The Liberal "MSNBC Republican" Washington Examiner Breaks the Sacred Journalistic Rule, Printing OFF THE RECORD Comments and Then Lying About It to Get Twitter Clicks and Maybe Some Liberal Media Gigs

This earns the death penalty for this sister-publication and now spiritual successor to the MSNBC "Republican Weekly Standard.

The billionaire owner wants reach and influence? Well, just wait until 90% of all conservatives impose a complete and total boycott.

Not another link. If absolutely forced to, I will quote them briefly and note I got it from the "W.Ex." or something.

But no links.

I think people should just put a block on the site on their browser.

And oh, by the way: The Washington Examiner's "Political Conference" is tonight in Sea Island, Georgia.

Make sure you collar Seth Mandel, Jay Caruso, Phil Klein, Quin Hillyer and the rest of the gang and absolutely they demand they account for violating basic ethics and then lying about it.

(Leave Byron York alone; he's good people. But he really has to swim away from this slightly dumber and slightly cheaper but still sinking cruise ship.)

Also ask Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Devin Nunes if they're aware that the conference they're attending is now all about burning Trump officials and then making up bullshit rationales about why they feel they're allowed to pretend off the record comments are actually (secretly! fingers crossed!) on the record.

But don't make any affirmative statements yourself -- whether the Examiner promises you off-the-record status or not, they'll unethically publish your comments anyway if they think it will help them get jobs in the liberal media after their billionaire egomaniac finally realizes he can't influence Republican voters with filthy liberal scumbags.

Don't click on that. Don't ever click on Washington Examiner -- Cvckshed Daily -- material, ever. Go to Archive.is or Outline.com and enter the address if you must see the article.

More below.

Here's the story, which of course was leaked to the Washington Post to let all the liberal world know the Examiner is now a Debutante, ready to enter High Liberal Society as a Big Girl.

This journalist [churnalist], a breaking news reporter for the Washington Examiner, had written an article on Tuesday about President Trump considering Conway, counselor to the president, as his next chief of staff...

Joannou requested that the conversation with him be off the record..This reporter agreed, but moments later, Conway took over the call, initiating a new conversation without any agreement that it was off the record. The Washington Examiner is publishing audio and a transcript of the full exchange.

That is a lie: As I'll show below, the churnalist herself had to ask Kellyanne Conway if she would like to "dispute that on the record?" demonstrating that she knew damn well it was off the record, and knew, based on her own fresh affirmation, that Kellyanne Conway understood it was off the record too.

But liars gonna lie and grift gonna grift.

The editors at the new Weekly Standard (same as the old Weekly Standard, except dumber and cheaper to hire) approved of this. They got together and decided to say "Who cares about off the record guarantees? YOLO!"

Hey, you can't get #TrendingOnTwitter without relaxing a certain amount of journalistic integrity.

Conway, 52, was furious that her husband George Conway, 56, who has attracted considerable media coverage by publicly feuding with Trump, was mentioned in the story. She took issue with a line in the story that she had "been in the middle of Trump’s barbs with her husband, George, a conservative lawyer who frequently makes headlines for his criticism of the president."

She said: "So I just am wondering why in God's earth you would need to mention anything about George Conway's tweets in an article that talks about me as possibly being chief of staff. Other than it looks to me like there’s no original reporting here, you just read Twitter and other people’s stuff, which I guess is why you don’t pick up the phone when people call from the White House because, if it's not on Twitter or it’s not on cable TV, it's not real."

This is all true.

"They know absolutely nothing," as Ben Rhodes observed (and Jake Tapper refused to report).

The only thing they know is Their Twitterz.

...

After an offer to speak with an editor, Conway, who is notorious for berating journalists, told this reporter, 29: "Let me tell you something, from a powerful woman. Don’t pull the crap where you're trying to undercut another woman based on who she’s married to. He gets his power through me, if you haven't noticed. Not the other way around. And if these are the quote standards unquote at the Washington Examiner, then yes I'd be happy to talk to your editor. But I've known your editor since before you were born."

...

Before ending the call, Conway threatened that the White House would delve into the personal lives of reporters if they wrote about her husband. "Listen, if you're going to cover my personal life, then we’re welcome to do the same around here," she said.

This is also true, and "journalists" are about to start learning just how true this is.

They keep insisting on this very self-serving "rule:" We can report on everyone else's indiscretions, affairs, and drug use but you can't report on ours because that would be "chilling" the press.

Well listen here, my pale little low-T Gollums: What you're doing is "chilling" how politicians act or vote because they know, for a fact, that if they go against your political preferences, you will dig and dig and dig until you can destroy them.

In fact, you're chilling everyone who dares speak in public but who does not follow the approved One-Party Liberal Establishment DC line.

Why should the same rule not run in the opposite direction?

Only "Journalists" think they should have a special protection from "research" and "routine background social media checks" that literally not another citizen in the world -- including just a kid at a DC protest wearing a hat, or a 24 year old raising money for St. Jude's Children's hospital -- has.

What is this apart from very self-interested special pleading and the assertion of a special higher class of citizenship that is completely hateful to our Constitution and which no one in the world has ever voted into law?

People are already digging into reporters. And I say, godspeed.

Aren't we past the point of pretending that you're "apolitical" truth-seekers?

Did you really think it was huge news that a great many Americans -- including Kellyanne Conway and about 330 million others -- think it's high time we started running some "routine background checks" on you?

Or was this just another bid for attention by Clarity Media's next sunken cruise ship?

Now on to the disputation of Sethie's lies, via Jordan Schaechtel:

That's just background type stuff. As he says, if every time a subject says "if you print that, I'll have your job" or "if you run with that, that's the end of your career" the reporter then gets to decide "Hey, I can now dishonor the off the record promise," then there is no off the record promise, because this shit happens every single day.

Here's the killer part:

If this was "off the record," why did the reporter have to invite Kellyanne to go on the record?

Do not ever give an interview to the Washington Examiner -- they are sneaky liars who will violate the basic norms of journalism to get them some clicks.

Is this one of those end-of-quarter deals where Sethie and the other members of the soy staff have to prove to their billionaire sugar-daddy that they're really getting some "strong online engagement" by racking up some viral clickbait?

Or is Sethie or one of the other gals in the middle of trying to get an MSNBC "contributor" deal and wanted to Demonstrate Value?

So do not ever speak to these sneakly little shits, grifters, and liars, do not permit them to even join conference calls or general briefings, and, on the reader side, embargo them completely.

If you hear of a story you think you must read, use Archive.is or Outline.com or tip your friendly local blogger to take a look and excerpt the two or three important sentences.

Otherwise-- Death Penalty.

Let them pass from the earth unremarked and without trace.

And don't be afraid to ask them some questions out in public, like at their stupid conference where they try to chisel money out of actual Republicans under false pretenses.

And also don't be afraid to promise them their answers are off the record, and then send me the recording.

The Liberal "MSNBC Republican" Washington Examiner Breaks the Sacred Journalistic Rule, Printing OFF THE RECORD Comments and Then Lying About It to Get Twitter Clicks and Maybe Some Liberal Media Gigs&bodytext=This earns the death penalty for this sister-publication and now spiritual successor to the MSNBC "Republican Weekly Standard. The billionaire owner wants reach and influence? Well, just wait until 90% of all conservatives impose a complete and total boycott. Not...&topic=world_news"> posted by Ace of Spades at 06:38 PM

| Access Comments