@npr_matrix
Far-Right Media Still Pushing Super Bowl Conspiracy Theories

Far-Right Media Still Pushing Super Bowl Conspiracy Theories

Following months of right-wing attacks on singer Taylor Swift and Kansas City Chiefs player Travis Kelce, far-right social media accounts continued to push baseless conspiracy theories about the singer — as well as the game itself — during and after the 2024 Super Bowl.

  • Right-wing media figures relentlessly attacked Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce leading up to the Super Bowl, eventually drawing criticism from some right-wing peers
    • Swift’s relationship with Kelce has been drawing right-wing ire for months. In September, Kelce’s appearances in advertising campaigns for Pfizer and Bud Light spurred anti-vax and anti-LGBTQ attacks against the couple. [Media Matters, 9/27/23]
    • Prior to the Superbowl, right-wing figures claimed Swift was a Democratic operative or part of a “psyop.” They also claimed that the game would be rigged for Kelce’s team to win and that a Chiefs victory would strengthen Swift’s potential endorsement of President Joe Biden. [Media Matters, 2/1/24]

    • Even some right-wing media figures started begging fellow conservatives to stop attacking Swift. Some figures recognized the absurdity of such theories, asking their colleagues and peers to focus on more important issues heading into the 2024 election cycle. The Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro said, “Guys, not everything you don’t like is a conspiracy.” [Media Matters, 2/2/24]
  • QAnon figures and far-right accounts accused Swift’s Super Bowl guest Ice Spice of being a “satanist” and “summoning demons”
    • QAnon account Shadow of Ezra claimed that Ice Spice, who came to the game with Swift, was “seen making hand gestures associated with Satanic symbolism while wearing an upside-down cross.” The account also said the Super Bowl was “nothing but a major Satanic ritual.” [Twitter/X, 2/11/24; Media Matters, 7/17/23]
    • QAnon influencer Brian Cates said Ice Spice threw “up the devil sign with both hands and then does the double-hand collar lift to hold up the upside down cross to make sure attention is drawn to it.” [Twitter/X, 2/11/24; Media Matters, 5/18/23]
    • QAnon influencer John Sabal (aka “QAnon John”) called Swift an “alcoholic harlot who likes to hang out with Satanists,” asking if “that thing next to her” was “summoning demons” with an “upside down cross.” [Gab, 2/11/24; Media Matters, 9/27/23]
    • QAnon influencerMJTruth posted a video of Ice Spice and Taylor Swift at the football game titled “A satanist performing a satanic ritual, while the drunken harlot gets hammered.” [Rumble, 2/11/24; Media Matters, 7/28/23]
    • Right-wing Twitter account For America posted, “With Chiefs down 3 how many more demons will Ice Spice summon?!?” [Twitter/X, 2/11/24]
    • Anti-vaccine figure Erin Elizabeth posted on Twitter, “Ice Spice who accompanied Taylor Swift to tonight's game throwing up satanic symbols while wearing an upside down cross.” [Twitter/X, 2/11/24; Media Matters, 11/22/22]
    • Right-wing account End Wokeness said Ice Spice was showing “demonic hand gestures on the big screen” with an “upside down cross” and “not even hiding it.” [Twitter/X, 2/11/24]
    • Former Fox News producer Kyle Becker accused Ice Spice of “demon summoning,” sharing a video of her touching her necklace. [Twitter/X, 2/11/24]
    • Real America’s Voice’s Ben Bergquam claimed that Swift was in “all black chugging while her friend Ice Spice wearing an upside down cross signs to the devil.” Bergquam called this “spiritual warfare” and asked God to “rebuke the evil and witchcraft of this generation.” [Twitter/X, 2/11/24]
  • Other far-right figures claimed that the Super Bowl was “rigged” and the NFL is a “scam”
    • QAnon influencer Sun Tzu called the NFL a “scam” because it had announced “the address of the stadium in Las Vegas after Kansas City won the Super Bowl,” which was “333.” According to SunTzusWar, “Who has ever announced the address of the stadium of the Super Bowl? Just saying.” [Twitter/X, 2/11/24; Media Matters, 12/12/23]
    • “Stop the Steal” organizer Ali Alexander called the Super Bowl “totally fake & rigged,” adding, “Notice no grass stains.” [Telegram, 2/11/24]
      • The Biden Twitter/X page posted a Dark Brandon meme, and QAnon John said it was “signaling to everyone that the Super Bowl was RIGGED in their favor.” He also called it “direct comms.” [Gab, 2/11/24; Jezebel, 2/12/24]
      • QAnon personality Woke Societies posted, “Tell me the nfl isn’t rigged.” [Telegram, 2/11/24; Media Matters, 4/18/22]
  • QAnon figures have continued the trend of labeling Swift a “psyop”
      • QAnon John posted screenshots of Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama congratulating the Chiefs and “Taylor Swift’s boyfriend” with the caption “PSYOP CONFIRMED.” [Gab, 2/12/24]
      • QAnon influencer Jordan Sather: “There’s more aliens featured during this game than Taylor Swift. Subliminal soft disclosure be strong. Prepping our minds for something later this year? Psyop me harder baby.” [Telegram, 2/11/24; The Hill, 6/15/21]
      • A user on the QAnon forum TheDonald posted a picture of Taylor Swift with the caption “totally not a psyop.” [Patriots.win, 2/11/24; Media Matters, 12/12/23]

