Mark Halperin and former Politico reporter scorch 'liberal media bias' on networks like MSNBC

Political commentator Mark Halperin and Axios White House reporter Marc Caputo skewered much of the modern media for brazen bias against President Donald Trump and conservatives in general.
MSNBC has been in the national spotlight after the network underwent a major shakeup, elevating former President Biden's first press secretary Jen Psaki's show to primetime, while purging "The Reidout" and "Alex Wagner Tonight." On Halperin's "2WAY TONIGHT" podcast, Caputo, who was a reporter for Politico, said Psaki joining MSNBC network at all during Biden's presidency, after she left her White House role, was an indictment of modern media.
"Jen Psaki's hiring by MSNBC was one of the many examples of how utterly broken the Acela media industrial complex is," Caputo said. "For the first time in United States history, a sitting president seeking reelection had his press secretary go and work for a major media enterprise and anchor a show. And no one f---ing said anything about how irregular, how newsworthy, how out of line that was."
He added "So when we come to our current moment, Jen Psaki, MSNBC represents a very particular inflection point, as does the Biden presidency, in the way in which the press covered it. That leads us to where we are today."
Halperin agreed, but suggested, "Of all of the examples of liberal media bias denied by the people who run the big organizations, of all the examples, perhaps the most egregious is they hire media writers who are far, far left—as if they're covering the media fairly."
"If you're going to have a media writer whose job it is to hold the media to account, you cannot hire people who hate Donald Trump. And their coverage isn't subtle," Halperin added.
"It's not like some of The New York Times coverage, for instance, where within the crevices of the paragraphs, you can see they're biased against Trump," he said. "They are full-on resistance writers, and that's why they write negative things about Marc Caputo, and me, and why they did not touch this Jen Psaki story."
The silence of media reporters on certain specific stories, Halperin said, speaks volumes about who they are.
"It's bats--t crazy for these organizations, who claim to be serious news organizations, to have as their media reporters leading members of the resistance - unapologetic and explicit - who, to this day, have not written about Joe Biden, the lack of coverage of Joe Biden's loss of mental acuity - to this day, they have not written about the biggest media story of all time, and instead they are writing about Stephen Miller's demeanor in a cable news hit," he said.
Halperin also called out the media for not platforming now-Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and former Rep. Dean Phillips, D-Minn., as each of them attempted to run against Biden for the Democratic Party nomination in the 2024 election. By contrast, he recalled how networks have platformed Sen. Adam Schiff of California, who was censured by the House for 'false' allegations on Trump-Russia collusion.
"And they will put Adam Schiff on, whose public failures of credibility are more pronounced than Dean Phillips. And in terms of implications, I would say you could argue comparable to Bobby Kennedy's," he argued. "It's insane that they didn't put them on, but it's more insane that people whose job it is to write about the press and hold the press accountable didn't write a word about it."

