Report: CBS News, Frank Luntz Cut Muslim-Americans’ U.S. Criticism From Focus Group

by JOHN NOLTE21 Dec 20150

Republican frontrunner Donald Trump hasalready exposed a 14 year-old DC Media  cover up involving numerous Muslim-American celebrations of the collapse of the World Trade Center on 9/11. Now, according to a new report, in their never-ending quest to disqualify Trump and make serial-liar Hillary Clinton president, CBS News has apparently been caught red-handed cutting footage from a focus group mediated by Establishment Republican Frank Luntz that shows American Muslims criticizing the United States:

The Intercept:

[I]n interviews with The Intercept, two Muslim Americans who took part in the group complained that CBS edited out parts of the discussion where they raised their own concerns — including critiques of U.S. militarism, surveillance, and entrapment.

They also said that Frank Luntz, the right-wing pollster who led the focus group, silenced members of the group when they criticized discriminatory U.S. government policies.

One  woman claimed that she brought up Luntz’s Jewishness:

For example, [Sarah] Harvard wrote that after Luntz asked the group whether they were Americans or Muslims first, she chose to demonstrate the offensive nature of the question by asking, “Well, are you an American or Jewish first?”

From the sound of it, Luntz was far from objective. One participant said:

He kept saying how he felt bad that no one listens to Muslims and how he wanted to give us an opportunity to talk to the general population. But how can that happen when we’re manipulatively edited to have us fit their own narrative and agenda?

According to Ms. Harvard’s own Facebook post, Luntz did not just edit out the inconvenient moments that didn’t fit his desired narrative, he went so far as to silence her when she tore into the American government as a racist institution that has “killed many Muslims.”

He also had silenced me and other participants who have routinely brought up the fact the government has enacted in state violence against the Muslim community — whether that may be through entrapment cases and surveillance programs — and our concerns about institutional racism. He shut me down when I said that President Obama and Hillary Clinton has killed many Muslims under the administration when we were discussing Trump, and ironically for a GOP strategist, he shut me down when I talked about how Democrats have enacted some of the most deadliest and discriminatory policies against Muslims. He also decided to stop letting me speak when I started talking about how Muslims should start focusing on combatting government policies rather than rushing to condemn terrorism or Islamophobia exclusively. They also cut out portions of where participants talked about media accountability when discussing Islam.

As you watch the segment below, it is painfully obvious that Luntz and CBS News had an agenda to show this group as one-dimensional patriots who are victims of discrimination, which is in and of itself a bigoted portrayal.

These are real people with real beliefs. Like all people, the American Muslim community is made up of complicated individuals with their own complicated view of the body politic. From the looks of it, rather than treat people like people, Luntz and CBS News instead chose to treat them as politically correct playthings that could be manipulated into political weapons against Donald Trump.

—

—

Note how at the end of the segment Luntz  closes by bashing Trump and talks at length about how he didn’t want to manipulate the group. And yet, by removing their criticism of America and the reference about his own Jewishness, that is exactly what he did.

There are few things more racist than patronizing condescension.

P.S. Obama National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes is the brother of CBS News president David Rhodes.

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               

Read More Stories About:

National Security, Big Journalism, 2016 Presidential Race, CBS News, Frank Luntz

HOUSTON TEXAS "2nd What?" Caves to Gun Control

Houston Police Prepare Texans for New Open Carry Law

File Photo: REUTERS/Rebecca Cook

by BOB PRICE21 Dec 2015188

HOUSTON, Texas – The Houston Police Department is preparing for the new year and Texas’ new open carry law by publishing information designed to help eliminate confusion on the law.

The Q&A below was prepared by Houston Police Chief Charles A McClelland, Jr., Harris County District Attorney Devon Anderson and Houston City Attorney Donna Edmundson. The Q&A was developed out of public hearings the department held with citizens.

Beginning January 1, 2016, people who hold a Texas Concealed Handgun License will be allowed to openly carry their handgun. Current law allows anyone to openly carry a rifle or shotgun. Only CHL holders will be allowed to openly carry a handgun under the new law signed in June by Texas Governor Greg Abbott.

On December 9th, an open carry information meeting was held to present more information and take questions from the public about the new law. Following is a video of that event published by the Houston Police Department:

The police website lists the following legislation as background for the answers to the questions below: HB910, SB11 andSB273.

