webodec3ARCHIVEPreview
Open in TheBrain

money cable tv show

see more generic investor advice & mgmt

chls payne fox biz renta “prosperity” 2 spkr bureau api

1/20 brainfart, spark by kudlow, mnu on cnbc

networks have too

jrnlism free zone? libtard vulnerable?

7 22 aha remember newsltr end of world grift hype fear

sage/savvy savior will warn you before so protect/profit

msnbc had one 2/24 club wild eye guy // rudy

===

an 11 26

In the wake of President Donald Trump’s stock trading disclosure last week, experts have been picking apart what many have suggested is “smoking gun” evidence that he is engaged in market manipulation for self-enrichment. Essentially, the president has been buying stocks in different tech and pharmaceutical companies, talking them up to inflate their prices, then selling them at a huge profit.

Longtime financial pundit Jim Cramer appeared on CNBC Monday, and appeared totally incoherent while discussing Trump’s trades. Cramer was in the middle of talking about the company Intel when anchor Carl Quintanilla cut him off.

“According to the filings, the president has been trading some Intel,” said Quintanilla suggestively.

“Yeah…” Cramer began.

“Got nothing to say about that?” said co-anchor David Faber, giving Cramer a pat on the arm. “Alright, don’t worry, we’re not having technical difficulties here everybody, but we’ve got to go.”

Cramer has a history of receiving criticism for his statements regarding Trump and finances. During the 2024 campaign, for example, Cramer asserted, “If you care about your paycheck, you go with Trump. That’s what you do.”

Today, 18 months into Trump’s second administration, Cramer's claim hasn’t panned out. Based on the latest numbers, what meager wage gains there have been in recent years have been “eaten up” by inflation caused by Trump’s tariffs and the war on Iran, which has been called the “Achilles heel” of the Trump economy. As a result, 57 percent of Americans now say Trump’s policies have left them “financially worse off.”

Now even those who support the president are flailing to explain his economic moves. As journalist Matt Stoller wondered of Cramer’s on-air fluster, “Was Cramer shocked by the corruption or mad Trump was picking better stocks?”

-=-=

mma

Right-wing media claimed a downward jobs revision indicated recession. A new GDP revision shows the economy actually grew more than expected.

08/30/24

Right-wing media claimed a downward jobs revision indicated recession. A new GDP revision shows the economy actually grew more than expected.

Right-wing media have been quick to catastrophize every hiccup in the economy this election cycle, ignoring many of the facts

Written by Zachary Pleat

Published 08/30/24

After the Bureau of Labor Statistics released a report on August 21 showing that 818,000 fewer jobs than initially estimated were created between March 2023-March 2024, right-wing media falsely claimed this report showed that the U.S. is in recession. Fox Business was particularly loud in proclaiming the downward jobs revision was a recession indicator.

However, an August 29 release from the Bureau of Economic Analysis showed that the real gross domestic product (GDP) of the U.S. increased at a 3% rate in the second quarter of this year, an upward revision from an initial estimate of 2.8% and more than double the first quarter GDP growth of 1.4%.

Although it’s not the official definition, recession is generally understood to begin after two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth. Economists take a more holistic approach to determining when the economy is in recession. Given the positive GDP growth over the last two quarters, even this oversimplified yardstick did not indicate the U.S. economy was in recession, and these revised BEA numbers are further proof of the current strength of the economy.

Discussing his analysis of the new BEA release, Bobby Kogan, the Center for American Progress senior director of federal budget policy, gave context on just how strong this data shows the U.S. economy is:

IFrame Content

In a separate post, Kogan noted that the “US GDP growth has outpaced all other G7 nations” and “wages at the bottom rose so much, income inequality is down, undoing 1/3 of its growth since Reagan.” Ernie Tedeschi, economic director of Yale’s Budget Lab, also noted that “3% is a very good number.”

These facts did not deter right-wing media however — misleading economic doomsaying about the BLS report from Fox News and others is the latest in a series of false attacks on the economy this year.