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

2 hours ago

• Yahoo

U.S. Sits on Billions of Untapped Oil Barrels

The United States is the largest oil and gas producer in the world. It is also experiencing a slowdown in its oil production for a number of reasons, including natural depletion. The U.S. Geological Survey, however, has just published a study stating that there are almost 30 billion new barrels of untapped oil—under federal lands, no less. Oil and gas drilling was a contentious topic during the Biden administration. The administration decidedly did not like it and put a serious effort into curbing this drilling as much as the law allowed. As soon as Donald Trump became president, the tables turned and drilling on federal lands became very much a desirable direction for federal energy policy to move in, with the President prioritizing affordable energy and higher exports. Now, the U.S. Geological Survey has thrown its weight behind the American energy dominance idea, reporting estimated undiscovered oil reserves of 29.4 billion barrels across the country, with the leader being Alaska with 14.46 billion barrels of untapped oil under federal lands. New Mexico is next, with 8.925 billion barrels of undiscovered oil, followed by Nevada, with 1.4 billion barrels. Untapped gas reserves on federal land were estimated at over 391.55 trillion cu ft. Now, the only question is when these hitherto untapped resources will be number of drilling rigs in the U.S. oil patch has been on a steady decline recently, reflecting an extended weakness in international prices. This has now changed, of course, after Israel attacked Iran on June 13, but the industry is in no rush to reverse course for the time being. The industry is playing it safe, not least because cheap drilling sites are running out—or maybe not, if the USGS assessment of untapped resources is correct. For years now, the biggest production growth driver of U.S. oil has been the Permian Basin, spanning Texas and New Mexico. The Permian has single-handedly offset declines in a number of other shale plays and largely uneventful day-to-day business in conventional fields. But the Permian is not inexhaustible, and more importantly, it's not cheap to drill everywhere there. So, costs are rising in the Permian as some parts of the play hit their geological limits while others, yet to be drilled, are not expected to be as prolific as that top-tier acreage that the industry is running out of currently. This has sparked some concern among commentators, although some have argued that there may yet be another boom left in the most prolific shale play in the country. Yet with the USGS's new assessment of undiscovered reserves, such a boom becomes less important for the current administration's dominance plans. If there are 14.46 billion untapped barrels of crude under Alaska alone, shortage of new oil will not become a problem for the world's top producer anytime soon. 'American Energy Dominance is more important than ever, and this report underscores the critical role science plays in informing our energy future,' Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said in comments on the USGS study. 'Thanks to the USGS's rigorous and independent assessment, we're better equipped to manage America's vast public lands responsibly while supporting energy security and economic opportunity.' Crude oil is currently trading at over $75 per barrel. In fact, WTI is climbing closer to $76 per barrel amid the spike in violence in the Middle East. How long this will hold is anyone's guess, but the fact is that prices are set for their third consecutive weekly rise. This is a short-term development, of course, while oil companies are more interested in the long-term outlook for their business. This is also uncertain, alas, because federal policy could flip in three years just like it flipped when Trump took the helm. Indeed, environmentalists are massively unhappy about any oil and gas drilling on any federal lands. 'America's public lands are intended to be held in trust for all people in this country, and their resources managed carefully and in perpetuity,' a Natural Resources Defense Council blog post from February said, as quoted by Bloomberg. 'As the Trump administration shifts to a pro-industry footing to help rich dirty energy companies get even richer, we're seeing this trust responsibility shirked in shocking and truly damaging ways,' the author, senior program advocate Josh Axelrod, wrote. The Center for American Progress claimed earlier this year that more drilling on federal lands would not bring down energy costs for Americans, in part because companies were uninterested in the acreage that the federal government had to offer, and also, they worked like a cartel to set prices. Such attacks on oil and gas will no doubt intensify—even as banks, the actual people with the money, walk back their climate commitments and boost investment in oil and gas. With or without these attacks, however, tapping those billions of barrels would depend on one thing only: whether it makes economic sense. With new discoveries few and far between globally, they might start making such sense before very long. By Irina Slav for More Top Reads From this article on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

New York Post

5 hours ago

• New York Post

Finally: A president who understands ‘peace through strength' just made the world safer