Following is the Q&A directly from the Houston Police Department’s website:

Question: If a person is open carrying a handgun, how does a police officer determine if he is carrying the handgun legally?
Answer: Constitutional carry did not pass in Texas, so a police officer has the right to ask you to prove that you have a CHL (Concealed Handgun License). If you are asked by a police officer to prove that you are allowed to carry a handgun, you must produce identification.

Question: If I see a person open carrying a handgun, should I call the police?
Answer: Yes you can call the police, but before you call, observe how the person is acting. If they are acting suspicious, or enter a building such as a school, then please give us a call. But, if they are simply at a gas station filling up their car, then they are probably a law abiding citizen who is legally open carrying.

Question: If you are walking down a street, and an officer approaches you, is it a voluntary encounter, or at this point am I “detained”?
Answer: Technically, you are temporarily detained so that the officer can check your license and make sure that you are legally able to carry a handgun.

Question: If I am open carrying a handgun, am I allowed to get out of my car, take the holster off my belt, and place it into the trunk of my car?
Answer: Yes you are able to do that.

Question: As a parent, I am concerned with my kids being around people open carrying a handgun. What do I tell my kids to do when they see someone with a pistol on their hip?
Answer: Again, it is situational. If your kids see someone in a grocery store shopping, they should not be alarmed if that person is carrying a handgun. But if they are at school, and they see a person (who is not a Police officer) carrying a gun, they should immediately tell someone and/or call 911.

Question: In a government building such as a police station, can someone carry a handgun?
Answer: Yes you can, but only in the areas that are open to the public. So if that person has to go to a portion of the building where a normal citizen would not be allowed, they are not allowed to carry a handgun. If you are in this position where you are not sure if you can carry or not, it is recommended that you leave your handgun in your vehicle.

Question: I am a teacher in an early college that is held within a Lone Star College campus. Early colleges count as an educational facility which means that since there are minors present in a school setting it is illegal to carry any type of weapon. Since I teach students who range in age from 14-18 years old, how will they be affected by “Campus Carry”?
Answer: These areas will be counted as an education facility where you will not be able to carry a weapon. The biggest thing that needs to be done is to have signs posted in the buildings designating where you can carry a concealed handgun and where you cannot.

Question: Will the presence of an open carried handgun during a verbal altercation between two people, elevate this altercation to an aggravated assault because a handgun has been “exhibited”?
Answer: No, it will not be considered aggravated assault as long as the person carrying the weapon was not threatening to use it.

Question: Since an open carried weapon must either be carried in a shoulder holster or a belt holster, will there be a set standard that constitutes what is considered a shoulder or belt holster?
Answer: Currently there is no standard that constitutes what is a shoulder or belt holster.

Question: If an officer sees me openly carrying a handgun in a shoulder or belt holster, is that officer legally able to ask me for proof that I have a CHL?
Answer: Yes, since constitutional carry did not pass, the officer is within his or her right to ask you for your license. Also, when you get your CHL, you are instructed that if a police officer asks you for your CHL license, you must provide it.

Question: If I am carrying a handgun, and I am approached by a police officer, what steps should I take to ensure that the police officer and myself both feel safe during this transaction?
Answer: Do as the officer asks. Tell the officer you are carrying a weapon and have a license to do so. Do not reach for the weapon, have the officer tell you what to do with the weapon. On houstonpolice.org there are videos that illustrate what you should when you are in contact with a police officer.

Question: Will we have access to information that simplifies the penal code down into easily understandable facts for the general public?
Answer: The police department will have information available on the basic facts of the open carry laws.

Question: Once a police officer determines that you are carrying a handgun legally, does the situation turn from the person being detained, to being a casual encounter?
Answer: Yes. After the person has proved that they are carrying a weapon legally, they are free to go as long as they only reason they were stopped was for proof for a CHL.

Question: If I want to prohibit both concealed carry and open carry in my private business what signs do I need to have displayed?
Answer: You must have the 30.06 (concealed carry) and the 30.07 (open carry) signs posted in the front windows of your business.

Question: If I am a private business owner and I do not have the proper 30.06 and 30.07 signs posted and I ask someone to leave my store who is carrying a weapon, are they still legally required to leave even though I don’t have the proper signs?
Answer: Yes. As a private business owner you can tell someone to leave if they are carrying a weapon whether you have or don’t have the proper signs posted.