Right-wing media falsely claimed the downward jobs revision meant the U.S. is in recession

* Daily Caller cited a Heritage Foundation economist to claim the BLS report shows a “recession may have already begun.” E.J. Antoni told the Daily Caller, “Wall Street is increasingly waking up to the fact that the economy post-covid has never been as good as the government bean counters claimed, and a recession may have already begun. These revisions are a violent shove in the direction of reality.” The Heritage Foundation is the leading organization behind Project 2025. Daily Caller, [8/21/24; Media Matters, accessed 8/30/24]

:{*:{ Fox Business host Larry Kudlow cited Hassett to say “we could be on the front end of a recession” because of the BLS revision. Fox Business, *Kudlow*:(style="background-color:#ffbb16"):}:, [8/22/24]}:

Fox News host Jesse Watters and Fox Business host Stuart Varney used the BLS report to claim the economy is in bad shape. Watters said, “The economy’s check engine light has been blinking for three years and Biden and Harris have been ignoring it. They say the economy is great. Just look at the job numbers. Well we did, and they disappeared.” Varney chimed in: “It’s going to be interesting to see how Kamala pivots on this. How do you reverse the idea — oh, we have got a great booming economy, but you don't. … How is she going to pivot with these lousy jobs numbers?” Fox News, *Jesse Watters Primetime*, [8/21/24]

This follows many other false right-wing media attacks on the Biden-Harris economy

* Fox News attacked a blockbuster inflation report that showed the first decline in prices since May 2020. Media Matters, [7/11/24; Market Watch, 7/11/24]

===

MMA 5 24

Fox Business host pushes conspiracy theory that energy efficiency standards are intended to end private home ownership

Fox & Friends neglected to inform its audience that the new standard would save homeowners nearly $1,000 per year on energy costs

Special PROGRAMSCLIMATE & ENERGY

WRITTEN BY ZACHARY PLEAT

PUBLISHED 05/30/24

On the May 30 edition of Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy and Fox Business host Charles Payne discussed a Biden administration proposal to increase the heating and cooling efficiency standards of new homes, focusing on a Department of Housing and Urban Development analysis that found it would add $7,200 to the average price of a new house but improve energy efficiency by 37%, leading to long-term savings for homeowners.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, “direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions” from homes and businesses are responsible for 31 percent of the United States’ total emissions. Politico reported that homebuilders oppose the implementation of new energy standards, citing cost concerns, while supporters point to the long-term cost savings homeowners will enjoy in addition to the environmental benefits. Politico also reported that the new standards conform with the “latest international standards for energy efficiency,” as “many U.S. homebuilders now use standards that are over a decade old and have weaker requirements for insulation, lighting, heating and cooling.”

During their segment, which glossed over the benefits of the new standards, Doocy and Payne completely ignored that the same HUD analysis found that the policy would lead to “average annual energy savings of almost $1,000 per household per year for single family homes and more than $400 per household in low-rise multifamily housing.”

Instead, Payne launched into a baseless conspiracy theory that the policy isn’t designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and save homeowners on energy costs, but is instead meant to fulfill a progressive agenda to end home ownership:

Video

CitationFrom the May 30, 2024, edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends

CHARLES PAYNE (FOX BUSINESS HOST): Hey, listen. I'm going to tell you right now, progressives don't like ownership. They really — the ultimate goal is for you to not to own a home. That's the real ultimate goal. They love everyone to congregate around major cities and live on top of each other in apartments and share things. They have pushed for a sharing society.

Related

New water heater standards provide a new front in right-wing media's manufactured “war on appliances”

07/27/23

Fox networks fearmonger over the Biden administration's new vehicle tailpipe emissions proposal

04/18/23

Right-wing media attack new EPA rule aimed at cutting coal pollution

05/06/24

===

7 22

Kevin Freeman talks with Frank Gaffney about the landmark court victory known as Jarkesy v. SEC and the Chinese economic warfare in the U.S. Patent and...

We are in an Economic War.

By Kevin Freeman

economic weapons deployed media coverage patriotic investing May 21, 2022

Kevin Freeman talks with Frank Gaffney about the impact of the Economic War we are facing from both domestic and foreign forces.

The Economic War Room

The Economic War Room monitors critical pressure points on an ongoing basis. We report who, what, when, where, and why they will impact you. More importantly, we bring in top experts to help you understand and respond to the threats they pose and how you can respond!

