Contrary to DOJ’s Aim, Backlash to J6 Trial Could Boost Trump in Iowa

(Mark Pellin, Headline USA) The Biden Justice Department’s chief Trump headhunter requested a trial date of Jan. 2, 2024, to launch his prosecution of the former president for challenging the results of the highly controversial 2020 election, with his hopes to wrap a convict’s bow around the neck of his boss’s chief obstacle to another term in the White House.

Special counsel Jack Smith’s requested timing for the trial — two weeks before the massively consequential GOP Iowa Caucus — was roundly criticized as another gross display of election interference targeting the Republican frontrunner’s prospects for securing the party’s nomination.

“Deranged Jack Smith has just asked for a trial on the Biden Indictment to take place on January 2nd., just ahead of the important Iowa Caucuses,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Only an out of touch lunatic would ask for such a date, ONE DAY into the New Year,  and maximum Election Interference with IOWA!”

“How is this not election interference?” asked West Virginia Republican Attorney General Patrick Morrisey. “I think every American has to rise up and say, ‘No. These political prosecutions have to stop.’”

Iowa might be the place were the uprising starts. And if Smith’s intention was to twist the partisan ties of the Obama-appointed federal judge overseeing the J6 case, who worked at the same law firm with Hunter Biden, to secure a Trump conviction, the outcome could face heavy backlash that would significantly favor Trump in Iowa.

The state’s caucus has a history of proving a reliable indicator of a candidate’s success in securing the party’s nomination, and a new poll suggests boiling discontent with the DOJ could give Trump a campaign boost in Iowa, regardless of how the case unfolds in front of a likely D.C. jury. 

A nearly 60% majority of Republican voters said they agreed with the statement that “The lawlessness of the persecutions of President Trump and his supporters is reminiscent of Nazi Germany in the 1930s,” which echoed the charge Trump’s team posted on Truth Social when the DOJ unleashed its J6 indictment.

A Daily Mail poll conducted after the indictment was issued, and Trump’s response had been widely circulated, surveyed 600 likely Republican caucus-goers in Iowa. “Only 28 percent disagreed with the comparison, driven largely by supporters of Tim Scott, the only black Republican senator. Half of his supporters said they did not agree with the Trump campaign statement,” the Daily Mail reported.

In addition to the 57% of all Republicans surveyed who did agree with the brutal assessment of the DOJ, a whopping 73% of Trump’s supporters agreed with the sentiment.

Mirroring the poll’s results, floundering presidential hopeful Will Hurd was nearly booed off the stage at last month’s Iowa Republican Party’s Lincoln Dinner, when he claimed Trump was only running for president “to stay out of prison.”

Delivering his own remarks at the same event, Trump said of his indictments, “If I weren’t running, I would have nobody coming after me. Or if I was losing by a lot, I would have nobody coming after me.”

Iowa Republicans’ shared agreement with that claim could prove critical if the DOJ’s J6 trial proceeds on pace with the Iowa Caucus. Trump, it should be noted, has declared that a sham DOJ conviction and prison wouldn’t sidetrack his presidential run.

“We have seen Republicans say Trump is being pursued unfairly, and people agree that the series of indictments are a ‘witch hunt,’” said James Johnson, co-founder of Republican polling firm J.L. Partners.

Taking it a step further, the poll showed Iowa “Republicans also think the Department of Justice is acting in the same way that the Nazis did in the 1930s,” Johnson said.

“However shocking that may sound, this is another statistic in a long line of others that demonstrates the loyalty of many of Trump’s voters — and how the indictments have only emboldened their support rather than undermined it.”

Biden’s $6B Iranian Bribe Torched by GOP

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) President Joe Biden is facing intense criticism from lawmakers and experts after the New York Times confirmed the funneling of $6 billion to Iran in exchange for the release of five detained Americans.  

The move, aimed at securing the freedom of Siamak Namazi, Morad Tahbaz, Emad Shargi and two unnamed Americans, has sparked a heated debate over the effectiveness of such a policy and its potential consequences. 

In a press release, Adrienne Watson, the National Security Council spokesperson said, “We have received confirmation that Iran has released from prison five Americans who were unjustly detained and has placed them on house arrest.” 