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

Joe Biden

Right-Wing Media Urge Biden Impeachment To Counter Trump Indictments

Right-wing media have spun the latest indictment of former President Donald Trump into an opportunity to baselessly call for President Joe Biden’s impeachment — with Fox News host Jesse Watters driving the narrative.

The indictment regarding Trump’s alleged criminal actions after the 2020 election, which was handed down on August 1, has sent right-wing media into a spiral as they defend the former president. Criticisms of the indictment range from questions over the legality of Jack Smith’s role as special counsel to claims that the charges criminalize free speech to comparisons of the charges to legal systems in “communist and Nazi countries.” The claims from right-wing media and politicians contradict those from legal experts, who report that the legal reasoning behind the charges against Trump is sound.

As Trump faces felony charges from three separate indictments, some House Republicans and members of the Freedom Caucus have presented impeachment articles against Biden. For months, right-wing media have laid the groundwork for Biden impeachment calls, despite little evidence to back their claims, and now Watters and others in right-wing media have been using the latest Trump indictment to move forward with impeachment "to run counter to the Trump trials next year.”

Watters has repeatedly urged Republicans to “fast-track” an impeachment inquiry into Biden to counterprogram Trump trials next year

  • The night Trump was indicted, Watters urged Republicans to “fast-track this impeachment inquiry … because once you got all these Trump trials next year, an election year, that's all the media is going to cover.” Watters declared: “There is a window where Republicans have to exploit. These Trump trials aren’t going to be until next year. They got to get back from vacation in mid-September, and they have to fast-track this impeachment inquiry. Because they have the impeachment itself, and get that moved into 2024. Because once you got all these Trump trials next year, an election year, that's all the media is going to cover. And they're not going to cover anything about Joe Biden. You got to squeeze us in now. It’s that important.” [Fox News, Jesse Watters Primetime,8/1/23]
  • On the August 2 edition of The Five, Watters instructed Republicans to use impeachment as a political stunt to distract from Trump’s multiple trials. He said: “What the Republicans need to do is time the impeachment because that's the main draw. And if you put up impeachment with the Trump trials, I don't think the Democrats want to stomach that.” [Fox News, The Five, 8/2/23]
  • The same day, Watters again urged House Republicans to speed up their impeachment inquiry so that an impeachment trial of Biden can “run counter to the Trump trials next year … you have to put something against the Trump Trials in the spring.” Watters explained: “There's no way Biden is going to survive a full-blown House impeachment. … It lasts months, all of this evidence is on the table, Democrats and the media forced to engage on it. But if Joe wants to roll the dice, Republicans move with impeachment. But without the impeachment, you have back-to-back-to-back-to-back Trump trials. The media’s not going to cover anything else. Biden’s going to hide and Trump is going to be criminalized on TV. But if Republicans time this right and follow the evidence where it leads, impeachment is going to run counter to the Trump trials next year.” [Fox News, Jesse Watters Primetime, 8/2/23]

Other right-wing media figures used Trump’s indictment to beg the GOP to launch impeachment proceedings against Biden 

  • Daily Wire host Michael Knowles declared, “We just got to impeach” Biden, adding, “We need to impeach these people before they imprison us.” Knowles continued: “I don’t know what other evidence of what other crimes we could possibly get. I don’t know how the political situation in this country could deteriorate any more. They’re trying to put Donald Trump in prison for over 500 years and potentially execute him. What are we waiting for? … We need to impeach these people before they imprison us.” [Daily Wire, Michael Knowles Show,8/3/23]
  • On Fox & Friends, pro-Trump lawyer Mike Davis declared that “House Republicans must move forward immediately with impeachment.” Asked by co-host Brian Kilmeade if the indictment was because Democrats are trying to “do everything constitutionally to stop him from becoming president again,” Davis claimed: “That is absolutely what's happening here. It's being driven by President Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland. And this is why House Republicans must move forward immediately with impeachment. President Biden is clearly corrupt. He is clearly compromised as the president of the United States and Attorney General Merrick Garland is clearly covering up for his boss. [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 8/3/23]
  • The Federalist published an article titled “Republicans Who Don’t Impeach Biden And His DOJ Cronies Now Are Part Of The Partisan Prosecution Problem.” The article argued that “the first round of sham charges against Trump should have prompted a swift and sound impeachment campaign against key players like President Joe Biden,” and asserted that “the latest round of unconstitutional charges from Biden’s Department of Justice against former President Donald Trump warrants a severe smackdown from the other branches of government.” [The Federalist, 8/2/23]
  • When the indictment was announced, Fox News contributor Leo Terell used social media to call for Republicans to impeach Biden. Terell posted, “PLAY HARDBALL WITH DEMOCRATS: IMPEACH JOE BIDEN NOW!” [Twitter/X, 8/1/23]