President Donald Trump's order to 'obliterate' Iranian nuclear-weapons sites just made the whole world a lot safer — not only because he kept a maniacal regime from acquiring nukes, but because other nations must now think twice before defying the United States. 'American deterrence is back,' proclaimed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. 'When this president speaks, the world should listen' — because the US military 'can back it up.' Advertisement And, indeed, US military might is a thing to behold. What a refreshing change from the Obama and Biden years. Time and again, President Joe Biden issued a toothless, finger-wagging 'Don't' — only for his targets to laugh and do as they pleased anyway, knowing that America's adversaries would face no real consequences. Advertisement 'Don't, don't, don't,' Biden threatened any 'hostile actor thinking about attacking Israel' after Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023; Hezbollah and the Houthis struck the Jewish state anyway. US drops $500M bombs on Iran The US military dropped six 'bunker buster' bombs on Iran's Fordow nuclear enrichment plant Saturday night and on two other key sites. Prior to the airstrikes, Israel initiated extensive attacks on Iran's nuclear infrastructure and military. Satellite images show how part of the mountain protecting the facility was completely obliterated. This marks the first time that the US used the 15-ton GBU-57 bunker buster bombs in anger. 'Each and every member of the UN must be alarmed over this extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior,' Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said following the attack. Last year he told Iran 'don't' after it threatened to attack Israel; Tehran responded by launching hundreds of missiles at Israeli targets. Biden warned Vladimir Putin of 'severe consequences' for invading Ukraine; Putin went ahead. Advertisement Even after Iranian-backed militants killed three US soldiers and injured 30 others in Jordan last year, Biden's response was all but nonexistent. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Joe earned the world's contempt his first year in office with his disastrous Afghan withdrawal, and kept on earning it by repeatedly hesitating in getting Ukraine the arms it needed to do more than slow the Russian onslaught. President Barack Obama was no better. Recall his 'red line' on Syria's use of chemical weapons? When Bashar al-Assad used them anyway, Obama set off on an elaborate dance to not follow through — even facilitating Moscow's return to being a Mideast player when Putin offered face-saving cover for Bam's back-down. Advertisement Obama's answer to Iran's nukes was to hand the regime billions in exchange for promises to delay gaining them, a deal Tehran quickly violated. The Obama crew confused America's enemies with its friends; Biden was just confused — but each opened to door to chaos with bumbling that led to the rise of ISIS and Putin's first grab of Ukrainian territory on Bam's watch, then the latest Ukraine war plus the Middle East in flames after Joe took over. Yes, Trump prefers diplomacy, even to end Iran's nuclear ambitions. But he also warned that no deal meant 'bombing the likes of which they have never seen before' — and now has proved that his words aren't empty threats. And just as Putin, China's Xi Jinping and other malign actors saw Biden's Afghan bugout as a US retreat and a license for belligerence, they heard the rumble of Trump's massive bunker-buster bombs Saturday — and the message they sent about America's new resolve. It's true that Trump strongly prefers peace and is reluctant to use military power, but he's now proved beyond a doubt that he will use it — and to overwhelming effect — when necessary. Plus, US deception and strategic misdirection in advance of Saturday's strikes now make it clear that Trump's trademark ambiguity is reason for the other guys to worry about what he might do. Advertisement America is well-served by that 'unpredictability,' even as it was ill-served by Obama and Biden's predictable weakness. Bombing Iran's nuke sites won't guarantee better behavior from US adversaries, but the Putins and Xis of the world are on notice that they move at high risk of paying a far greater cost than they can afford. It's the very definition of deterrence: 'Peace through strength' makes the world safer. Thank goodness the nation has a president who gets it.