What People Are Saying About Kevin Freeman:

“Kevin Freeman understands the threat of financial terrorism as well as anyone. You’d have to be negligent to ignore his timely advice about protecting your family from the economic attacks that are clearly on the horizon.”

—FRANK KEATING,

Retired President and CEO, American Bankers Association, former governor of Oklahoma

“Along with the Internet our markets, banks, and other financial systems are vital institutions that are far more vulnerable to complete disruption than we would hope, especially to carefully-planned intervenors with the opportunity, motive, and means to, say, bring down the dollar. Freeman explains persuasively and clearly why we may be beginning the third act of a monetary and fiscal tragedy. You don’t care about dark pools, huge Middle-Eastern sovereign wealth funds, naked short selling, and bear runs? I’m afraid you will, and rather soon.”

—R JAMES WOOLSEY

Chairman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and former Director of Central Intelligence

Become an Economic Patriot

Get access to top National Security, Cyber, and Investment talent.

Watch Economic War Room and other great BlazeTV content.

no lnx GUK

Robert Reich explores the compelling question of why CBS News hired Trump loyalists Mick Mulvaney

Meaghan Ellis April 19, 2022

Former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert Reich is offering insight on a controversial topic that many have questions about: Why on earth did CBS News hire former Trump White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney?

In an op-ed written for The Guardian, Reich tackled the issue of Mulvaney's hiring just days after he made his first CBS appearance on “MoneyWatch."

During that segment, Mulvaney, who is now an on-air contributor for the network, was asked to break down President Joe Biden's plan to increase taxation on America's ultra-wealthy. He also noted that the anchor, Anne-Marie Green, introduced Mulvaney as a former White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) director and that she failed to mention the chaotic presidential administration he worked for. While he did serve in that capacity, he was also a partisan Trumpist.

Then she asked him if "regular working-class Americans" should be concerned about Biden's tax initiative. Reich highlighted Mulvaney’s answer: “It’s easy to look at it and say, ‘Don’t worry, you’re not going to pay this,’but regular working Americans would have to 'prove that they don’t have to pay it,' a burden that 'could be troublesome: every single year proving that you’re not worth a hundred million dollars.'”

Mulvaney's response is what Reich suggested is most problematic and also an example of the reason for concern about his hiring.

"This is as misleading as it gets in broadcast media (except for Fox News)," he wrote. "Nothing in Biden’s proposal to tax the super-rich requires that people prove they’re not super-rich. Mulvaney’s claim was pure demagoguery."

He added, "That’s what we should expect from Mulvaney. In 2019 Mulvaney threatened to withhold U.S. aid to Ukraine to fight Russian aggression unless President Zelenskiy came up with dirt on Hunter Biden. (This was the call in which Zelenskiy’s plea 'we need more Javelins' – anti-tank missiles that have proved crucial in Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s invasion – was met with Trump’s 'I would like you to do us a favor though.'”

Reich went on to offer a number of times Mulvaney has dropped the ball for the sake of politicization. From his 2019 threats toward Ukraine demanding dirt on Hunter Biden to his conspiracy theory stance on the COVID-19 pandemic he described as a "media hoax," Reich highlighted the unfavorable moments in his career that should raise questions about his credibility.

He also criticized CBS News noting the stark difference in the network now compared to what it once was. "When I was growing up, CBS News was the home of news legends like Edward R Murrow and Walter Cronkite – pioneers who set the standards for broadcast news," he wrote. "So why is CBS News now reaching into the cesspool of Trump conspirators and enablers to hire Mulvaney?"

Reich went on to push back against the explanation for Mulvaney's hiring which was provided by CBS News' Neeraj Khemlani. When asked about Mulvaney, Khemlani claimed "when it comes to contributor hires, 'getting access to both sides of the aisle is a priority because we know the Republicans are going to take over, most likely, in the midterms.'”

For that statement, Reich raised questions. “Getting access” to what? To the big lie about the 2020 election? To lies about Covid? To bonkers economics?" he wrote.