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

U.S. Court

Far Right Lauds Affirmative Action Decision -- And Aims At Civil Rights Act

As the Supreme Court handed down its decision that the race-conscious admission policies of Harvard College and the University of North Carolina violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment, effectively dismantling affirmative action in higher education, right-wing media poured praise on the conservative justices for ending what they claim is a “discriminatory” and “racist” practice.

On June 29, the Supreme Court’s decisions in both SFFA v. Presidentand Fellows of Harvard College and SFFA v. University of North Carolina essentially decided that race can no longer be a factor in college admissions, striking down affirmative action. Both cases involved Students for Fair Admissions, a nonprofit with financial ties to anti-civil rights strategists, suing Harvard University and the University of North Carolina over their admissions processes that the group claimed violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 14th Amendment, respectively. The elimination of affirmative action has been a right-wing policy goal for years and has been bankrolled through SFFA in order to see its elimination come to fruition.

Right-wing media continuously amplified their hatred of affirmative action leading up to its elimination, platforming guests who view the policy as “un-American.” Some right-wing figures that are celebrating the end of affirmative action have now begun calling for the end of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and “disparate impact” regulations, revealing their ultimate goal to destroy civil rights protections in the United States.

The Supreme Court’s decision to dismantle affirmative action coincides with a network of “parental choice” activists and right-wing media figures demanding radical changes to the U.S. education system. Anti-critical race theory proponents like Christopher Rufo and Russ Vought have worked hand-in-hand with right-wing media to mount aggressive smear campaigns against critical race theory and diversity policies. These groups have deliberately tried to gut the 14th Amendment, which would create massive obstacles to communities of color in education.

As part of their attacks on education, Fox News hosts have already started calling for the destruction of the public school system, arguing that the U.S. should “defund government education” and replace it with private school vouchers. The network has also spread misinformation about critical race theory, even claiming that proponents want to “brainwash your child so that they feel guilty about being born white.” Right-wing media attacks on the education system serve to minimize the impact that the Supreme Court’s decision to end affirmative action will have on diversity and equity in higher education.

Right-wing media agreed with Supreme Court that affirmative action is “unconstitutional,” labeling it a “racist” and “discriminatory” practice:

  • Turning Point USA’s Charlie Kirk praised the decision, tweeting, “Finally the Court has corrected another awful 70s mistake, and ruled that racially discriminatory college admissions are unconstitutional.”
  • Fox News contributor Katie Pavlich called affirmative action “unconstitutional and anti-American, for college admissions and everywhere else. This is an earthquake that should upend the left’s racist standards, not just in education but in employment at every level.”
  • On America’s Newsroom, former Trump official Roger Severino claimed that “45% of the students of African American descent admitted to Harvard would not have made it according to Harvard's own statistics had they not done the racial balancing in the name of diversity. Now, Harvard only has 8% of conservatives that are admitted students, 82% of Harvard students come from wealthy backgrounds. It’s not really about diversity. It was about racial balancing.”
  • The Daily Caller published an article, titled “Supreme Court Rules Against Racial Prejudice In College Admissions,” framing affirmative action as being discriminatory.
  • Newsmax’s Justine Brooke Murray tweeted that people “already knew” affirmative action was discriminatory prior to the Supreme Court decision, arguing that prospective students “should not be judged by the color of their skin but by content of their character!”
  • Racist livestreamer Steven Crowder claimed that because of the Supreme Court decision, “Asian students can no longer be discriminated against.”

Some right-wing figures praised former President Donald Trump for his Supreme Court picks who helped bring affirmative action to an end:

  • Former Trump adviser and white nationalist Stephen Miller called the decision a “colossal win for USA. Colossal achievement for 45 in shaping the Court to realize this victory.”
  • Failed congressional candidate and “proud IslamophobeLaura Loomer celebrated the decision as a “great day” that “was only made possible today thanks to President Donald J Trump’s nomination of 3 SCOTUS justices.”
  • Newsmax contributor Karoline Leavitt claimed that “President Donald Trump made today's historic decision to end the racist college admissions process possible because he delivered on his promise to appoint constitutionalist justices.”

