7 of the Media’s Most Egregious Lies in 2016

The dominant story pushed by the mainstream media in the last few weeks of 2016 has been the harm caused by “fake news.” Indeed, a simple Google search reveals countless stories centering around the topic of fake news, its harmful effects, and what people (or the government) should do to fight it.

But while mainstream media consternation over fake news draws nearer to peak hysteria with each passing day, looking back at 2016, there were plenty of times the mainstream media itself spread blatant falsehoods as “news.”

Here are seven of the worst media lies from 2016.

1. Ted Cruz stole votes from Ben Carson

What was reported: Ted Cruz’s campaign launched a “dirty trick” in the Iowa caucuses by intentionally spreading a false report that Dr. Ben Carson had dropped out of the race. Caucus goers were then told that a vote for Carson would be a wasted vote. Ted Cruz won the Iowa caucuses by cheating.

The facts: The Ben Carson suspension rumor in February originated with a CNN report that gave many, many people the impression that Dr. Carson was returning home to Florida after the caucus, presumably to drop out after his fourth-place finish. They gained this impression because Carson did return home — apparently to do laundry — rather than continue on to the New Hampshire or South Carolina contests.

One of those people who believed Carson’s dropout was imminent was Congressman (and Ted Cruz supporter) Steve King, R-Iowa (B, 81%), who tweeted: “Carson looks like he is out. Iowans need to know before they vote. Most will go to Cruz, I hope.” By this time, CNN had tweeted a second time: “After the #IAcaucus, @RealBenCarson plans to take a break from campaigning.”

Following that report, a Cruz staffer told precinct captains, “Breaking News. The press is reporting that Dr. Ben Carson is taking time off from the campaign trail after Iowa and making a big announcement next week. Please inform any Carson caucus goers of this news and urge them to caucus for Ted Cruz.”

Now, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. (C, 74%)’s campaign aggressively pushed that narrative as well. But Ted Cruz’s campaign bore the brunt of the blame for “lying,” as CNN vehemently denied that they had suggested Carson was dropping out. CNN “fact-checkers” stuck to accusing Cruz of spreading a falsehood.

The media was complicit in characterizing Cruz as a dirty sport, and Donald Trump seized on the controversy to label Sen. Cruz “lyin’ Ted.” The Cruz campaign never fully recovered from the fallout of the Carson debacle, and, in this writer’s opinion, this distorted media narrative in all likelihood cost Ted Cruz needed momentum from his Iowa win and ultimately the Republican nomination.

2. Trump supports a “Muslim ban” … and that would harm Muslim Americans

What was reported: Donald Trump called for a “total and complete” ban on Muslims entering the United States.

The facts: The actual text of Trump’s proposal read, at the time: “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

That is, by plain reading, a temporary restriction on Muslim immigration. As Trump would later clarify:

Nevertheless, the fearmongering Huffington Post (of anti-Trump editor’s note fame) insisted in a recent piece, “The comment was an unequivocal and alarming pledge that threatened to impact the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims, but today, it’s unclear what the fate of Muslim Americans will be in a Trump administration.”

First, Trump’s proposal wouldn’t affect 1.6 billion Muslims; it would exclusively apply to migrants attempting to enter the U.S. who are from hotbeds of terrorism. Such a policy has been previously implemented by the Obama administration, and tighter restrictions are supported by a majority of Americans.

Second, the “fate of Muslim Americans” is not thrown into question under a policy that restricts immigration, because … they are already in the country.

Media fearmongering on Muslim ban = lie.

3. Orlando nightclub terrorist used an “AR-15”

What was reported: “AR-15 Rifle Used in Orlando Massacre Has Bloody Pedigree,” (NBC); “Orlando Shooting Puts Spotlight on AR-15 Rifle,” (Newsweek); “The history of the AR-15, the weapon that had a hand in the United States’ worst mass shooting,” (Washington Post).

The facts: As TheBlaze’s Jason Howerton dutifully reported in the aftermath of the Orlando nightclub terror attack in June, jihadist Omar Mateen did not use an AR-15 rifle in carrying out his massacre of 49 people at the Pulse gay nightclub. Mateen used a Sig Saucer MCX carbine, which have virtually “no major parts that interface with AR-15s in any way, shape or form,” as Bearing Arms’ Bob Owens explained.

The media excitedly launched a blind crusade against the AR-15, pushing for Obama’s executive actions on gun control. Democratic lawmakers eventually joined in on the frenzy, launching a sit-in protest that inspired fawning coverage from the media and ridicule from conservatives.

4. Anyone can legally buy a gun; easily

What was reported: During the Orlando jihad (gun control) hysteria, CBS News reported it took “38 minutes and $1,030 for our @CBSNews producer to buy an AR-15 and walk out legally armed in Virginia.” Additionally, terrorists can easily use the “gun show loophole” to purchase firearms without background checks, The New York Times told America.

The facts: First thing’s first: CBS had to issue a correction because the reporter did not purchase an AR-15. Next, it is not so easy to buy a gun. You have to pass a background check, which the CBS producer, Paula Reid, did because she didn’t have a criminal record. Well … she didn’t until she broke federal law by purchasing that gun under false pretenses.

You see, Reid told the gun store’s general manager that she intended to purchase the firearm and “undergo training” with a “NRA-certified instructor.” The actual story, however, revealed the purchase was for their story and that they had transferred the firearm to a “federally licensed firearms dealer and weapons instructor in Virginia, just hours after we bought it.” The gun store owner, after gaining knowledge of the report, alerted the ATF of a potential “straw purchase” — a federal crime.

As RedState’s Streiff wrote, “All this segment did was demonstrate that if someone is intent upon violating the law, the technical term for people like this is “criminals”, then they will violate the law. If the dealer acts in good faith and does all the appropriate checks and is deceived their is very little else one could expect them to do.”

