Corporate media supports ‘corrupt regimes’, says Mollie Hemingway

How did the corporate media become so biased and corrupt, and why aren’t they held accountable?

The mainstream media exist “to support corrupt regimes,” Mollie Hemingway, editor of The Federalistsaid.

She is optimistic because “a lot of people have lost faith in corporate media in recent years, [and] that’s a good thing,” says Hemingway. “It’s wrong if people believe the propaganda.”

Hemingway joins “The Daily Signal Podcast” to discuss the state of the media today and to share his reaction to President Joe Biden’s nomination of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court.

Also on today’s show, Rep. Mark Green, R-Tenn., explains what he saw in Ukraine a week before the Russian invasion.

We also cover Biden’s first State of the Union address.

Listen to the podcast below or read the slightly edited transcript:

Mary Margaret Olohan: My guest today is Mollie Hemingway, editor of The Federalist. Mollie, thank you so much for being with us today.

Molli Hemingway: It’s great to be here with you.

Olohan: So Mollie, you’ve been one of the most prolific critics I’ve ever seen of the media’s misrepresentation of news. I would like you to share with us, what are some of the most egregious lies you have seen propagated by the media?

Hemingway: Well, first of all, I remember it’s been something I’ve been interested in since I was literally a kid. I remember reading – I lived in a town that had two newspapers and you would compare how these two newspapers covered events. And I realized early on the power of media to shape stories and shape the way you think about things. So it’s a problem we’ve had for decades.

And you think of the number of Republican presidents who have complained about media bias. It literally comes back [President Dwight D.] Eisenhower. But what we find ourselves in right now is something much worse and much different, and just an environment of overt propaganda, where we have corporate media making up stories that use sources they shouldn’t never use and who also hide stories that are detrimental to their political goals.

So there are a lot of stories in the last few years that have been really bad. Obviously the Russia collusion hoax that they completely perpetrated for years and was fabricated out of thin air, using sources they never should have used, all with the intent of destroying a politician they didn’t like and a political movement they didn’t like.

Also, I would say the [Brett] Kavanaugh’s smear is one of the most horrible things I’ve ever seen. And I wrote a book on that with Carrie Severino about that confirmation. And they, again, went with a story that should never have been made public. And they pushed narratives that were false, all to destroy a person because really they just wanted to shape what the Supreme Court looked like.

Olohan: What about when someone like Hunter Biden actually has a senseless scandal and the media ignores it or doesn’t allow the story to be told?

Hemingway: Law. I love how we’ve been through this Trump era where the President’s children have been lambasted all the time. And then you have a real crack addict for the son of our current president, who has been engaged in all sorts of financial dealings with corrupt oligarchs and the Chinese communist government. We have policies that clearly seem to have been shaped by some of these relationships, whether in Ukraine, China or Russia.

And the media all of a sudden, the mainstream media has no interest in covering this, even if it’s a dramatic story. I mean, there are all the elements that you know would have just salivated had there been an opposing party – the sex, the drugs, the madness. But no, all of a sudden they are showing a lot of restraint. And I think that’s—

Olohan: Respect for his privacy.

Hemingway: Yeah.

Olohan: So why are they getting away with it? How are they doing?

Hemingway: Well, I think there are a lot of issues that go into all of this. One thing is that I call them corporate media partly because they are so well funded by corporations. They exist to support corrupt regimes and they do a great job doing so and corporations pay them for it. The issue of funding is therefore huge.

And if you believe in a free and fair press, which is actually very important to our system of government, you look at the founders, they spoke at length about the need for a free and fair press to hold people accountable. We don’t have that in the corporate press, but we have other outlets that do a good job of reporting real, fact-based news instead of pushing storytelling and those need to be funded.

So it’s an important question.

Also, one thing I’m really optimistic about is that a lot of people have lost faith in corporate media in recent years – that’s a good thing. It’s bad if people believe the propaganda that’s coming.

You look at the numbers from the corporate press and they’re right on the edge of a cliff. It’s like 9% of Republicans have the slightest bit of faith in the media and the left doesn’t really believe them either.