Despite polling on affirmative action showing high rates of approval with marginalized groups, right-wing media argued that the Supreme Court’s decision was “popular” with all Americans:

  • Former Fox News host Megyn Kelly tweeted, “Race-based admissions will still continue bc these institutions will find sneaky ways of doing it, but they will no longer have the absurd cover of law. THESE POLICIES HAVE BEEN HURTING MINORITY GROUPS FOR DECADES. And ppl of all races oppose them. This is a great day for America.”
  • Fox News Radio host Guy Benson tweeted, “We are told SCOTUS is ‘losing legitimacy’ by issuing rulings that are ‘out of touch’ or unpopular. That misunderstands the justices’ function, of course, but many of the same people who’ve engaged in such concern trolling will be screaming over today’s decision.” Benson also posted an image of polling data, seemingly ignoring that the results showed that among American adults familiar with affirmative action, nearly every racial category mostly saw it as a “good thing.”

Fringe and right-wing accounts also celebrated the decision as a victory for white people and discussed what’s “next up”:

  • Following the decision, Rufo tweeted: “The Supreme Court has struck down affirmative action in college admissions. It's time to go further: abolish DEI bureaucracies, prohibit race-based hiring, eliminate the ‘disparate impact’ doctrine, and restore the principle of colorblind equality in all of our institutions.”
  • Gab founder and virulent antisemite Andrew Torba posted, “Affirmative action is dead. Roe is dead. Next up: the Civil Rights Act so we can restore the freedom of association in this country.”
  • White nationalist vlogger Steve Franssen tweeted “LETS GO WHITE RACE” in response to the decision.
  • On Gab, failed Senate candidate and Proud Boys supporter Lauren Witzke posted on Gab, “How many hopes and dreams have been destroyed for White people due to this vile policy? Affirmative Action is truly one of the biggest stains on America. Overqualified people were rejected from jobs and schools due to the color of their skin. It’s been unconstitutional from the start. It’s time to put an END to the cruel and evil practice of Affirmative Action.”
  • Far-right account Write Winger posted on Gab, “With race-based admissions being struck down at colleges, now is the time for White people to claim their space in this oh so diverse and inclusive environment, and I’ll tell you how you personally can help. If your school or employer has or does anything based on race, I want you to politely ask, in writing preferably via email, how you can go about creating the same for White people.”
  • Author Padraig Martin posted on Gab, “While Affirmative Action harmed hundreds of thousands of qualified White applicants over the past five decades, nobody gave a damn. How many aspiring White applicants from low income homes were denied economic advancement because they were White? I appreciate this decision, but just remember - if you are White, the United States government still hates you for being White and actively seeks your displacement and replacement with its myriad of anti-White policies.”

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

No, Hunter Biden Didn't Get A 'Sweetheart Deal' From GOP Prosecutor

No, Hunter Biden Didn't Get A 'Sweetheart Deal' From GOP Prosecutor

Right-wing media have attacked the plea deal reached for Hunter Biden over his past failure to pay taxes and unlawful possession of a gun, falsely claiming that the president’s son got a “sweetheart deal” in comparison with others who faced tax and gun charges and in particular comparing it to the sentencing of musician Kodak Black.

But numerous legal experts rebutted these conservative claims of a “sweetheart deal,” with some explaining that his deal is actually “harsh” for his circumstances as a first-time offender.

Legal experts rebutted claims of a “sweetheart deal"

On June 20, Hunter Biden was charged for tax evasion and unlawful gun possession. He pleaded guilty on misdemeanor tax charges, for which he likely faces probation, and agreed to a pretrial diversion program for the gun charge. Even though the U.S. attorney who prosecuted Biden was appointed by former President Donald Trump and was left in place by President Joe Biden to preserve the independence of his investigation, Republican lawmakers were quick to call the agreement a “slap on the wrist” and a “sweetheart deal” for the president’s son.

But legal experts interviewed by news outlets explained that the charges against Hunter Biden are rarely prosecuted and even more rarely include jail time. As many experts have explained, given Biden’s repayment of the taxes he owed, his lack of a prior criminal record, and the fact that his gun was not used in any crimes, his plea deal may even seem unduly “harsh.”