While the White House warned that the Americans “should have never been detained in the first place,” it celebrated the news as a victory for Biden. 

Critics, however, argued that this approach sets a dangerous precedent and could embolden Iran to engage in further hostile actions.  

Prominent voices, including Sen. Tom Cotton, R- Ark., expressed concerns about the payment being perceived as ransom, potentially encouraging Iran to continue taking hostages and funding terrorist activities

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. echoed these sentiments, stating, “The best way to protect Americans is to have countries like Iran be afraid of taking Americans hostage in the first place.”

GOP Reps. Nicole Malliotakis, N.Y. and Barry Loudermilk, Ga., also strongly condemned the decision, with Malliotakis calling it a “lopsided deal” that encourages bad behavior and terrorism. Similarly, Loudermilk criticized the administration’s foreign policy decisions in the wake of the Afghanistan withdrawal.

Rep. Darrel Issa chimed in, saying, “By paying billions in ransom to Iran, Biden is financing the world’s worst terror state.”

The $6 billion payout comes days after the Biden foreign policy came under scrutiny from Gold Star parents who blamed Biden officials for the death of 13 U.S. servicemen in the chaotic Biden-ordered withdrawal from Afghanistan. 

“Be a grown a** man,” Darren Hoover, father of  Staff Sgt. Darin Taylor Hoover, said in a now-viral testimony referring to President Biden. “Admit to your mistakes. Learn from them so that this doesn’t happen ever, ever again. You all need to resign immediately.” 

Bill Barr Bombshell Tied to Reported Mich. 2020 Election Fraud

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) Michigan’s electoral landscape is ablaze with a pair of new revelations that have sent shockwaves through the political sphere.

A former Trump administration official has come forward with a startling allegation that the Justice Department, led by then-Attorney General Bill Barr, deliberately impeded an investigation into potential voter irregularities and fraud in Muskegon, Michigan, leading up to the 2020 election. The allegations, first brought forward by the Gateway Pundit, tie GBI Strategies LLC, a company that had come under scrutiny by Michigan state police.

In an equally staggering disclosure, the Twitter account “KanekoaTheGreat” reported that a controversial “dark money” Super PAC channeled an astonishing $11,254,919 to GBI Strategies LLC. Allegedly, these funds were earmarked for voter registration initiatives supporting Joe Biden’s presidential campaign.

Andrew Kloster, a former general counsel of personnel operations in the Trump administration, delivered these bombshell claims during an interview on The War Room with Steve Bannon. Kloster shed light on a potentially significant cover-up, asserting that a senior law enforcement official in Muskegon alerted him to a woman who had been apprehended for her alleged involvement in voter fraud. 

Reportedly, this woman was found in possession of a substantial number of completed voter registration applications. Some of these applications exhibited unsettling patterns, including identical handwriting and non-existent addresses, raising serious concerns about the integrity of the electoral process in the contentious state.

The Gateway Pundit first brought these damning allegations to the forefront earlier this week. The controversy revolves around the activities of a woman associated with GBI Strategies, who was purportedly discovered with thousands of completed voter registration applications mere weeks before the 2020 election.

Although local law enforcement initiated the investigation, it was eventually handed over to the FBI. However, the investigation seems to have hit a standstill, leaving critical questions unanswered. It is unclear whether the FBI further investigated the claims or whether it had no further evidence of wrongdoing.

Kloster detailed the obstacles he encountered in his attempts to address the matter within the Trump administration. Despite clear indications of potential fraud and irregularities, there were explicit directives to avoid delving into election-related matters from both the White House Council and the DOJ during Barr’s tenure. 

Kloster’s endeavors to raise concerns and initiate an investigation were met with resistance and indifference from various quarters within the Trump administration.  

Barr’s Chief of Staff, Will Levi, allegedly rebuffed Kloster’s efforts, and the White House Counsel eventually intervened, effectively halting any further action and leaving the investigation in a state of uncertainty. 

In interviews after the 2020 presidential election, Barr has admitted that he approached the allegations of election irregularities with skepticism.