Question: Since the zoo is often frequented by school field trips, are the zoo and other similar places trying to establish themselves as educational facilities or at least be considered that when there is a school field trip present?
Answer: It will be a case by case basis. If it is a city owned business, there should be something in the future that when a school field trip is present, you will not be able to carry a weapon. Again, it is up to private business to designate if they allow weapons or not.

Question: If I use a “drop leg” holster that holds my gun around the middle of my thigh, will I get arrested for having an improper holster?
Answer: No you will not be arrested for that type of holster. It is still mounted to your belt which is the requirement in the law.

Question: If my private business has multiple entrances, can I post the 30.06 and 30.07 signs at the main entrance, or do I need to post them at every entrance?
Answer: You must have them posted at all entrances.

Question: Does a citizen have the right to ask a CHL carrier for proof of licensing?
Answer: No. A citizen does not have the right to ask a CHL carrier for proof that he or she is legally carrying a weapon.

Question: Since open carry is now legal, does that mean that I am no longer able to conceal my handgun?
Answer: The open carry law gives you the option to conceal your handgun or carry it out in the open.

Question: How will deaf people be kept safe when they are approached by a police officer and there is difficulty telling the officer that they are reaching for their CHL license rather than their gun?
Answer: Police cadets are currently being trained in proper ways to interact with deaf people during a traffic stop or an occurrence where they are being asked to provide identification for a CHL.

Question: What advice would you give to someone who is feeling anxious or intimidated in an open carry environment?
Answer: Open carry is going to be something that everyone will have to get used to. Initially it will be weird to see someone carrying a handgun in the grocery store, but it is important to know that the people who are open carrying a gun are law abiding citizens and are not there to intimidate or hurt you.

Question: Since the public is not allowed to open carry a weapon, will you allow off duty police officers to be able to open carry their handgun?
Answer: No. Off duty police officers will still be required to conceal their handgun. However, if an officer wants to go and get their CHL, they will be allowed to carry a handgun out in the open as long as they are not carrying it under the authority or general orders of the Houston Police Department.

Question: Some organizations that are in opposition to open carry, have said that if they see someone openly carrying a handgun, they will call 911 and say that person is being aggressive and threatening people with the weapon. How will the police handle situations like this.
Answer: The police will act with caution when approaching the person, they will collect the facts, and when it is found that this person was doing nothing wrong, the investigation will be turned towards the person who made the false 911 call.

Bob Price serves as associate editor and senior political news contributor for Breitbart Texas and is a member of the original Breitbart Texas team. Follow him on Twitter @BobPriceBBTX.

 

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, Breitbart Texas, 2nd Amendment

ClockBoy Part II Muslim Inventions Explode

‘Zero Tolerance’ Brings Arrest of Another Teen for ‘Bomb Threat’ Device at Texas School

Screenshot: DMN YouTube

by MERRILL HOPE21 Dec 20152,229

A Texas middle school-aged boy was arrested on Friday, Dec. 11 for allegedly threatening to blow up his suburban Dallas public school in Arlington. The incident is now bubbling up with conflicting stories, a comparison to “Clock Boy” Ahmed Mohamed, and no mention of school zero tolerance policies behind these situations.

Armaan Singh, a student at Nichols Junior High in the Arlington Independent School District, was arrested last Friday on the charge of making a terroristic threat following a classmate’s report that Singh threatened to detonate a bomb at Nichols Junior High School. Singh’s “charging backpack,” had wires to charge electronics. Arlington PD said Singh admitted twice to telling another student he was going to blow up his school, using his backpack but Singh told officials he was only joking when he told a classmate he had a bomb in his backpack. Authorities kept Singh at juvenile detention through the weekend, released to house arrest,according to KDFW 4, who spoke to the 12-year-old.

“On Thursday, I was doing my test in my class and then the student behind me saw inside my backpack,” said Singh. “He saw this battery thing I have for charging electronics and he assumed that it was a bomb, and I said, ‘No, it’s not.’”

Arlington police spokesman Lt. Christopher Cook said it doesn’t matter that Singh told them he was joking, KDFW 4 reported. “People have got to learn they cannot make these types of threats, which cause alarm, which cause evacuations,” noted Cook. “Just because you say it’s a joke, it doesn’t get you out of trouble.”

At the time of the incident, police evacuated the classroom and quickly determined that there was no credible threat without calling in the bomb squad.

“Unfortunately, nowadays you cannot do that,” said Cook. “When speech crosses that line, whether it’s written, like on social media, or it’s verbalized, like it was in this manner, we take that very seriously.”