Reich concluded by saying, "CBS News, like every news outlet, has a cardinal responsibility to protect American democracy from this growing menace," he wrote. "To fulfill this responsibility, it must report accurately what is occurring. It should not pander to the menace by hiring a person who has had a hand in it and will further obscure the truth."

---

an 620

Jim Cramer: Coronavirus pandemic triggered ‘one of the greatest wealth transfers in history’

Written by Andrea Germanos / Common Dreams June 5, 2020

CNBC‘s Jim Cramer said Thursday that that coronavirus pandemic has triggered “one of the greatest wealth transfers in history.”

The remark from the network’s “Mad Money” host came amid “ominous” economic data but a rebounding stock market.

:{:{}:

}:

“How can the market rebound without the economy? Because the market doesn’t represent the economy; it represents the future of big business,” said Cramer. “The bigger the business, the more it moves the major averages.”

:{:{}:

}:

“And that matters,” he continued, ‘because this is the first recession where big business—along of course with bigger wealth, but that’s not really by show—is coming through virtually unscathed, if not going for the gold.”

:{:{}:

}:

In contrast, small businesses are “dropping like flies,” Cramer said, attributing those failures to the fact that smaller businesses are struggling to pay rent as “major landlords” don’t appear to be offering relief.

:{:{}:

}:

“That’s the thing about this pandemic,” Cramer continued, “it’s been one of the greatest wealth transfers in history.”

Cramer projected that transfer to have a “horrible effect” on the country.

Further, the CNBC host said, “we’ve barely begun to see the impacts” of the pandemic’s economic fallout. Cramer pointed to the latest corporate bankruptcy figures he said would “chill both Republicans and Democrats.”

The new comments came a day before federal data showed the nation facing a 13.3 percent unemployment rate, and as a new analysis showed the fortunes of U.S. billionaires increased by $565 billion between March 18 and June 4. That 11-week period also saw 42.6 million Americans filing jobless claims.

==

===

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/24/how-greta-thunbergs-rise-could-backfire-on-environmentalists.html

How 16-year-old Greta Thunberg’s rise could backfire on environmentalists

PUBLISHED TUE, SEP 24 2019  8:42 AM EDTUPDATED TUE, SEP 24 2019  9:47 AM EDT

Jake Novak

@JAKEJAKENY

KEY POINTS

Sixteen-year-old Greta Thunberg’s ascendancy to the forefront of environmental activism could end up being a major negative to the movement and the environment, writes Jake Novak.

GP: Greta Thunberg World Leaders Gather For United Nations Climate Summit

Youth activist Greta Thunberg speaks at the Climate Action Summit at the United Nations on September 23, 2019 in New York City. While the United States will not be participating, China and about 70 other countries are expected to make announcements concerning climate change.

Stephanie Keith | Getty Images

Sixteen-year-old Greta Thunberg from Sweden is the new face of the environmentalist movement, thanks to a pair of impassioned speeches to the U.S. Congress and the United Nations.

But while personalizing a movement, especially with the innocent face of a child, is usually PR gold, Greta’s ascendancy to the forefront of environmental activism could end up being a major negative to the movement – and the environment.

Just how inspiring or even persuasive you find Greta’s speeches and overall activism likely depends on where you stand on the political spectrum. There are plenty of politicians and regular voters claiming to be inspired by her words and passion. There are also lots of observers expressing general alarm at what they see as an indoctrinated child being coerced by adults to make their political arguments with her youth as a shield from any criticism.

WATCH NOW

VIDEO01:45

Pres. Trump leaves UN climate summit, attends religious freedom summit, instead

Her story signals a clear change in environmental movement tactics, and just how much more divisive and ineffective that change is likely to be.

Greta, and the adults guiding her, are seeking to shift almost all the focus from personal responsibility to governments and big corporations to enact environmental reform. Their argument is that individual people can’t do much to save the world from climate change disaster when energy companies and governments focused mostly on economic growth don’t care enough to make the big changes.

The adult version of that argument emerged earlier this month when Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren basically mocked personal conservation efforts. Warren told a climate town hall audience and later tweeted that the fossil fuel industry wants the public to discuss issues like plastic straws, lightbulbs, and cheeseburgers so they can continue to get away with producing most of the emissions blamed for climate change.