Bernie Sanders’s Campaign Funneled $200K Into Wife’s Nonprofit

(Headline USA) Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., funneled more than $200,000 from his campaign into a nonprofit organization started by his wife and stepson.

Federal Election Commission records show Sanders’s campaign committee, Friends of Bernie Sanders, made two payments to the Sanders Institute, both for $100,000, in January and March, according to Fox News.

The Sanders Institute was established in 2017 by the senator’s wife, Jane O’Meara Sanders, and stepson, David Driscoll. Its mission is to “revitalize democracy by actively engaging individuals, organizations and the media in the pursuit of progressive solutions to economic, environmental, racial and social justice issues,” according to its website.

“The purpose is to revitalize democracy in the support of progressive institutions,” Jane Sanders told the Washington Post in 2017. “Our feeling is at our point in time, our country is at a crossroads, and people are engaged in a political process that can be opaque. So we put together this team to focus on issues, but not in a partisan way, not in a way that just focuses on the latest crazy thing.”

It is not clear what the think tank does, since its website primarily consists of links to articles on other outlets. The organization also briefly halted its operations in 2019 while Bernie Sanders campaigned for the presidency in 2020.

Tax forms from 2021 show more than one-third of the nonprofit’s income was spent on salaries. That year, the institute raised $716,618 and spent $257,000 of it on wages, including $152,653 for Driscoll’s salary and other benefits.

This is not the first time Sanders’s campaign has spent money propping up the institute. In 2021, Sanders’s 2020 presidential campaign sent $350,000 to the non-profit.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Bernie Sanders harshly criticized Hillary Clinton for her family’s use of the Clinton Foundation.

“If you ask me about the Clinton Foundation, do I have a problem when a sitting secretary of state and a foundation run by her husband collects many millions of dollars from foreign governments, governments which are dictatorships?” Sanders told CNN at the time. “Do I have a problem with that? Yeah, I do.”

Doctors Were Bribed to Promote COVID-19 Jabs

(Dmytro “Henry” Aleksandrov, Headline USA) It was recently discovered that doctors were bought off by Big Pharma and its insurance industry gunsels to administer the COVID-19 vaccine, turning the jab business into big business with major monetary gains.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., shared a graphic from Anthem Medical, an arm of health insurance company Blue Cross Blue Shield, that revealed that doctors were financially incentivized to give the COVID-19 vaccine to their patients.

The document titled “COVID-19 Vaccine Provider Incentive Program” that was shared by Massie was published in 2021.

The document that was addressed to physicians in Kentucky who regularly treat patients claimed that receiving the COVID-19 vaccine was “one of the best and safest ways people can protect themselves and their families against the virus.”

“As a participating practice in the COVID-19 Provider Vaccine Incentive program, we recognize your hard work by offering incentives for helping patients make the choice to become vaccinated,” the document stated.

In addition to that, the COVID-19 Provider Vaccine Incentive program is open to primary care providers in the state of Kentucky who have an Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield Medicaid panel size of 25 or more members.

“If your practice meets the below thresholds for vaccination with at least one dose by September 1, 2021, you will receive the initial incentive payment,” the document said.

The payments were based on the following rates: $20 bonus per vaccinated Anthem member if 30% are vaccinated; $45 bonus per vaccinated member if 40% are vaccinated, $70 bonus per vaccinated member if 50% are vaccinated; $100 bonus per vaccinated member if 60% are vaccinated; and $125 bonus per vaccinated member if 75% are vaccinated.

“The final incentive payment is calculated based on members who are newly vaccinated between September 1, 2021, and December 31, 2021,” according to the document.

The graphic then added another payout scale for those doctors who chased the vax loot: $100 bonus per member if 30% are vaccinated; $150 bonus per member if 40% are vaccinated; $175 per member if 50% are vaccinated; $200 bonus per member if 60% are vaccinated; and $250 bonus per member if 75% are vaccinated.

Comer Says House Oversight Will Subpoena Hunter, Joe Biden

(Headline USA) House Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., revealed this week that he plans to subpoena both Hunter Biden and President Joe Biden and force them to testify about the $20 million Hunter Biden raked in from foreign entities.

