Condign Justice For The Biased News Media

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

The incoming Trump administration has signaled that it will be giving some podcasters, bloggers and news commentary websites access to White House briefings. As the night follows day, the Axis media is freaking out. The James S. Brady Press Briefing Room only has a capacity of 49 seats (the room could be changed to a larger one, of course) and adding participants means that some legacy media reporters will have to go. Good.

Here’s the objective, fair, unbiased headline at NewsCastStudio, the trade publication for broadcast news media: “Report: Trump officials may meddle in White House briefing room seating, add pro-MAGA outlets.” Allow me to translate: “pro-MAGA outlets” means non-Axis propagandists, those who may not see it as their duty as ‘advocacy journalists’ to undermine Republicans in general and Trump in particular.

The White House Correspondents’ Association is technically in charge of deciding seating access and assignments, but the White House controls who gets access to the building and room. Having the White House Correspondents Association decide who can be part of the the press corps questioning the White House spokespeople in daily briefings is a classic “fox in the hen house” system. Still, the White House has the power to block the access of a particular reporter or an entire network (Bye-bye, MSNBC!) by denying security passes. This would, of course, be condemned as undemocratic and something Hitler would do, but the Biden team kicked the conservative Daily Signal out of the briefings because it was inadequately supportive of Joe.

Continue reading →

OK, Prof. Appiah, Enough With The Stupid Ethics Questions From The Trump-Deranged…

/ Jack Marshall / 1 Comment

Since the election, the New York Times ethics advice columnist “The Ethicist” has been featuring a series of hopelessly dunderheaded questions from Trump-Deranged New York Democrats. “Should I cut off my Trump-supporting mother?” was one that Ethics Alarms discussed recently. I have to assume Kwame Appiah is getting a lot of these questions and thinks they really need more of an answer than “Grow up” or “Here’s the number of an affordable therapist.”

They don’t.

There were two more of this ilk today: “Is It Fair to Assume a Best Friend Is Bad and Selfish if She Supported Trump?” and a woman who felt her husband divulged a damning confidence by telling his adult children that her grandson had voted for Trump, as if he had informed them that the kid was a member of the Klan. Nobody who voted for either candidate should feel ashamed of their vote or feel they have to defend it.

Since The Ethicist’s employer is significantly responsible for these people’s current disability, being one of main purveyors of the “Trump is a fascist” fearmongering, I hold that Prof. Appiah has an obligation to give tough-love to these fools. Tell them that bias has made them stupid, that it is no more “selfish” or “ignorant” to vote for one candidate over another, and that the toxic delusion that those who reach a different conclusion than you regarding society, the culture, national policy and leadership are evil as opposed to merely having a different opinion.

Continue reading →

Well, This Is Embarrassing…

/ Jack Marshall / 3 Comments

I’ve received several inquiries about how to send gifts, or donations, or whatever they would be called, to Ethics Alarms. I was going to respond yesterday, but “Giving Tuesday” annoys me, so I put it off a day.

I’m enrolled in both Zelle and BILL, though I must say I’m unimpressed with both so far, and my bank loused up my attempts to set up Stripe. Obviously, I appreciate any expressions of appreciation: I don’t work on Ethics Alarms for money, but I have to do something for money. I know many of you have sent suggestions for monetizing the blog, but it is more important to me to have readers than to make this a profit center. I think, all things considered, EA had a good year even if I personally did not.

I also appreciate feedback, on the blog or off: my email is jamproethics@verizon.net, my phone in the office is 703-548-5229, and my address, should you be moved to engage in holiday charity (but I’m not a non-profit!) is

Jack Marshall, 2707 Westminster Place, Alexandria, VA, 22305.

“Monica Crowley and the Death of the Plagiarism Scandal,” The Sequel

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

President-elect Trump today nominated Monica Crowley to be “Ambassador, Assistant Secretary of State, and Chief of Protocol,” a position that will coordinate and oversee U.S.-hosted events of note such as America’s 250th Independence Day anniversary in 2026; the FIFA World Cup in 2026 and the Olympic Games in Los Angeles in 2028.  The position requires Senate confirmation. In reporting the nomination, The Hill described Crowley as “a former Fox News contributor,” which is deceitful and a cheap shot: she was that, but her experience is much more varied than that would suggest, and Crowley has legitimate credentials for that job—more, in fact, than many other recent nominations announced by Trump.

