Honesty in the fishwrap

bacon-ashford-03In this morning’s post, Leavenworth St. talked about the timing of some of the news, and how some are looking to make a direct affect on the politics of the day.

For instance, we now see that NBC knew about the Billy Bush video for some time — possibly 10 weeks — but held on to it so as to make the biggest splash before the debate.

But let us shift over to the coverage of local politics by the local news, to check their influence.

If you watched the 2nd District Congressional debate on Tuesday between Don Bacon and Brad Ashford, consider yourself among the wonkiest of the wonk political nerds of polinerdom.

It’s not necessarily a compliment.
It is not derogatory either.

The average long-time, high frequency voter doesn’t even watch this stuff — let alone the undecided voter. If someone hasn’t decided on the Congressional race, do you REALLY think they’re going to sit down and watch for an hour at 6pm on a Tuesday?

Anyway, the point is that most people — who want the news but aren’t going to sit through a 60 minute slog for Congress — are going to get their debate coverage from the local TV, drive-time radio and the newspaper.

So…about the local newspaper.

Let’s look at the OWH’s Robynn Tysver’s write-up of a few of the debate issues.

She wrote, generally, that it was an even split. Sort of summarizing answers.

Except when she decided to editorialize. She wrote…

“Ashford asked Bacon to name three things about which he disagreed with congressional Republicans. Bacon struggled, citing as one example his disagreement with Trump’s criticism of NATO.”

Well, those are two interesting points…except that she missed them both.

First, Bacon immediately rattled off his answer citing two specific instances. This isn’t an out-of-the-blue type question and Bacon clearly had an answer prepared. Watching it, he never “stumbled”. The suggestion does not make any sense.

But that’s what happens when you are a reporter projecting your thoughts on someone else’s response.

But about the question itself…

Ashford did NOT ask where Bacon disagree with “congressional Republicans.” How do we know that? BECAUSE THE DEBATE VIDEO IS STILL UP!

Ashford asked:

“Would you pick three Republican initiatives or issues where you would buck your party. Tell me what they are.”

Why is that key? Because after Bacon gave two examples — and then was interrupted — Ashford claimed these weren’t “Republican” positions.

Yet, Bacon cited the NATO position of the Republican Presidential nominee and he cited positions on Syria presented by many Republicans.

But Ashford didn’t like those positions. He  said those were positions of GOP members of the House Armed Services Committee.

And when Bacon was allowed to finish his answer, he added another regarding immigration where he disagreed with Republicans.

So Ashford had weeks to prepare for his question to Bacon, but didn’t make it specific — and therefore didn’t like the answer to his own non-specific question.

And the OWH’s reporter jumped on that for the top of her article.

Got it.

And oh hey, let’s look at the last point in the OWH article, about Bacon asking what Nebraska city was listed on an ISIS “hit list”. She wrote:

When asked after the debate where he got the information, Bacon noted that it came from a newspaper article published last year.

The Islamic State has distributed through social media a number of “hit lists” that purport to target military people and others for violence. The lists cover thousands of people and dozens of cities, and Bellevue was on one list.

Got that? “A newspaper article.”
WHAT newspaper?
That would be Tysver’s Omaha World-Herald.

Oh, and just for good measure, this issue was also covered by a local TV station.
You know, the TV station that co-hosted the debate.

Chip-chip-chip away. That’s how these things work.


The landslide bring you down

Noting this morning’s post again, it will be surprising if these latest allegations against Trump simply turn into some he-said-she-said type if situation. They will damage Trump’s chances, no matter what the situation.

And oh by the way, they are very likely not the last hits to come on Trump before the election.

So, here is a scenario:

What if, say a week before Election Day, it looks like Hillary will win in a landslide? Maybe a solid ten points or more. And everyone sees it, and gets sort of resigned to it.

What does that do to the Congressional races?

Conventional wisdom, from previous elections, is that Hillary’s coattails would bring her in new House members, and maybe even flip the Senate.

But remember that while many cite Trump’s divisiveness, Hillary’s unfavorables are also off the chart — a reason why she’s not “50 points ahead!”.

So if voters see that she is inevitable as the next President, long before Election Day, they may start thinking about a counter to her already. It did not take long for voters to give the House to Republicans after Bill Clinton was in office. And the same happened eventually happened with the Senate and Barack Obama. But what if they decide even sooner that Hillary needs a check and a balance?