“This is always going to end with the Bidens coming in front of the committee,” Comer told Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo on Thursday.

Comer also said he expects to eventually take his findings to court.

“We’re putting together a case, and I think we’ve done that very well,” he said. “We know that this is going to end up in court when we subpoena the Bidens.”

The Republican admitted neither will be simple tasks given how much “obstruction” his committee has already had to face.

“This is a complicated case, and we’re being obstructed every step of the way by the Department of Justice, by the FBI, by the Secret Service, by the IRS, and by the Biden family attorneys,” Comer explained. 

The House Oversight Committee released new findings this week that bring the total documented income from foreign sources brought in by the Biden family and their business associates to $20 million. Much of this money came from business deals struck by Hunter Biden with Russian, Kazakhstani, and Ukrainian officials, according to bank records obtained by Comer.

“During Joe Biden’s vice presidency, Hunter Biden sold him as ‘the brand’ to reap millions from oligarchs in Kazakhstan, Russia, and Ukraine. It appears no real services were provided other than access to the Biden network, including Joe Biden himself,” Comer said in a statement.

The Oversight Committee has not yet subpoenaed bank records for Joe Biden or any member of the Biden family, but has instead acquired documents on international transfers from the Biden family’s business partners, such as Devon Archer and Rob Walker, according to Comer.

U.S. Suicides Hit All-Time High under Biden, CDC Says

(By Brett Rowland, The Center Square) Suicide deaths in the United States hit an all-time high in 2022, increasing about 2.6% to 49,449 deaths last year.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released the provisional estimates on Thursday.

“One life lost to suicide is one too many. Yet, too many people still believe asking for help is a sign of weakness,” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra said in a statement. “We must continue to eliminate the stigmatization of mental health and make care available to all Americans.”

Suicide deaths declined in 2019 and 2020 before increasing about 5% to 48,183 deaths in 2021. The provisional estimates released Thursday show that suicide deaths further increased in 2022.

The CDC’s Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry called the increase “troubling.”

“The troubling increase in suicides requires immediate action across our society to address the staggering loss of life from tragedies that are preventable,” she said in a statement.

U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy called for improved access to mental health care.

“These numbers are a sobering reminder of how urgent it is that we further expand access to mental health care, address the root causes of mental health struggles, and recognize the importance of checking on and supporting one another,” he said in a statement.

Despite the overall increase, the CDC reported declines for American Indian and Alaska Native people (down 6.1%) and people 10-24 years old (down 8.4%).

The 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline can be reached by calling or texting 988 or chatting online at 988lifeline.org.

Judges Hear Oral Arguments in Biden Social Media Censorship Case

(By Steve Wilson, The Center Square) A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments Thursday in a free speech case involving the federal government and social media censorship during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The U.S. Department of Justice asked the three judges to lift a lower court order that bans the Biden administration and several federal agencies from contact with social media companies.

Daniel Tenny, an attorney with the Justice Department, said during arguments in front of Judges Edith Brown Clement, Jennifer Walker Elrod and Don R. Willett that the theory that the federal government coerced social media “falls apart on the facts.”

He also said that the plaintiffs admitted in earlier briefs that an injunction ordered by U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty on July 4 would prevent the federal government from asking social media companies to remove “untrue statements” during a natural disaster.

He also said they admitted the government would be prohibited from alerting social media companies about posts that could be part of a criminal conspiracy regarding human trafficking.

The Department of Justice attorney also said the district courts seem to credit that some of the efforts of the federal government was engaged in with regard to COVID-19 are no longer ongoing.

“I’d like to just point out the chronological point we made in our brief: Twitter and the other social media companies adopted policies in 2020 about COVID misinformation,” Tenny said. “And they (the plaintiffs) say this is attributable either to a White House pressure campaign that began in 2021, which is obviously not true.”

Louisiana Solicitor General Liz Murrill said the “digital warfare in this case is one of the most massive attacks on free speech rights in American history.” She also said that the censorship regime injures the states because of the “interference with our ability to have a process for our people to organize and petition the government for grievances.”