  • CNN legal analyst Jennifer Rodgers said that “it’s certainly not a sweetheart deal out of line with what happens in the rest of the country” and that the gun charge deal is “very standard” in similar circumstances. Rodgers explained: “So, on the gun form charge, it’s very, very standard for someone in this situation who lies on the form because they are an addict, the gun is long gone, apparently he only had it for a couple of weeks, it’s very standard in these circumstances for this diversion to occur and to wipe out the charges, assuming he successfully completes it. So, that’s totally standard. And the tax fraud is similar as well. I mean, he paid those taxes back a long time ago. That’s something that DOJ takes very, very seriously.” She continued: “This is not a sweetheart deal. … It’s certainly not a sweetheart deal out of line with what happens in the rest of the country.” [CNN, CNN News Central, 6/20/23]
  • MSNBC legal analyst Paul Butler explained that “this doesn’t look like a sweetheart deal,” explaining that “almost no defendant would be sent to federal prison for first time, low-level tax offenses.” Butler further noted that Biden paid back his owed taxes and sought treatment for his addiction, and that a federal judge may still ultimately step in if the judge deems the plea agreement too lenient. [MSNBC, Chris Jansing Reports, 6/20/23]
  • MSNBC legal analyst Catherine Christian: “I don’t think it’s accurate to call it a slap on the wrist” because Biden will have a criminal record. Christian said: “This is someone who didn't pay his taxes, and now he has — he's going to be stuck with these two criminal convictions on his record. He had a gun when he knew he was addicted to a controlled substance, and so now he has to go through a diversion program. So, I don't think it’s accurate to call it a slap on the wrist. As I said, these are serious charges that he’s now pleading guilty to.” [MSNBC, Ana Cabrera Reports, 6/20/23]
  • Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti: “If anything, Hunter Biden was treated harshly” for his tax charges because “those crimes are rarely charged.” [Twitter, 6/20/23]

  • NYU law professor and MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissmann: “This is if anything harsh, not lenient.” Weissmann wrote on Twitter: “first time tax offenders like this rarely get prosecuted and even rarer to get jail time. And false gun applications sadly also almost never get prosecuted or jail time. So this is if anything harsh, not lenient.” [Twitter, 6/20/23]
  • Former federal prosecutor Shan Wu wrote that “Attorney General Merrick Garland was actually pretty harsh on Hunter Biden.” In an opinion piece for The Daily Beast, Wu explained his reasoning:

The truth of the matter is that Attorney General Merrick Garland did Hunter Biden no favors in this case by leaving the original Trump-appointed prosecutor on the case, and approving a plea deal on charges that for anyone else would likely have resulted in no criminal charges being brought.

Under the terms of the plea deal, Hunter Biden must plead guilty to two misdemeanor counts of failing to pay his taxes in 2017 and 2018—for which he apparently underpaid by $100,000 each year. (In 2021, he paid the shortfall.) That makes the tax case a bit of an outlier, since prosecutors usually have little appetite for bringing criminal tax cases when the taxpayer has already paid the amount owing.

His self-admitted drug addiction likely played a role in prosecutors allowing him to seek pre-trial diversion, as diversion is frequently used as a means of holding drug addicts to accountability while not making them take a felony on the records in light of their addiction. In fact, it is rare for prosecutors to pursue criminal charges for this kind of false information on a gun ownership application form unless the gun was also used to commit some other crime, such as a robbery, to cite one example.

Here, however, there is no evidence Biden used the gun in any crime. He apparently only had the gun for two weeks before his then-girlfriend threw it away in a trash dumpster. [The Daily Beast,6/20/23]


  • MSNBC legal analyst Joyce Vance said “it wouldn’t at all be unusual” for the gun charge to be diverted.
    Vance said of the tax charges: “It’s very typical, the law provides for misdemeanors in cases where a defendant fails to file. And so this would be, I think, within the heartland of the way the department charges these kinds of cases, if that in fact is what the charge is, a failure to file.” Vance also called the gun charge “a more obscure portion of the statute,” adding that “it wouldn’t at all be unusual to see someone put into some form of front-end program.” [MSNBC, Morning Joe, 6/20/23]
  • CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig: “There’s virtually no chance that a first-time offender would get sentenced to prison based on misdemeanors … especially tax-type misdemeanors.” Honig further explained that “the vast majority of federal firearms cases are either a firearm used in another crime of violence, or a firearm possessed by somebody who has a prior felony. This is sort of low down on the list of firearms offenses.” [CNN, CNN News Central, 6/20/23]
  • CNN chief legal analyst Laura Coates said that Biden’s pretrial diversion for the gun felony “is quite common in the grand scheme of things.” Coates explained: “These are oftentimes included in any plea deal to try to use a diversionary program that essentially says, look. If you keep on the up-and-up, if you stay clean, then you will not have this felony charge attached to your record as well. This actually is quite common in the grand scheme of things. What’s so uncommon is that it’s now a former vice president and current president’s child.” [CNN, CNN News Central, 6/20/23]
  • UCLA law professor Adam Winkler suggested that it’s unusual for someone to be charged solely for lying on a gun form. Winkler told The Washington Post that “prosecutors typically would not charge lying on a gun form as a stand-alone crime, instead filing it as a secondary charge when someone also may have committed a violent crime with the weapon.” [The Washington Post, 6/20/23]
  • Ohio State University law professor and sentencing expert Douglas Berman told The New York Times that “the average person is rarely prosecuted for” the crimes Biden was charged with. Berman further suggested that far from receiving preferential treatment in this case, Biden was charged only because he’s the president’s son and prosecutors may have hoped to avoid “the perception that there was some sort of special treatment or leniency.” From the NY Times:

Douglas Berman, a professor of law at Ohio State University and a sentencing expert, read the court papers unsealed on Tuesday morning and said that it was difficult to assess from the filings whether Mr. Biden received a sweetheart deal.
The crimes to which Mr. Biden is pleading guilty, Mr. Berman said, are ones that the average person is rarely prosecuted for because they are usually only brought along with more serious offenses.

In Mr. Biden’s case, they include a charge stemming from lying about drug use on the government form used for his purchase of a handgun. Current and former officials say tens of thousands of Americans, out of the 25 million who buy guns each year, lie on their forms and are not prosecuted.

“If these are the only offenses, most prosecutors are going to say it’s not worth a federal case — they would say: Let’s not make a federal case of it for the average person because it’s not worth it to bring a case unless there’s reason to be concerned that there’s a public safety issue or the trust that everyone is treated equally under the law is at stake,” Mr. Berman said.

Mr. Berman said that in this case, federal prosecutors are in a unique situation because there was a very high-profile defendant who was the subject of investigations for a range of activities. The failure to bring some charges when there is no factual dispute, he said, could create the impression of a two-tiered system of justice.

“Everyone is paying attention and the facts are not in dispute, so a failure to bring charges would create the perception that there was some sort of special treatment or leniency being given to the president’s son,” Mr. Berman [said]. [The New York Times, 6/20/23]

Right-wing media falsely claimed Hunter Biden got a “sweetheart deal”

Despite the extensive evidence and expert commentary to the contrary, right-wing media ran with the false accusation that Hunter Biden's plea agreement was a “sweetheart deal” arranged by a corrupt Department of Justice.

  • Fox News contributor and New York Post columnist Miranda Devine: Hunter Biden got “this sweetheart deal from the DOJ.” On Fox, Devine said: “I think Hunter Biden's team is quite correct in that their man is off the hook with this sweetheart deal from the DOJ,” before referencing GOP probes into Biden’s business dealings. [Fox News, America Reports, 6/20/23]
  • Tucker Carlson producer Justin Wells wrote on Twitter: “President Biden’s inept son, Hunter Biden, gets a sweetheart deal from the DOJ. What a joke.” [Twitter, 6/20/23]
  • On Twitter, Breitbart senior editor-at-large Joel Pollak wrote that Hunter Biden got “a sweetheart deal” and will later be pardoned by his father. Pollak claimed: “.@JoeBiden just had his leading opponent arrested for ‘documents’ while his son, Hunter — whom the media assured us was innocent — gets a sweetheart deal and will, no doubt, be pardoned. Trump was right about the Bidens in 2019, and they impeached him for it. Banana republic.” [Twitter, 6/20/23]
  • Fox host Jesse Watters said, “Hunter Biden was never going to go to prison anyway, he was either going to get a sweetheart plea deal or get pardoned.” Watters also asked, “If this wasn’t a sweetheart deal, then why did Donald Trump’s CFO get thrown in Rikers Island for 100 days for pleading guilty to a smaller tax charge than Hunter?” Watters continued making comparisons with celebrities who served prison time. [Fox News, Jesse Watters Primetime, 6/20/23]
  • Quoting House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Trump ally John Solomon argued that Hunter Biden got a “‘sweetheart’ plea deal” in the headline of an article he wrote on Just the News. [Just the News, 6/20/23]
  • Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton claimed Hunter Biden got a “sweetheart plea deal,” which is an “‘in-your-face’ show of contempt for the rule of law.” [Twitter, 6/20/23]
  • CPAC Chairman Matt Schlapp tweeted that the president “just orchestrated a sweetheart deal for his son in order to boost his re-election.” [Twitter, 6/20/23]

Conservatives made false comparison between Hunter Biden and rapper Kodak Black

Some conservative media figures and outlets compared Biden’s gun charge, described by the Justice Department as possessing “a firearm despite knowing he was an unlawful user of and addicted to a controlled substance,” to that of the rapper Kodak Black, who was sentenced to almost four years in prison for ostensibly similar gun charges.