As for the whole, so-called “gun show loophole”? As CRTV contributor Steven Crowder has demonstrated, that is a myth.

You need to pass a background check to purchase a gun at a gun show.

5. The Clinton email investigation was not closed. Or was it? Yes it was. No it wasn’t.

What was reported: In July, after FBI Director James Comey announced the FBI would not recommend prosecution against Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information on her private email server, the media reported the case “closed.” On Oct. 28, Director Comey sent a letter to Congress indicating that additional emails relevant to the Democratic presidential candidate’s case had been discovered.

After initially reporting that the case was “reopened,” the media backtracked after left-wing sites ThinkProgress and The Daily Banter argued that the case was not “reopened” on a technicality. Then Politifact claimed the FBI didn’t “reopen” the investigation because “it wasn’t formally closed.”

The facts: As Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin explained, Director James Comey said the new information was “pertinent to the investigation.” If the investigation was closed, as the media reported in July (in an effort to aid their anointed candidate), then Comey’s language clearly indicated that the new evidence “reopened” the FBI’s investigation. Listen to his explanation at 7:08:

Rob Eno further spelled it out on Twitter for the apparently illiterate (or just extremely ethics-deprived) liberal bloggers:

The investigation was closed. Then new evidence reopened the case. Period.

6. Muslim teen’s claims of a Trump supporter attack; post-election “hate crime wave”

What was reported: Yasmin Seweid, a female Muslim teen, claimed she was harassed by Trump supporters on a New York City subway. Her claims received widespread media coverage, as Katrina Trinko documented for The Daily Signal:

“Muslim teen verbally attacked on NYC subway,” reported CBS News. “Drunk Men Yelling ‘Donald Trump’ Attempt To Remove Woman’s Hijab On NYC Subway,” was the BuzzFeed headline. “Muslim Woman Harassed on Subway by 3 Men Who Call Her ‘Terrorist,’ Chant Trump’s Name: NYPD,” reported NBC 4 New York.

Slate wrote, “Three white men who were apparently intoxicated repeatedly yelled anti-Islam insults at a Muslim student in the New York City subway and no one did anything. The men, who yelled ‘Donald Trump!’ several times and even tried to pull off the terrified 18-year-old’s hijab, also accused her of being a terrorist.”

This story was the most publicized of a supposed wave of hate crimes committed by bigoted Trump fans after the election.

The facts: As is an unmistakable pattern from the Left, Yasmin Seweid’s story was a complete fabrication and the mainstream media was all too happy to fall for it hard, reporting it as trending news. Police became concerned about the lack of corroborating evidence and witnesses during their investigation, and the 18-year-old eventually admitted the story was a lie. Seweid now faces criminal charges for filing a fake hate crime report.

Her hoax does not stand alone (not by a long, long shot). In their agenda to further perpetuate the very worst stereotypes and narrative about Donald Trump’s supporters, the mainstream media have reported a number of “hate crimes” that were later discovered to be fake. The Daily Caller has compiled a list, which includes a false report of a Muslim woman robbed of her hijab and a black woman harassed at a Philadelphia gas station. Reason’s Elizabeth Nolan Brown has an even more comprehensive list, in which she illustrates how the truth on common narratives are usually far more nuanced and complicated than the mainstream media could ever care for.

As Brown writes, “The picture that emerges isn’t a wave of hoaxes, a wave of attacks on minorities by Trump-emboldened bigots, nor a wave of attacks on Trump supporters by intolerant liberals—though all have occurred—but something more complex and, hopefully, a little less frightening, even if the stories that have happened are still horrible.”

7. Fake news is an epidemic that cost Hillary Clinton the election

What was reported: There is an epidemic of “fake news” in America, enabled and spread via social media, that The New York Times, The Washington Post, and countless other mainstream media outfits (and Obama himself) warn could threaten democracy itself. Indeed, Hillary Clinton lost the election because of fake news.

The facts: Data show that fake news sites have extremely limited reach and struggle to reach a mass audience. Peter Hasson and The Daily Caller cite one example to help illustrate the point: “Fake news site DenverGuardian.com, subject of coverage from the New York Times and the Washington Post, is ranked 91,688 in web traffic in the U.S., according to web analytics firm Alexa. To put that number in perspective: the site supposedly impacting the national political scene is more than 84,000 slots behind the website for a Virginia community college.” Other sites frequently decried by the mainstream media are, if possible, even more irrelevant.

The fact of the matter is Hillary Clinton did not lose the election because of a gullible electorate prone to lies. Were that the case, a compulsive liar such as Mrs. Clinton should’ve won easily.

Fake news cost her the White House? No — Hillary Clinton lost the election because she is untrustworthy. Hillary Clinton lost the election because her incompetent campaign thought they should focus on states that would help run up her popular vote numbers, instead of keying in on battleground states like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

Hillary Clinton lost the election because her economic ideas do not offer a path to growth. She lost because her extreme position on abortion is well outside the mainstream of the electorate. She lost because of the vicious intolerance the Left has for religious Americans (though only of the Christian variety). She lost because her open-borders proposals threaten American sovereignty.

Hillary Clinton lost because she was corrupt and under federal investigation for placing American national security at risk on an easily hackable private email server. She was a terrible candidate and no amount of “fake news” could have changed that about her, as was demonstrated by the Praetorian Guard media’s failed attempt to get her elected president.

And why did the media fail? Because the American people’s trust in the media has fallen to record lows, in no small part thanks to their continued reporting of lies and advancing of their liberal agenda.

If members of the media have any hope of regaining their credibility, they can start by telling the truth. (For more from the author of “7 of the Media’s Most Egregious Lies in 2016” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.