Axios

6 hours ago

• Axios

"It was a headfake": Inside Trump's secret orders to strike Iran

President Trump told the world last Thursday that he would decide " within the next two weeks" whether to strike Iran. 48 hours later, B-2 stealth bombers were whizzing through Iranian airspace — undetected — on a mission to cripple the Islamic Republic's nuclear program. Why it matters: Trump remained open to aborting the mission if a diplomatic window emerged. But his public countdown doubled as a smokescreen — concealing a strike plan that was already in motion, according to multiple officials. "It was a headfake," a Trump adviser told Axios. "He knew the media couldn't resist amplifying it. He knew the Iranians might think he was bluffing. Well, everyone was wrong." "The president wanted to buy time," another adviser said. "He knew what he wanted to do. And he knows he can't look eager for war. So all the folks in MAGA urging restraint gave him some space." Driving the news: The bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities on Saturday marked the most direct and consequential U.S. military action against Iran since the Islamic Republic was founded in 1979. Trump, who praised the operation as a "spectacular military success," came to the decision to join Israel's war after months of failed diplomacy — and one last secret effort to meet with Iranian officials last week. Once Trump decided Thursday that a military intervention was necessary, he tightly controlled the administration's messaging and narrowed the circle of people involved in the planning. Between the lines: As with many moments of geopolitical drama during Trump's two terms, his aides have gone to great lengths to emphasize an image of total command and decisive leadership. "This wasn't a Pentagon operation. This was a Donald Trump operation," a senior administration official told Axios. "He came up with the PR. He chose the plans. He chose the day." "He's no Jimmy Carter," the official said, referencing the last time the U.S. tried direct military action in Iran: Operation Eagle Claw in 1980, a humiliating and failed hostage rescue mission. The complexity of Saturday's Operation Midnight Hammer — which amounted to the largest B-2 strike in U.S. history — required meticulous planning from the Pentagon that likely stretched back years. Behind the scenes: In the first days after Israel launched its unprecedented attack on Iran, Trump hoped a swift nuclear deal could end the war before it escalated further. From the sidelines of the G7 summit in Canada last weekend, he began coordinating with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to arrange a high-level meeting between U.S. and Iranian officials in Istanbul. Trump was prepared to send Vice President J.D. Vance and White House envoy Steve Witkoff — or even travel himself to meet Iran's president, if that's what it would take to reach a deal. Vance and Witkoff had even started packing their bags, but it became clear on Monday afternoon that the meeting was not going to happen, senior U.S. official said. Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who was in hiding over fears of assassination, couldn't be reached to authorize the talks — and constant Israeli airstrikes made it too dangerous for Iranian officials to leave the country. "The president was ready to go forward with a strike if no diplomatic breakthrough took place. And as the week progressed, he realized that this was the case," a U.S. official told Axios. Zoom in: While still at the G7 summit, Trump gave the Pentagon the order to begin final planning work for a U.S. strike on Iran. On Tuesday, after cutting short his trip to Canada, he convened a Situation Room meeting with his top national security team. Trump pressed for details on the military plans, the reliability of the 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs, and the potential risks of the operation. "The military and the Pentagon told the president they were sure it was going to work," a U.S. official said. On Friday afternoon, a day after suggesting the attack could be delayed, Trump gave Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth the green-light to launch the B-2 bombers. Several hours later, the stealth bombers departed their base in Missouri. Some flew west as decoys. The real strike group headed east toward Iran, according to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dan Caine. On Saturday afternoon, while still at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, Trump was told the bombers were about to reach the point of no return — the moment they would go into full radio silence. The president gave the final go-ahead. Shortly after, Trump boarded Air Force One and flew back to Washington to be in the Situation Room as the first bombs hit their targets. Sitting in the Situation Room, the president saw that the media was still reporting he was undecided, a U.S. official said. That's when Trump grew confident the operation would be successful. "In the end, it was everything. The timing was right. The Ayatollah gave Trump and the U.S. the middle finger. And that came with a price," said a Trump confidant who spoke with the president in recent days. The intrigue: An extraordinarily small group of officials inside the Trump administration knew about the planned strike. "There were no leaks from the Pentagon or from the White House," a U.S. official said. Trump himself helped maintain the secrecy, using public statements to keep Washington, Tehran and the rest of the world guessing about his true intentions. On Thursday, he told reporters he would decide "within the next two weeks" whether to join the war — signaling that a strike wasn't necessarily imminent. A U.S. official said the president was willing to abort the mission at any minute if he saw a diplomatic opening, but "his instinct at that point was to move forward with a strike." An Israeli official told Axios that by the time Trump made the "two weeks" comment, he had already decided to authorize military action — and knew exactly when it would happen. On Friday night, as the bombers were already in the air, Trump appeared upbeat and relaxed at his golf club in New Jersey. "POTUS was having the time of his life. None of us had any idea that a bunch of bombers were already in the air ready to rain down hell," said one person who spoke with him that evening. What to watch: As the strike was underway, White House envoy Steve Witkoff sent a message to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to make clear that the operation was a one-off and limited strictly to Iran's nuclear program, a U.S. official told Axios. Witkoff, who has remained in direct contact with Araghchi throughout the crisis, emphasized that the U.S. still seeks a diplomatic resolution — and now wants Iran to return to the table following the destruction of its key enrichment sites, the official said. Several senior Trump officials, including Vance and Hegseth, stressed Sunday that the U.S. does not seek regime change in Iran and called on the Iranians to return to the negotiating table. The big picture: Multiple factors ultimately triggered Trump's decision to green-light the strike and go where no president has gone before, advisers told Axios. The CIA, working closely with Israeli intelligence, delivered fresh assessments on Iran's nuclear progress, though skepticism remains about whether Iran had made the formal decision to build a bomb. A damning International Atomic Energy Agency report underscored the urgency. And Israel's success in degrading Iranian air defenses created a window to act. The bottom line: Trump still wants a deal with Iran — and wanted one before the bombers took off, an adviser to the president told Axios.