Singh and his family insisted that the other student made the whole thing up, and that authorities overreacted because of his Indian ethnicity, keeping him in custody for three nights. The Washington Post chimed in by asking if Singh was “Another ‘Clock Kid,'” referencing “Clock Boy” Ahmed Mohamed and drawing “parallels” between the two arrests: “The two cities near Dallas neighbor one another,and the circumstances of their arrests are similar.” They highlighted that Mohamed was Muslim and Singh, Sikh. Singh, of Indian descent, was born in San Antonio, according to the Dallas Morning News, which reported police said the Singh family’s faith and ethnicity were irrelevant to the case.

Breitbart Texas reports on the school-to-prison pipeline and the often devastating outcomes of these choking zero tolerance policies that criminalize typical kid behavior nationwide, which played a pivotal role in the Ahmed Mohamed incident in Irving ISD. The Associated Pressagreed.

In November, local law enforcement arrested Arlington ISD high school student Shalaria Jones for multiple alleged social media threats in which she was connected to tweets calling out a campus shooting. Breitbart Texas reported Arlington PD Police Chief Will Johnson emphasized they took that threat serious. The Arlington ISD Student Code of Conduct handbook defines a terroristic threat as a “threat of violence to any person or property with the intent to cause a reaction by an official or volunteer to deal with emergencies, prevent or interrupt the occupation or use of a building, place others in fear of serious bodily injury, or impair or influence activities of the government or school.

Texas public school Student Code of Conduct handbooks are often posted online in school districts. They include a whole slew of potential violations written in accordance with the state’s 1995 Safe Schools Act and Chapter 37 of the Texas Education Code, including threats, hoaxes, plus perceived and sometimes even discretionary threats and their often harsh blanket consequences. In Texas, the education code grants school districts broad discretionary leeway and the authority to refer students for those discretionary offenses deemed “disruptive.”

Arlington ISD spokeswoman Leslie Johnston told Breitbart Texas: “When children claim to have bombs or threaten to do harm to students and tell other students this, we don’t consider it unreasonable to call the police. In fact, we work with the Arlington Police Department to investigate all threats and determine if they are legitimate.”

She emphasized, “We did attempt to contact the parents (last) Friday afternoon. We also had a meeting scheduled with the parents Tuesday, but they did not arrive for the meeting. There was a meeting with the parents held this morning.”

Johnston pointed out that that the district will do “whatever is necessary to maintain the safety and security of its students, and we are confident that our actions are appropriate in all respects.” Because of the student privacy law, Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), she cannot divulge information pertaining to specific disciplinary matters unless the parents sign a release to share such information and records, something that Ahmed Mohamed’s parents never signed for their respective school district in Irving.

Breitbart Texas reached out to Arlington police but did not hear back before press time.

 Follow Merrill Hope on Twitter@OutOfTheBoxMom.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, Breitbart Texas, Education,"Clock Boy" Ahmed Mohamed, Arlington ISD

Trump Wins ‘Lie of the Year’ For Exposing DC Media’s Muslim, Immigrant Crime Cover-Up

The Associated Press

by JOHN NOLTE21 Dec 20151,783

The DC Media is furious at Republican frontrunner Donald Trump for pushing two vitally important national issues that this very same media has been covering up for years — American Muslims celebrating 9/11 and the horrific crimes committed by illegal immigrants. In fact, although Trump has been vindicated on both accounts, the DC Media is so desperate to distract from this exposure, the serial-liars at PolitiFact have laughably awarded Trump “Lie of the Year.”

To validate the “Lie of the Year” award, PolitiFact cites Trump’s claim that, “I watched in Jersey City, N.J., where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down.” Second on the list is “The Mexican government … they send the bad ones over.” The third and final “lie” is a tweet Trump re-tweeted about crime statistics.

Trump’s comments about Muslim celebrations and his criticism of Mexican illegals blew open  the door on truths the DC Media has, for partisan political reasons, kept covered up for years.

The DC Media can use “Lie of the Year” all it wants to try and paper over the fact that they have been caught in an industry-wide cover-up. Nothing, though, changes the fact that for the first time Americans now know that a troubling number of Muslims did celebrate on 9/11 and that there is an illegal immigrant crime wave.