Crowley also, however, is a serial plagiarist, and her latest assignment from Trump—the previous one was in 2019, when then-President Trump announced Crowley’s appointment as Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs in the Treasury Department—is another canary dying in the ethics mine.

Continue reading →

Baseball’s Foolish, Offensive “Golden At-Bat” Proposal

/ Jack Marshall / 26 Comments

I have long believed that baseball’s Commissioner Rob Manfred doesn’t understand the game he oversees and maybe even doesn’t like it much. My assessment (I’ve been proven right a lot lately, have you noticed?) has been confirmed in a recent baseball podcast in which Manfred was the guest. He expressed enthusiasm for the proposed rule change being called “The Golden At-Bat.” If enacted, this gimmick would allow a team to send its best hitter up to the plate in any situation whether it was his turn in the lineup or not, but only once a game.

This disgusting device is what one might expect from a leader who inflicted the “zombie runner” on the game because people who weren’t baseball fans don’t appreciate extra-inning games and the players don’t like having to play overtime without compensation.

The Athletic’s Jason Stark, who tried to write a neutral report on this monstrosity, asked former manager of the Rays, Cubs and Angels, Joe Maddon, what he thought. Maddon is as close to an intellectual as one is likely to find in baseball (which is not all that close), and he found the concept repulsive.

Continue reading →

Ethics Quote of the Day: The New York Times [Link Added]

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

“Mr. Patel has also called for using the Justice Department more aggressively to uncover who in the government is providing information to news reporters, and said that leakers should be prosecuted. He wrote in his book that all federal employees should be forced to submit to monthly scans of their devices “to determine who has improperly transferred classified information, including to the press.”

—Elizabeth Williamson and Charlie Savage in “Kash Patel Has Plan to Remake the F.B.I. Into a Tool of Trump”

The news media is clearly frightened that its various methods of spreading propaganda on behalf of the Left and that totalitarian-leaning cabal’s strangle-hold on the government is imperiled by Donald Trump’s return. The article that the quote above comes from is an excellent example. Good.

Gee, Trump’s FBI nominee Kash Patel  (above) will actually use law enforcement to enforce the law. The Horror. Providing leaks to reporters, from inside the government or from inside any legitimate organization, is a breach of ethics warranting dismissal and civil penalties. For a lawyer to do it is grounds for disbarment. In many instances, leaking to the media by a government employee is illegal. Continue reading →

Unethical Tweet of the Week: “The View” DEI Hispanic, Ana Navarro-Cárdenas 

/ Jack Marshall / 28 Comments

Navarro, a fixture on ABC’s “The View,” has been an embarrassment to all of her media employers; they have just been too foolish to realize it. She’s a fake Republican/conservative, initially hired by CNN as a token so she could bash Donald Trump and claim objectivity. She isn’t witty, analytical or smart and has a speech impediment: if she were a white male, she would be defending DUI cases.

That tweet is special. She’s allegedly a lawyer, and she doesn’t know what a precedent is? The precedent is a President giving a suspiciously extensive pardon including crimes that haven’t been charged yet that the President might have directly benefited from to his son. That’s never happened before because it directly benefits the President and has the appearance of impropriety.

The whole tweet, moreover, is based on a passel of rationalizations falsely applied, like “Everybody does it” (#1) and “There are worse things” (#22). “Every President” doesn’t pardon their immediate family. The closest analog was Bill Clinton pardoning his half-brother for a cocaine conviction, but Roger’s crimes were neither as numerous nor as serious as Hunter’s, nor did anyone think Bill had any connection to them.

Saying that Trump also appointed his father-in-law as French ambassador is as relevant to Navarro’s argument as writing, “And he has bad breath, too!” That factoid has nothing to do with the pardon.

Additionally, citing Wilson, Clinton and Trump as Presidential role models in a matter of ethics is idiotic strategy. They are three of the most ethically-inert of all our Chief Executives, and those pardons match their proclivities. Defending Biden by comparing him to that trio is desperate.

I saved the best for last, though: Navarro-Cárdenas is making Americans dumber by spreading Presidential fiction. Woodrow Wilson had no brother-in-law named “Hunter DeButts,” so he couldn’t have pardoned him.

This pure fiction, the results of Navarro being hoaxed or the victim of an AI “hallucination”: either way, it’s irresponsible journalism. She obviously didn’t check her facts before making a false statement, one that impugned a President (though one who earned a lot of impugning).