The May 2022 lawsuit was brought by Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry and Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt over what the two prosecutors say is the Biden administration’s censorship of conservative views on social media during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Doughty’s order prevents the Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Census Bureau, FBI, U.S. Department of Justice and members of the president’s executive office from having any discussions with social media companies about “encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”

A NATO Without Limits?

(By Francis P. Sempa, RealClear Wire) Jessica Berlin, a policy analyst writing in the Center for European Policy Analysis’ online journal, has proposed a NATO without limits–an expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to all democratic nations. “The 21st-century threat landscape,” she contends, “calls for a global alliance capable of mutual defense.” “NATO must open its doors,” she writes, “to new members beyond Europe and North America.”

Her proposal is breathtaking in scope: an attack on any democracy is an attack on all democracies. It is a recipe for endless wars on all continents and a reckless extension of America’s nuclear guarantee to all the world’s democracies. It turns John Quincy Adams’ prudent counsel on its head: America goes abroad in search of monsters to destroy and is the champion and vindicator of the freedom and independence of all democracies.

Berlin’s proposed “New Alliance Treaty Organization” fulfills the vision of Woodrow Wilson who sought to use American power, treasure and blood to make the world “safe for democracy.” It echoes the irresponsible Truman Doctrine which rhetorically committed the United States to “support free peoples around the world who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.”

It mirrors the reckless pledge of President John F. Kennedy to “pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” It shares the Utopian vision announced by President George W. Bush that the United States will “extend the benefits of freedom across the globe” and to “bring the hope of democracy . . . to every corner of the world.”

Berlin is simply the latest exponent of democratism, an ideology that Patrick Buchanan argued would “bleed, bankrupt, and break this republic in endless crusades and interminable wars.” It is a tragedy of history that the ideology of democratism coincided with the rise to power of what President Eisenhower called the “military-industrial complex.”

That tragedy is written in blood in Southeast Asia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and lesser conflicts. And Berlin envisions the new NATO as not only the army of the world’s democracies but also the armed force that will be used to prevent or stop genocide wherever it occurs. Here, Berlin mimics Samantha Power’s notion that the United States and its European allies have a “responsibility to protect” (R2P) the rest of the world’s people.

One of history’s greatest statesman Otto von Bismarck once remarked that “it is unworthy of a great state to dispute over something which does not concern its interests.” Bismarck was referring to actual, concrete interests, not interests defined by ideology. The great British geopolitical thinker Sir Halford Mackinder understood that democratic ideals must give way to geopolitical realities. Closer to home, America’s first and greatest president, George Washington, counseled his countrymen to conduct foreign policy without sentiment or emotion, and to “steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world,” and to “safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.”

Jessica Berlin not only wants to make NATO permanent; she wants to expand it to geographical and ideological lengths that even its most ardent supporters and admirers should shy away from. Crusaders and ideologues make for dangerous statesmen.

For WaPo’s Feared ‘Pinocchio’ Fact Checker, Forthrightness Dies in ‘Updates’ to Biden-Burisma Story

(By Paul Sperry, RealClear Wire) For the second time in three years, the Washington Post has quietly “updated” one of the most consequential fact checks in the history of American politics – its October 2020 article undercutting reports that Hunter Biden arranged a dinner meeting between one of his foreign business clients and his father, who was then vice president of the United States.

The original article by the Washington Post’s chief fact checker, Glenn Kessler, was published the same day as the New York Post’s pre-election scoop revealing that Joe Biden had attended a 2015 dinner with a top executive of a Ukrainian energy firm, Burisma, which was paying his son $83,000 per month. Kessler’s fact-check involved interviews with a host of Biden aides who vehemently disputed the vice president’s attendance at the dinner and advanced the theory that the source of the information – a laptop Hunter had abandoned at a Delaware repair shop – was untrustworthy and possibly a Russian plant.

That conspiracy theory was quickly embraced by 51 former intelligence officials, who signed an open letter dismissing the New York Post’s scoop as having “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” This letter and the Washington Post fact check were used by the Biden campaign, other media outlets, and social media platforms to discredit the information contained on the laptop in the final days of the campaign. The article, Kessler would later boast, was “one of the most read articles in our 13-year history” of the fact-checking feature.

