Ultra-MAGA Agenda. It’s extreme, as most MAGA things are.”
He’s attributing it to Rick Scott. And he’s not the first person to use it in that way. New York Magazine’s Intelligencer blog headlined an article on Scott’s agenda with the term a month ago.
There’s probably something to all of the above takes. Biden may think the ultra prefix “pops.” The use of MAGA in talking points and rhetoric as a means of categorizing and attacking opponents is almost certainly the product of a concerted, market-tested branding effort, and the term is exactly the sort of product such efforts usually come up with. You know, not materially different from any rando tweeting in anger.
And yes, it was used elsewhere before Joe Biden put it in a speech where he attributed it to Rick Scott. That’s politics.
But what it isn’t is something Biden invented to add oomph. That version, put out by Jen Psaki, is what you might call “ultra-wrong.”
Or, you know, that other word: False.
This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.