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism, 2016 Presidential Race

Sharia in Obamatrade–Analyst: Sultan of Brunei Could Bypass U.S. Courts, Acquire American Land and Infrastructure

Sharia in Obamatrade–Analyst: Sultan of Brunei Could Bypass U.S. Courts, Acquire American Land and Infrastructure

Aude Guerrucci-Pool/Getty Images

by ALEX SWOYER21 Dec 2015Washington, DC3,692

The text of the Obama administration’s Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal between the United States and 11 other countries reverses policies that were originally put into place to prevent a foreign takeover of the nation’s infrastructure, argues political consultant Curtis Ellis, who adds that the deal threatens U.S. national security interests.

Ellis explained:

Previous U.S. trade pacts stated in no uncertain terms that the national security interests of the United States are determined solely by the U.S. government and supersede any provisions of the pacts.  The U.S. government had unfettered power to protect our national security interests as it deemed necessary – even if its actions might violate the terms of a trade agreement.

But the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement reverses this precedent. As a result, other countries could claim our national security interests violate the T.P.P. agreement and force the U.S. to pay billions of dollars in damages.

Ellis says that Chapter 11 in the more than 5,000-page trade deal provides foreign investors with special rights to acquire U.S. land, businesses, natural resources and investments.

“Under Chapter 28 and Chapter 29, these foreign investors could do an end-run around U.S. courts and sue the U.S. before an international panel, known as an investor-state dispute tribunal, if they feel American law violates their ‘rights’ under the TPP,” Ellis argues.

Currently, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) reviews pending foreign investments in the U.S. to determine if they pose a threat to national security and can recommend the president shut down investments deemed a threat. Under previous trade agreements, foreign investors would have no recourse.

But under the T.P.P., the Sultan of Brunei, the billionaire autocrat who rules his T.P.P. country under Sharia law, could sue for billions of dollars if CFIUS denied his bid to buy a company providing security to U.S. ports and airports.

He would bring his case before a foreign tribunal that could force taxpayers to award him compensation for “lost profits.” The tribunal, staffed by three unelected lawyers hailing from anywhere in the world, would have the power to second-guess the U.S. government on what constitutes a threat to our national security.

Additionally, the Islamic Sultanate of Brunei — a country that’s a party to President Obama’s trade agenda — hasoutlawed Christmas and threatens to place offenders in prison.

Ellis points to an event in 2006 that supports his concerns within the TPP.

According to Ellis, Dubai Ports World (DPW), an enterprise of the United Arab Emirates, sought to purchase a company in 2006, which operated six U.S. ports. During that time, Ellis says, “Congress intervened to block the sale after Coast Guard officials raised the possibility of significant security risks,” but he argues that the 2006 “controversy came in the midst of congressional debate over the U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement.”

Ellis’s concerns with TPP is that the TPP, like the Oman pact, gives foreign investors special rights to own and operate U.S. businesses and an option to sue if they feel their rights are violated. He adds that the public outcry in 2006 blocked the sale.

Following the Dubai Ports World controversy, language was added in a footnote to all U.S. trade agreements to shut down any second-guessing of U.S. security interests by trade tribunals. The footnote makes clear the U.S. has sole discretion in determining its essential national security interests.

The critical footnote to the “Security Exception” Article 22.2 of the Peru Free Trade Agreement, Article 21.2 of the Panama FT, Article 22.2 of the Colombia FTA and Article 23.2 of the Korea-US FT reads: “For greater certainty, if a Party invokes [the “Security Exception] Article in an arbitral proceeding initiated under [Investment] Chapter or [Dispute Settlement] Chapter, the tribunal or panel hearing the matter shall find that the exception applies.”

“In plain English, it says if the U.S. invokes national security, that’s final – no foreign ‘trade’ tribunal could overrule it,” Ellis told Breitbart News.

According to Ellis, the TPP eliminated this “crucial stipulation.”

“As a result, any company operating in a T.P.P. country could drag the U.S. before an extrajudicial foreign tribunal and demand taxpayer compensation if our government prevented it from buying a crucial American asset based on national security grounds,” he explains.

Ellis argues that without a footnote to “Article 29.2, one of the TPP’s trade dispute tribunals could substitute its judgment for that of our own government with respect to what is considered an essential security interest of the U.S.”

“The TPP also includes an Annex 9-H which states that a government’s decision on whether to approve a given foreign investment in its territory is not subject to challenges before an investor-state dispute tribunal,” he stressed.

Australia, Canada, Mexico and New Zealand each listed their own foreign investment review laws, according to Ellis. However, the U.S. did not do so.