But Kessler’s fact check has not aged well. Just last week Hunter Biden’s former business partner, Devon Archer, testified before Congress that the article was “not correct reporting.” Instead of retracting the article – as the Post did with some of its debunked Russiagate coverage – or running a straightforward correction, the paper has appended a series of “updates” to its reporting.

“The Washington Post and other media have tried to squelch the scandal of Joe Biden potentially using his high office to enrich himself and his family,” said a congressional investigator for a GOP-led committee. “Almost nobody is fact-checking these biased fact checkers, and they carry a lot of weight and authority.”

In his original article, “Hunter Biden’s alleged laptop: An explainer,” Kessler took the Biden camp’s word that the then-vice president never met senior Burisma official Vadym Pozharskyi on April 16, 2015, and didn’t even attend the dinner in question at a Georgetown restaurant. Kessler also expressed open doubts about the authenticity of the laptop. Kessler wrote that the New York Post stories “purportedly” came from a Hunter Biden laptop “supposedly” left at a repair shop. Quoting an author of a book on disinformation, Kessler also questioned the authenticity of the emails on the laptop. The specific email in question – the New York Post called it a “smoking gun” – was an April 17 message from Pozharskyi thanking Hunter Biden for the “opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together.”

“Officials who worked for Biden at the time told The Fact Checker that no such meeting took place,” Kessler asserted, noting that it was not listed on the former vice president’s schedule and that it was unlikely Biden even went to the restaurant.

After the election, with Biden in office, and as more details about the dinner trickled in over the next several months, the Washington Post on June 7, 2021, appended Kessler’s story with a note that the article had been ”updated.” It linked to a revised version, which carried the headline, “Hunter Biden’s laptop: The April 16, 2015, dinner.”

In the new article, Kessler acknowledged Biden did, in fact, go to the 2015 dinner, which was held at the Cafe Milano in Georgetown. But he insisted “there was less to the story than one might imagine.”

Kessler quoted Biden allies who said the vice president had “only dropped by briefly,” and only to say hello to a personal friend tied to a Biden family charity, adding that Biden “didn’t even sit down” at the table with his son. He cast doubt that Vadym Pozharskyi, the Burisma executive, was part of the group – even though New York Post reporter Miranda Devine pointed out to Kessler through Twitter that a “Vadym” was on the guest list Hunter sent to Archer before the event. Devine called Kessler’s reporting “sloppy.”

However, Kessler stopped short of conceding he’d been burned by Team Biden. For the next two years, he and the Washington Post stubbornly hewed to his original story, albeit with some alterations, that the dinner was much ado about nothing and that Republicans were falsely trying to tie Biden to his son’s corrupt Ukrainian benefactor.

But transcripts released last week reveal that Archer, who sat on the Burisma board with Hunter and attended the Cafe Milano dinner, confirmed the New York Post’s reporting about the event.

In a recent deposition before the House Oversight Committee, Archer testified that not only did Pozharskyi attend the dinner, but so did Biden – and not just for a brief “drop-by,” as Kessler claimed in the revised, 2021 version of his story. Archer recalled the vice president sat down and stayed for the dinner, which was held in a private room in the back of the restaurant.

After Democratic lawmakers and lawyers quizzed him about the Washington Post story, Archer said “that’s not correct reporting.”

Asked last Thursday if the paper still stands behind Kessler’s story, Washington Post spokeswoman Kathy Baird told RealClearInvestigations that the paper was addressing Archer’s revelations. “Following up on your earlier inquiry,” she said, “this piece has now been updated.”

In the latest version, published Aug. 3, Kessler added a parenthetical “update” several paragraphs into the piece that Archer in his deposition “disputed” the recollections of Kessler’s Biden sources about the dinner. In another update inserted later in the story, Kessler acknowledged that “Archer told investigators [Burisma official] Pozharskyi attended the dinner.” (This was an update of a previous update.) Finally, at the end of the story, Kessler again cited Archer’s interview to correct his earlier reporting about a dinner attendee who did not in fact attend the function. But he referred to it as an “update,” instead of a correction.