This needs to continue and I think in this regard a lot of Republican politicians are doing a lot to support this corrupt press. They treat them as if they were reasonable, rather than their main political opponents.

They let them moderate the debates, which is insane. It’s like you’re debating your opponent from the other political party and you’re also debating someone much crazier than your opponent from the political party who asks the questions, decides how to phrase them. And this must stop.

So I would say any Conservative politician who doesn’t believe it’s their job or their job to go to war against these people who are destroying the country doesn’t deserve to be in office.

Olohan: Well, I’d like to talk more about your book on the Kavanaugh hearings, because that’s something that got me into journalism. I was so radicalized by this whole experience. We have another confirmation from the Supreme Court to come. Do you have any ideas on how this will all play out, what kind of confirmation process we might see?

Hemingway: That’s another disparity you see between the parties. So Carrie Severino and I wrote “Justice on trial.” And we go through history, not just with Kavanaugh’s confirmation, but all the recent nominations, it’s really kind of like a lot of history from the 70s.

So what you see in the confirmation battles is that they’ve become incredibly difficult when a Republican nominates someone to the court and in particular, generally – that wasn’t the case with Amy Coney Barrett – but when a Republican appoints someone to the court to replace a seat held by someone the left considers one of their own.

So you don’t see these types of hard-fought battles on the right, partly because the right doesn’t seem to fight as well as the left, or they’re not willing to brazenly accuse someone of a crime that she did not do. commit, such as serial gang rape.

In that case, I think the right thing to remember, and something all Americans should remember, is who controls the Senate really dictates what happens with those appointments. I believe Clarence Thomas was the last candidate to be confirmed by a Senate controlled by a different party than the nominating party.

So it’s a bad card game here. We have 50 Democrats, but they control the Senate. And then you have a ton of weak Republicans who will probably agree lest they be accused of being mean.

Even though now that we have the candidate, we know – which we knew regardless of who the candidate was – that she’s incredibly radical partisan, that she’s engaged in some pretty extreme decisions from the bench, and that she’s an unconditional activist.

So if you care about the country and if you care about the legitimacy of the court, and if you care that the judges consider it their job to interpret the Constitution faithfully, fairly, and accurately, you should fight against that person.

Olohan: Well, one last question for you. This one is a bit off topic, but it’s about Ukraine. I’ve seen a lot of media and Democrats suggesting that all these Republicans and commentators side with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin. Did you see anything about it?

Hemingway: Oh my God. It’s infuriating to me. The first job of anyone in foreign policy should be to understand the positions of key players. Understanding a player’s position does not mean that you endorse that person. And in fact, especially if you oppose Putin, you have to understand where he comes from.

What I think is really happening when people move around, they say, “Oh, by articulating the complexity of the situation, or articulating how our foreign policy has helped contribute to it, you are siding with Putin. What they are trying to do is to avoid responsibility for what they have done.

The thing is, I mean, you look at what Putin has done in the last four presidents, he made inroads when George W. Bush was weak with his distraction in the Iraq war, when [Barack] Obama and [Joe] Biden was in power the first time, and now again with Biden in power.

The only exception is the Trump presidency. And that was because that was the only time we had a different foreign policy, where we thought [in] to strengthen this country, to have energy independence, to focus on China instead of being distracted by endless wars in other places, and to really encourage the NATO alliance to be strong against Russia – this which means NATO countries had to step up and manage their defense far more, especially with what is happening with China.

So these people just don’t want to face the reality that their foreign policy has contributed to this absolute disaster situation. And that doesn’t mean you support the problem just because you accurately identify what the problem is.

Olohan: Very interesting. Well, Mollie, thank you so much for joining us. We are very grateful for your ideas.

Hemingway: Thanks very much. Great to see you.

Do you have an opinion on this article ? To ring, please email [email protected] and we will consider publishing your amended remarks in our regular “We hear you” column. Don’t forget to include the URL or title of the article as well as your name and city and/or state.

About Teddy Clinton

Check Also

New York Post deserves an apology and a Pulitzer for Hunter Biden coverage – AMAC

AMAC Exclusive – By Andrew Abbott As the public continues …