Elizabeth Warren

?

@ewarren

This is exactly what fossil fuel industries want us to talk about—they want to stir up a lot of controversy around your light bulbs, straws, cheeseburgers. But 70% of the pollution comes from three industries. We can set our targets and say no more by 2035. #ClimateTownHall

19.2K

6:46 PM - Sep 4, 2019

Twitter Ads info and privacy

5,109 people are talking about this

The funny thing about all of this is the free market is already doing these things based on the same capitalist incentives Greta and so many other activists are blaming for environmental disaster.Natural gas is cheaper and produces 50% fewer emissions than coal, nuclear power has been modernized and made much safer in recent decades while producing no emissions. For-profit entities like a company called Carbon Engineering are working on machines that literally suck carbon emissions out of the atmosphere.

Each of these innovations has enjoyed some level of government support here and there, but raw capitalistic profit motives are the primary driver. Warren and those like her are failing to see that millions more Americans who use their consumer spending powers to reduce their carbon footprint will send corporate America chasing after those dollars in a much faster and more effective way than government fiat.

It’s not just die-hard capitalists or environmental skeptics who are pushing back on this focus away from personal responsibility. In a remarkable interview on PBS last week, author Jonathan Safran Foer spoke out against Warren’s comments and pointed out that those who say they believe in the dire effects of climate change would do more than protest if they really believed it. That point is the premise of Foer’s new book, “We Are the Weather: Saving the Planet Begins at Breakfast.”

Based on all the politically partisan slogans and signs we saw at the climate protests over the past few days, are we sure the top motivation is the environment and not politics? If the activists protesting right now could get the most serious climate change threats eliminated, but without politically defeating President Trump and Republicans and/or putting the big oil companies out of business in the process, would they still be interested in the cause?

The shift from the “Think Globally, Act Locally,” environmental philosophy of the 1980s and 1990s makes that question fair game. When we move from encouraging people to change their personal practices to something like Warren’s mocking of that very idea, it guts the very soul of any movement for effective change.

Previous generations of environmental activists knew this. By focusing on what people could do in their own personal lives to cut down on pollution, they presided over an environmental movement that used to be much more bipartisan in America.

This new focus on making environmentalism an angrier protest movement threatens to make the effort to protect the planet just another wedge issue that politicians often use to motivate their base of voters. Similar wedge issues like abortion and gun control have long shifted become tribal controversies with little chance of progress and compromise.

Greta Thunberg is angry.Lots of people are angry. But anger without doing something other than protesting and making speeches won’t protect the environment or do much else other than produce more anger.

Jake Novak is a political and economic analyst at Jake Novak News and former CNBC TV producer. You can follow him on Twitter @jakejakeny.

WATCH: Amazon to meet Paris climate goals 10 years ahead of schedule

---

off bs kudlow 2012 :{Report:(style="box-sizing:border-box"):}: with :{Larry Kudlow:(style="box-sizing:border-box"):}: and began his additional role as a contributing op-ed columnist for CNBC in 2013. [2]

Novak was named senior columnist in 2016. His columns focus on politics, economic and social issues, and American culture. [2]

Prior to joining CNBC, Novak co-created and oversaw the "Varney and Company" program on the :{Fox Business:(style="box-sizing:border-box"):}: Network along with anchor :{Stuart Varney:(style="box-sizing:border-box"):}:. He also spent seven years at :{CNN}:, producing financial news programs including launching the successful "In the Money" show with anchor :{Jack Cafferty}:. [2]

==

gop debate led to revolt? bashed liberal media (a la gingrich on wife?)

he three main moderators -- CNBC’s Carl Quintanilla, Becky Quick and John Harwood -- posed a series of pointed and sometimes contentious questions to the 10 candidates who participated in the third debate of the GOP presidential primary season. And the candidates did not hide their contempt.

“The questions asked in this debate illustrate why the American people don't trust the media,” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said. “This is not a cage match. Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain? Marco Rubio, why don't you resign? Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen?”

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/cnbc-debate-moderators-face-backlash-3rd-gop-presidential/story?id=34803250

===