In its related 2020 story, the Post appended another correction masquerading as an “update” at the bottom of Kessler’s piece, which noted that the laptop Kessler implied was “disinformation” had in fact been authenticated.

All told, the Post has run six corrections across its original and revised Kessler stories about the laptop emails and the Biden-Burisma dinner.

Baird declined to answer whether the Post’s designated fact-checker was too trusting of his Biden sources. Though documented evidence was available at the time, Kessler took the word of Biden’s aides over contemporaneous emails and texts contradicting what they told him. Most facts were always there. It was only when the facts were amplified by government hearings, reports and depositions, as well as other news sites and Twitter, that Kessler revised his analysis – while still resisting calling his revisions “corrections.”

Despite the rolling disclosures reaching a critical mass, the Post has not published a separate news story examining its own errors, which misinformed voters ahead of the November 2020 presidential election and continued to mislead the public deep into the Biden presidency.

Republican lawmakers say the Post’s inaccurate and misleading “fact-checking” is a microcosm of how the Washington press corps has been ignoring evidence of Biden family influence-peddling and corruption, which they say has had a chilling effect on criminal investigations. Media coverage often drives investigations into public corruption as well the appointment of independent prosecutors when there is a political conflict, as in the case of the Biden-controlled Justice Department looking into the Biden family. But not during this administration.

The Post’s influential Fact Checker staff brands stories or public statements it deems false or misleading with “Pinocchios.” A fact-check that earns one Pinocchio “shades the facts,” according to the newspaper’s criteria, while one garnering four Pinocchios is condemned as a “whopper.” Democrats and political commentators routinely cite Kessler’s findings to
bolster – or impugn – politicians or points of view.

By his own measure, Kessler’s Biden-Burisma dinner story containing significant factual errors would have earned four Pinocchios.

The Washington Post began running Kessler’s The Fact Checker as a permanent feature in 2011. Now with its own team, including researchers and videographers (working with a $250,000 grant from Google News Initiative/YouTube to expand production of video fact checks), the award-winning feature is part of the Post’s national-news section led by Matea Gold, who last year had to recuse herself from DOJ and FBI coverage over a personal conflict, as RCI first reported. Gold is married to FBI chief of staff Jonathan Lenzner.

In 2023, Kessler was awarded the Sigma Delta Chi award for a series of fact checks in 2022 concerning claims about Hunter Biden. In its announcement, the Society of Professional Journalists remarked that Kessler had provided “a very detailed, balanced analysis of a complicated and horrifically convoluted story that spawned a thousand rumors and falsehoods.”

Kessler, who co-authored the book, Donald Trump and His Assault on Truth: The President’s Falsehoods, Misleading Claims and Flat-Out Lies, portrays himself as a neutral arbiter of truth in journalism. He promises his Fact Checker readers that he “will strive to be dispassionate and non-partisan, drawing attention to inaccurate statements on both left and right.”

“Consistent with Washington Post policy,” Kessler added, “no one working on The Fact Checker may engage in partisan political activity or make contributions to candidates or advocacy organizations.”

A search of the Federal Election Commission database does not turn up political contributions made by Kessler. However, FEC records reveal that his wife, Cynthia J. “Cindy” Rich, has donated more than $10,000 to the Democratic National Committee and Democratic candidates, including Joe Biden, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. She gave a total of $5,700 to Biden for President and the Biden Victory Fund in 2020. Rich, who gives exclusively to Democrats, previously worked in Bill Clinton’s administration as a policy adviser on commerce and trade.

Kessler was raised in a liberal Democrat household. Kessler’s late mother, Else Bolotin, was a “committed Democrat,” according to a family friend, who started an “Institute for Social Change” in Lexington, Ky., when Kessler lived there in the 1970s. Records show she founded the institute with ‘70s radical Allie Hendricks, a “socialist feminist” who supported a “collective” of fellow travelers dubbed the “Lexington Six” after the FBI investigated them for allegedly harboring left-wing terrorists wanted by the FBI for helping kill a cop during a bank robbery.