But these comparisons exclude important context: Black already had an extensive criminal record and was facing numerous other criminal charges when he lied on background check forms to purchase multiple guns, and two of the guns he purchased were later found at crime scenes, including one, as The New York Times reported, “with Black’s fingerprints and a live round in the chamber — that had been used to fire at a ‘rival rap artist.’”

The remainder of Black’s sentence, for falsifying information to buy firearms, was commuted by former President Donald Trump during his last full day in office, and months later he received a plea agreement that avoided prison time in a case involving a report of sexual assault.

Conservatives ignored this context in making the comparison to further their false claim that Biden has been treated too leniently:

  • Devine highlighted the years in jail Black served for his gun charges: “I think David Weiss should come before [Rep. James Comer's (R-KY)] committee and just explain if everything was aboveboard exactly why they made the decisions they did, and why it took five years to come up with these two pretty minor misdemeanor tax charges and a gun charge that has gone away that has had people locked in jail for four years. The rapper Kodak Black was in jail for four years in a federal prison for lying on his background form to buy — he bought four guns in that case.” [Fox News, Hannity, 6/20/23]
  • Fox & Friends hosts claimed that Black merely used a “wrong Social Security number on the gun form” and went to prison, omitting all other context. [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 6/21/23]
  • Daily Caller chief national correspondent Henry Rodgers wrote a tweet echoing a claim that Black “served 3 years in jail” for the “same crime”: “NEW: Kodak Black’s lawyer reacts to the Hunter Biden news… Says Kodak was charged for the same crime and had to serve 3 years in jail for it:” [Twitter, 6/20/23]
  • A FoxNews.com headline repeated the false comparison: “Kodak Black's lawyer slams Hunter Biden plea deal after rapper sentenced to 3+ years for same crime.” [FoxNews.com, 6/20/23]
  • Gateway Pundit also cited the false claim by Black’s lawyer that he was charged with the “same federal weapons crime” as Hunter Biden. Jim Hoft, the founder of Gateway Pundit, wrote:

Hunter will serve NO TIME in prison for his latest criminal actions.

The same DOJ sent rappers Lil Wayne and Kodak Black to prison for years on gun charges. Both rappers were granted a pardon by President Donald Trump.


Contrasting Hunter Biden’s case, Kodak Black, whose real name is Bill Kapri, faced similar charges in 2019.

According to New York Post, the Grammy-nominated artist was found guilty of providing false information on a federal gun purchase form to procure three firearms from a shop in Miami. Given his criminal record, Black was not eligible to buy these weapons.

Despite pleading guilty, Black was handed a sentence exceeding three years in federal prison. [The Gateway Pundit, 6/21/23]

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

Evidence Piling Up Of GOP Efforts To Cut Social Security And Medicare

Evidence Piling Up Of GOP Efforts To Cut Social Security And Medicare

After calling out some members of the Republican Party for trying to cut entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare in his State of the Union speech, President Joe Biden is being labeled a liar by the party and right-wing media. Mainstream media's exhaustive reporting on the GOP trying to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits should serve to fact-check anyone who says otherwise.

During his 2023 State of the Union address, Biden noted, “Instead of making the wealthy pay their fair share, some Republicans — some Republicans — want Medicare and Social Security to sunset.” Despite their decadeslong war against Social Security and other entitlements, Republicans dubiously claim they have no intention of going after these programs. Right-wing media responded aggressively to the speech, with figures like The Daily Wire's Ben Shapiro and Newsmax's Sean Spicer calling Biden's comments “demagogic lies” and a “total flop of a moment," respectively. Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich labeled Biden’s comment an “attempt to attack the Republicans on Medicare and Social Security” that was “totally dishonest.”

Multiple GOP politicians — some of whom said Biden’s claim was a lie — have been on the record pushing legislation that would cut entitlement programs or have stated their opposition to the programs in their entirety. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has called for the age eligibility of Social Security to be raised while Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) has pushed a plan that would require these programs to be reauthorized by Congress every five years. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), who expressed indignation at Biden’s comments regarding entitlement programs, has remarked that it is his “objective to phase out Social Security.”

Some in the mainstream media also attempted to downplay the GOP’s past, and likely future, attempts to cut entitlement programs. On CNN, conservative pollster Frank Luntz said it was “dishonest” and “provocative” for Biden to say that Republicans want to “sunset” Social Security (host Kaitlan Collins pushed back on Luntz, referencing Scott’s proposed legislation). Additionally, ABC’s Jonathan Karl said that Biden’s remarks were inaccurate, falsely claiming that “there’s nobody seriously talking about sunsetting Social Security in the Republican Party.”