Breitbart News reached out to the United States Trade Representative’s office about Ellis’s concern but did not receive comment.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, National Security,Economics, national security, Trans Pacific Partnership, Trade Deal, Curtis Ellis

TEA PARTY VOWS REVENGE PAUL RYAN

Movement to Primary Speaker Paul Ryan Out of Congress Picks Up Steam

Jim Hoft Dec 19th, 2015 8:13 am Leave a Comment

We Were Warned–
Harry Reid threw his support behind Paul Ryan for Speaker back in October.

In July 2013 Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) spoke with a Hispanic audience about his intention to push immigration reform in the House of Representatives.

In October 2013 Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)wrote a bill that would grant citizenship to at least 11 million illegal immigrants.

Ryan was elected Speaker of the House in October.

On Thursday Speaker Ryan passed a trillion dollar budget deal that was widely praised by Barack Obama and Democratic leaders.
They got everything they wanted.

After Republicans passed this budget Rush Limbaugh posed the question: Tell Me How the Budget Deal Would Be Worse If Democrats Ran Congress
It wouldn’t.

Now there is a movement under way to primary Paul Ryan out of office.

A facebook page was set up to primary Paul Ryan from Congress.

The page already has 4,335 likes.

There is also a Fire Paul Ryan webpage set up online.

And now this…
On Friday the Wisconsin Tea Party declared war on Ryan.

Posted by Primary Challenge Paul Ryan on Friday, December 18, 2015

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed, 

 Gateway Pundit

Hillary Clinton Fan Threatens Mosque; Media Blame Trump

Facebook

by JOEL B. POLLAK21 Dec 2015127

The mainstream media are reporting that a Bay Area plumber who allegedly planned to bomb a California mosque was a Donald Trump supporter–though he explicitly supported Hillary Clinton.

On Sunday, police arrested 55-year-old William Celli “on suspicion of possessing an explosive device and making criminal threats,” CBS San Francisco reported. A bomb squad detonated a device at his house. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) cheered the arrest.

CBS elaborated further: “On Facebook, Celli repeatedly praised Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, whose plan to bar any Muslims from entering the United States has drawn criticism even as he continues to rise in the polls.”

The Huffington Post and other left-wing sites played up Celli’s support of Trump, implying that Trump was responsible for “propelling” bigotry and “white domestic terrorism” into the “mainstream” of political debate.

What the media left out, however, is that Celli also praised Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton.

In one post, Celli wrote: “Hillary Would make a great president. If she would commit to what she is hiding. But she has to crucify the president. Then her run for the White house is over.”

The post praising Hillary Clinton is dated Oct. 22–the day Clinton testified for 11 hours at the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

The Huffington Post and other outletsclaimed the story has been overlooked because

Celli doesn’t fit the profile of the “terrorist” who is likely to be invoked on cable news or on a GOP debate stage. In fact, judging by Celli’s Facebook page, he seems to be the exact inverse: a disgruntled white man who has bought into the xenophobic rhetoric of people like GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Or Hillary Clinton. But never mind the facts.

Update: The Contra Costa Times follows the same pattern, calling William Celli a “Donald Trump supporter” in the headline and throughout the piece, quoting extensively from his Facebook page without mentioning his support for Hillary Clinton.

(Screenshot of Contra Costa Times 11 p.m. Monday Dec. 21, 2015)

The article uses Celli’s arrest as a way to slam Trump:

Trump has received mounting criticism from both political parties for inflammatory comments about the Muslim community, such as the idea to create databases to track American Muslims and restrict Muslims from entering the country. Critics have warned that such comments could fuel Islamophobia.

No mention of Clinton whatsoever appears in the article.

One of the authors, Thomas Peele, mocked “Bill the Plumber” on Twitter:

Peele’s website boasts that he has won “more than 50 journalism awards.”

Update 2: Here’s Mediaite‘s Ken Meyer, linking to Talking Points Memo‘s Caitlin Cruz, linking to Raw Story‘s Travis Gettys, all regurgitating the “Trump supporter” claim, all quoting extensively from Celli’s Facebook page, and none mentioning his remarks about Hillary Clinton.

Update 3: The San Francisco Chroniclementions Celli’s posts about Trump but not his comments about Clinton. It also quotes CAIR–an organization that has been helping the family of the San Bernardino terrorists–raising concerns about Trump.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, Big Journalism, Breitbart California, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton,terrorism, Media Bias, CAIR, Richmond,Contra Costa Times, william celli