Could it mean a much stronger showing in Congressional races — say like the 2nd District in Nebraska (and 3rd in Iowa)?

Not the craziest idea.
I’ll take your answers off the air.


Leaking KXL

More wiki-leaks stuff continues to hit. (Will ANYONE in government or politics use email anymore after this? Politicos are going to turn into Mafia Dons who only talk in hushed tones while strolling near sidestreet delis…)

Of local interest was the latest from Democrat adviser John Podesta, where he characterizes President Obama’s position on the issue as,

“I hate this chicken shit issue; now let me tell you what I think about the important issues of climate change and clean energy.”

And then in another one, Hillary purportedly was telling her private audiences that the Russians were supporting fake environmentalist groups, “to stand against any effort, oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you…”

So the Russian zillionaires trying to damage American energy policy. Hmm.

There are people already starting to ask, since the death of Bold Nebraska’s chief funder Dick Holland, where Jane Kleeb’s now expanded org will be getting their funding…


Keep on keepin’ up

Follow @LeavenworthSt on the Twitter and Like Leavenworth St. on The Facebook, because there’s no better way to keep up with the talk of Nebraska politics!


  1. Anonymous says:

    Doesn’t it suck when your candidate uses debunked ISIS propaganda in a political attack to scare voters?

    But yeah, chip away. I am sure you’ll accomplish a lot in 26 days.

  2. Bluejay says:

    The people need to know. Is Bold Nebraska funded by Russian money? Jane Kleeb has plenty of money to fly to the East Coast all the time. And I’m sure she doesn’t stay at the Super 8 in DC.

    Come clean Kleeb!

    No surprise, if true, as the Left has always been a fifth column against the interests of the United States.

    • repenting lawyer says:

      Bluejay, Quisling, the Fifth Column, Fascists all, are you sure Kleeb is not an agent of the famous Masonic Jesuit conspiracy or maybe she is working for the International bankers who are helping HRC against Trump? Maybe Canadian coffee, Tim Horton, is behind it all..

      • Bluejay says:

        Wikileaks just uncovered the fact that John Podesta (Georgetown Law alum) got 75,000 shares in a Russian oil company. IF Podesta is funded by the Russians, why not Kleeb?

        And, note well, the source of the Sweeper’s text. It was Hillary Clinton who wrote that anti-fracking groups are funded by Russians. Considering the fact that Hillary had access to intelligence at the highest level it is undoubtedly true. But let’s ask Kleeb at her next press conference.

      • Bluejay says:

        Correction: Hillary told a group in one of her secret speeches that the Russians fund environmental groups. It was written other than the speech was probably on the Prompter. Hillary knows the truth!

    • Anonymous says:

      Jane and losing green energy pioneer Scott managed to buy expensive farm land south of Hastings a couple years ago. Our media doesn’t care to look into JFK’s financing just chalking it all up to her mastery of running non-profits. I agree, she seems to have a bottomless pit of big money, even after Holland’s death.

      • Anonymous says:

        What’s with all the sour grapes re/Kleeb. The so-called “Makers” can’t stand the fact that, not only does Kleeb have money when they don’t, she has the ability (somehow) to continue to get more money when they can’t. Why do Libs drive Volvos? Maybe its because (again, somehow) they out-hustle those who claim to know how. Rather like the presidential election.

        Compared to the Republicans the Democrats are a model of party discipline and teamwork, working toward a common goal. I desperately despise Secretary Clinton, but I admire the machine she and others have built to advance their goals. Meanwhile the Republican candidate can’t seem to get his wife-beater on straight before opening his damnable mouth.

        Cry all you want about not-right, unethical and not-fair. Politics is not about any of those things. Its about winning. Any assertion to the contrary is a lie. The Democrats are winning, the Republicans are losing, and its the Republicans goddamn fault. Wanna see the problem? Look in the mirror.

      • Bluejay says:

        Anon at 8:28

        Libs are rich because they get taxpayer money. The wind and solar industries would not exist BUT FOR federal tax credits.

      • Anonymous says:

        If Republicans would win and obtain actual power those tax credits could be taken away. How is that going exactly, Bluejay? It pays to be a winner, doesn’t it?