The GOP’s intention and attempts to cut Social Security and other entitlement programs have been extensively documented by mainstream media for over a decade. This reporting undermines the right’s argument that Democrats and the left are lying about the GOP’s desire to slash these programs. Here are some examples:

  • Back in 2011, The Cap Timespublished a piece exposing the GOP’s attempt to force concessions on entitlement reform using the debt ceiling: “But then the American people caught wind of [then-House Budget Committee chair Paul] Ryan’s ‘entitlement reform’ scheme and quickly recognized that it would end Medicare, along with retirement security, for most Americans.”
  • McClatchy wrote an article in 2013 titled “Sen. Mitch McConnell says Medicare, Social Security must change to fix U.S. debt,” noting, “McConnell, speaking to several hundred people during Commerce Lexington's Public Policy Luncheon at the Hyatt Regency, said those changes should include raising eligibility ages over time.”
  • In 2016, HuffPost illustrated that the GOP has camouflaged its attempts to slash Social Security by using vague language and ambiguous policy proposals: “The Republican Party platform doesn’t say how it would reform the program, and claims ‘all options should be considered.’ But as Social Security Works points out, the GOP clearly supports benefit cuts, since the platform later rules out tax hikes.”
  • The Intercept released an article in 2017 titled “Senate Republicans Are Coming For Medicare And Medicaid, This Time Through Tax Reform,” noting that Democrats said the GOP’s 2018 proposed budget would result in Medicaid being cut by $1 trillion and Medicare by $473 billion over 10 years.
  • Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik explained that McConnell made the GOP’s intentions clear after he blamed entitlements for the national debt in multiple 2018 interviews: “Mitch McConnell says it out loud: Republicans are gunning for Social Security, Medicare and Obamacare next.”
  • In 2019, Vox called out then-President Donald Trump for cutting entitlement programs in his proposed budget, despite repeatedly saying he wouldn’t: “Trump said he wouldn’t cut Medicaid, Social Security, and Medicare. His 2020 budget cuts all 3.”
  • Publishing an analysis in The Washington Spectator in 2020, professor of economics Steven Pressman elucidated one way the GOP has gone after Social Security: “Republicans frequently suggest raising the age for collecting full benefits from 67 to 70. In practice, this means a 25 percent cut in benefits, or $375 less each month for an average Social Security recipient.”
  • In 2021, economist Christian Weller published an article in Forbes highlighting that multiple Republican senators had their eyes on cutting funds to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid: “Given that four of the five sponsors of this idea [to balance the budget] have signed on to the tax pledge to never, ever under any circumstances raise taxes, they are looking for programs to cut. They consequently take aim mainly at cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.”
  • The Hill published an opinion piece in 2021 explaining that Sen. Mitt Romney’s (R-UT) proposed legislation would create a “back-door approach to cut Americans’ earned benefits”: “This is nothing more than a back-door mechanism for enacting cuts to seniors’ earned benefits that wouldn’t otherwise be possible through the normal legislative process.”
  • In October 2022, Bloomberg Government published a bombshell report on the GOP’s planned attempt to weaponize the debt ceiling to force through cuts to entitlement programs: “The four Republicans interested in serving as House Budget Committee chairman in the next Congress said in interviews that next year’s deadline to raise or suspend the debt ceiling is a point of leverage if their party can win control of the House in the November midterm elections.”
  • Truthout analyzed now-House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s (R-CA) October 2022 interview with Punchbowl News, explaining that McCarthy likely intends to use the debt ceiling to force concessions on entitlement programs: “When McCarthy refers to eliminating so-called waste, it is likely that he is referring to, among other things, the GOP’s plans to cut Medicare and Social Security, two of the most popular and vital anti-poverty government programs in the U.S.”
  • In early 2023, The Washington Post published an article titled “House GOP eyes Social Security, Medicare amid spending battle,” noting: “Others in the party have resurfaced more detailed plans to cut costs, including by raising the Social Security retirement age to 70, targeting younger Americans who have yet to obtain federal benefits.”
  • After Biden's speech, the Post assessed potential 2024 GOP presidential candidates’ past positions on Social Security, noting “several” of them “have a history of embracing cuts": The piece mentioned Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, and Trump, writing: “Fiscal conservatives have fought Social Security and Medicare since their inception as crowning achievements of Democratic presidents, and rising national debt has intensified calls for overhauling the programs in recent decades. But charting a new course for entitlements has also long proved a graveyard for Republican ambitions.”

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.