“Ick” or Ethics? The Miracle Baby

/ Jack Marshall / 21 Comments

Awww. Isn’t that romantic? Two inmates charged with murderer managed to conceive a love child while in prison without ever meeting each other face to face.

Daisy Link, 29, is charged with second-degree murder after being accused of killing her boyfriend in 2022. Joan Depaz, 23, (pronounced “JO-an”] is facing trial for first-degree murder. Both are being held at Metrowest Detention Center in Miami.

Link began talking to Depaz through the connecting vents in their cells. They fell in love. Then the love birds decided to have a child together. So Depaz deposited his semen in Saran Wrap about five times a day for about a month. The packages were pulled through the vents by Link using bedding material. Link inserted the fresh sperm using a yeast infection applicator. Eventually…success! She became pregnant, and now Depaz’s mother is raising the baby girl born in June.

Officials are conducting an internal affairs investigation. Yes, I’d agree that this is prudent.

What a lucky kid. She gets to grow up with the prospect of having both parents locked up until she’s out of high school, after being raised by a family that already spawned one killer, and is stuck with some problematic material from the gene pool. Memories of “It’s Alive” are creeping through my fertile but twisted brain.

Still, you never know: where there is life, there is hope. Some remarkable people have been born under less promising conditions. I think.

______________

Pointer: JutGory

Another Ethics Issue Highlighted By Biden’s Hunter Pardon [Corrected]

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

President Biden’s controversial and extreme pardon of his black sheep son did more than call into (further) question his honesty, integrity and trustworthiness. It also highlighted another ugly facet of his failed Presidency.

The power to grant clemency is enshrined in the Constitution is an important failsafe device against legal injustice.  When judges or juries convict an innocent person or impose an unjust sentence, often after unethical prosecutorial conduct, Presidents and governors, in the case of state crimes, possess the  irreversible power to either commute a sentence to issue a pardon, which wipes the slate clean and removes the conviction altogether. Sure the power, like all powers, can be abused, has been abused and will be abused, but it is still necessary. However, President Biden has used that power appropriately less frequently than any modern President, though our criminal laws have multiplied.

“Mr. Biden has granted 25 pardons and commuted the sentences of 131 other people, according to the most recent Justice Department data,” wrote law professors Rachel E. Barkow and Mark Osler in a September 2024 editorial in The New York Times. “That is a mere 1.4 percent of the petitions he has received, based on our analysis…Mr. Biden has issued fewer clemency grants so far than the 238—144 pardons and 94 commutations—issued by Mr. Trump during his first administration,” the Times’ Kenneth Vogel noted this week.

True, there is still time for Biden to do some good with his pardon and clemency powers, but he should have been using them all along. Biden is extending a pattern in which Presidents increasingly eschew the pardon power. “Between 1932 and 1988 the percentage of total cases acted on by the president that had been sent to him with the Justice Department’s blessing averaged around 30%,”  a 2015 piece by the Collateral Consequences Resource Center revealed. “The percentage of cases sent forward with a favorable recommendation dropped to single digits beginning with the presidency of George H.W. Bush, and it has dropped even lower in the past 15 years…The absolute numbers also tell a tale: President [Barack] Obama…granted more sentence commutations than any president since Richard Nixon, but fewer full pardons than any president since John Adams.”

Ah yes, Obama. He was a notable hypocrite on the matter of pardons. Continue reading →

Regarding Whether Canadians Are “More Free” Than Americans…

/ Jack Marshall / 23 Comments

The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, a government agency, decreed that the township of Emo must pay damages to Borderland Pride, a Canadian LGBTQ+ activist group, for refusing to proclaim “Pride Month” in 2020. Borderland Pride had “requested” that Emo declare June of that year as Pride Month—now it is clear that this was no mere request— and display a rainbow flag for one week. The township refused, the bigots. How dare they! Now it must pay the organization $10,000 with the other $5,000 coming from Emo mayor Harold McQuaker. The tribunal also ordered McQuaker and the Chief Administrative Officer of the municipality to complete a “Human Rights 101” training course offered by the Ontario Human Rights Commission within 30 days.

In case you missed a class or two, the damages are called “compelled speech,” a cornerstone of totalitarianism. The “Human Rights 101” training course is called “re-education,” or “brain-washing.” In the United States, such a result would be unimaginable, or at least is right now, since Kamala Harris wasn’t elected.

Whew! Close call, eh?

Continue reading →