      • Sparkles says:

        I can only assume Creighton offers courses in advanced Conspiracy Theorizing.

        Conspiracy Theoretics 511:
        Wal*Mart FEMA Camps, or CostCo Inculcation Zones?
        Professor: Viscount Hans Van Kloptenstein-Leiberfelter, Esq., DDS

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Sparkles, Bluejay loves conspiracy theories, a lot of Americans do. Creighton is hardly to blame for this. In NE if you are looking for a villain look at the literature on embittered Populism and leave Creighton alone. Your remarks were stupid and insulting.

  3. bynd says:

    If the Dems win the Senate, who will their top person be?

    If the worse race relations in this country in a long time happened under a black president, can a white female make them better? Or will even more cops be ambushed?

    If Putin pushed Obama all over Eastern Europe and Syria, basically the world, what will happen to Hillary?

    Have we seen just the tip of the iceberg of Iran’s new money in Yemen?

    Once ISIS is crushed, should be in Hillary’s time, what then?

    Can we really trust some one in the white house, who was “extremely careless” with secret documents because of her personal ambitions, to not spill some beans from the White House when the going gets tough?

    What is Hillary going to do about loss of jobs due to automation.

    I’m not as worried about illegals coming in, as much as the rich, or their money, leaving. Because then the tax hammer will fall on us.

    Will any of this affect the election? No and it is not meant too. Just asking. The future should be really scary.

    • Anonymous says:

      The people controlling Secretary Clinton will make sure Putin is reigned in without blowing us all to kingdom come. And, speaking of explosions, enough of them in Yemen will teach the Yemenis, the Houthis and the Persians to knock it off. Clinton has demonstrably bigger balls than Obama, so loosing a few missiles won’t be a problem. Again, Clinton’s handlers can sort that mess out.

      The future is really scary all the time, no matter who is at the top of the org chart.

      • Sparkles says:

        The future is really scary all the time, ..

        FACT –
        At no time in recent history were Americans in greater peril than at the conclusion of 8 years with a hapless GW Bush at the helm.
        Six of those 8 years with all 3 branches of our government controlled by the cluster$^*& that is our modern day, TEA addled, GOP.

        It’s was a tragic assault on the American psyche and spirit. An assault that still resonates today, as the suicide rate, specifically for middle age American men, has sky-rocketed since the Great Recession of George W.

        The only time in recent history that even comes close to the extreme peril wrought by an inept GOP, was an event that began 54 years ago, today – the Cuban Missile Crisis.
        Prior to that, you have to go back 75 years and the bombing of Pearl Harbor.
        Both events brought to our shores by external powers.

        And George W. Bush, the man that lead us to two unfunded, unwarranted wars, destabilized the entire middle east and brought our nation to the precipice of the 2nd Great Depression, is a literal Genius and Saint when compared to the buffoon the GOP has crowned their leader in this election cycle.

      • Bynd says:


        So Russia taking over Crimea was was no big deal. Wasn’t our fight anywy. Hmm, sounds like what the libs say about Bush. No big thing in anexing Eastern Ukraine and shooting down an airliner. Actually with don’t cross that line Obama in office, Putin new he would never be challenged.

        So I guess the conclusion we never were in any danger of any conflict is true.

        Hillary will get very tired of the name Putin within her first couple of months.

    • Sparkles says:

      Pony up, Bluejay.

      Dig through those those Breitbart ‘news’ stories, sort through your cache of Alex Jones lunacy, search your archive of WorldNutDaily files.
      I’d love to see, just once, you who peddle in this right wing crackpottery offer others a peek into the dark recesses from which you pull this inane garbage.

    • Oracle says:

      Maybe if you go back to the beginning of the last century. Geesh.., quit trying to just win the argument and make a relevant point instead.

    • repenting lawyer says:

      Bluejay, How does Communism in one country and purge of internationalists under Stalin scare with your historical knowledge? Was the Hitler Stalin Pact and Soviet efforts to undermine left in Europe part of the program? Do you remember that the New Left had a standard criticism of Old Left over anti-communism? Communists in Europe not great friends of student radicals in 1968. Perhaps you could move beyond the Comicbook History of the Cold War.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.