November, 16 2009, 10:50am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Brandon Hersh (202) 471-3205,bhersh@mediamatters.org
Going Rogue With the Facts?
To:
Interested Parties
From:
Ari Rabin-Havt, Media
Matters for America
Re:
Going
rogue with the facts?
Date:
Monday, November 16,
2009
WASHINGTON
To:
Interested Parties
From:
Ari Rabin-Havt, Media
Matters for America
Re:
Going
rogue with the facts?
Date:
Monday, November 16,
2009
Tomorrow, former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah
Palin's memoir Going Rogue: An American Life
will hit bookshelves across the country, and conservative media figures, including commentators from
Fox News, are already lining up to help Palin promote it.
Conservative radio
host Rush Limbaugh called it "one of the most substantive policy books I've
read" -- a claim at odds with statements by Fox News'
Carl Cameron, who said that the book "largely steers clear of politics and
policy." Greta Van Susteren devoted the opening
segment of her prime-time
program to Going Rogue without
mentioning that her husband advised Palin during the presidential campaign.
Palin is also reportedly set to make the rounds on Fox News, appearing on Van
Susteren's show as well as The O'Reilly
Factor and Hannity. In
her book, Palin returns the favor, thanking several Fox News
personalities by name as "bold and patriotic, fair and balanced media folks"
who "mak[e] the idiots' heads spin."
While the book is generating excitement and buzz within the conservative echo
chamber, it is riddled with factual inaccuracies. The book is also co-authored
by an extreme conservative figure who has a troubling history of launching
vicious attacks against the gay community and a checkered literary past marred
by shoddy scholarship, falsehoods, and over-the-top invective aimed at
Democrats.
Media Matters for America has been examining a copy of the book obtained in
advance of its release as part of its new "Right-Wing Book Watch"
project with the Progressive
Book Club and found that it contains a number of falsehoods:
Palin falsely suggests poor will be "hit
hardest" by cap and trade
Palin continues distortion of NY Times article to defend "palling around
with terrorists" claim
Palin falsely suggests she did not support
aerial hunting
Palin falsely suggests media did not
criticize Dems over fashion
Palin attacked "Democrat lawmaker" who's
actually a Republican
Palin's co-author, World
magazine features editor Lynn Vincent,
has a record of stridently attacking the gay community, likening gay people to
communists, and suggesting
that homosexuality is a mental disorder. Examples include:
- Gay
activists seeking to
make "deviance" appear "normal." [World, April 25, 2009]
- American
Psychiatric Association should still call homosexuality a disorder.
[World, June 15, 2002]
- Gay
people are like communists, seek "sexual gratification without
responsibility," wear dog collars. [World, April 10, 1999]
- Abortion
as "Black Genocide" [World, January 17, 2009]
Media
Matters also examined Vincent's previous book Donkey Cons: Sex, Crime, and Corruption in the
Democratic Party which she co-authored with Robert Stacy McCain, and found that the book is
marked by shoddy scholarship, falsehoods, and over-the-top invective aimed at
Democrats. Examples include:
- No
Republican "culture of corruption." In Chapter 1, Vincent
and McCain dismiss out of hand the idea of a Republican "culture of
corruption" and openly mocks the idea that Democrats would be able to
retake control of Congress in 2006 by campaigning against Republican
corruption.
- FDR
a "puppet" of Stalin. On Page 100, Vincent and McCain
wrote:
If anything was red and scary, it was the scab of
treachery that [Whittaker] Chambers peeled back to reveal a Democratic
administration teeming with a Communist infection, and despite repeated
warnings, doing nothing. One member of the HUAC [House Un-American Activities
Committee], a Republican congressman from California named Richard Nixon, believed
Chambers. His dogged pursuit of the truth ultimately revealed the extent to
which Joseph Stalin was pulling Roosevelt's
strings like those of a hapless puppet.
- Iraq's really real WMD programs. Vincent and
McCain repeatedly assert that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had a "WMD
program" that he was hiding from weapons inspectors prior to the 2003
invasion by American-led forces. On Page 105, they rebuffed the allegation that
no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.
- Democrats
"perilously close" to committing "treason."
Vincent and McCain wrote on Page 107:
Democrats want to have it both ways: they want to
whine that they were gullible dupes apparently incapable of their own competent
intelligence analysis and they
want to be put in charge of the country and the national defense. For the
basest of reasons -- to win a majority power in 2006 -- congressional Democrats
at this writing are misleading the American people, lying to them in time of
war, sowing doubt among American forces, twisting daggers in the hearts of
parents who have lost children, and shilling for the enemy. Constitutionally, that may not be treason. But it
appears perilously close.
- Clinton intentionally started Lewinsky scandal. On
Page 199, Vincent and McCain wrote that there is "merit" to the allegation
that the Clinton White House used the Monica Lewinsky scandal to intentionally
distract from the so-called "Chinagate" campaign finance
investigation.
As Palin travels the
conservative talk show circuit this week, Media
Matters will continue to debunk the former governor's false
assertions. For more information on Palin's memoir, please see:
https://mediamatters.org/search/tag/going_rogue__an_american_life
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
LATEST NEWS
Senate Dems Urge Treasury Chief to Crack Down on Rich Tax Dodgers
"The Treasury Department can and should exercise the full extent of its regulatory authority to limit this blatant abuse of our tax system by the ultrawealthy."
Mar 21, 2023
Four U.S senators this week called on Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen to use her existing authority to go after American billionaires and multimillionaires who "use trusts to shift wealth to their heirs tax-free, dodging federal estate and gift taxes."
"They are doing this in the open: Their wealth managers are bragging about how their tax dodging tricks will be more effective in the current economy," stressed Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
"While we look forward to continuing to partner with you on legislative solutions," the senators wrote to Yellen, "the Treasury Department can and should exercise the full extent of its regulatory authority to limit this blatant abuse of our tax system by the ultrawealthy."
Their letter to the Treasury leader, dated Monday and first reported by CBS MoneyWatch Tuesday, highlights that "only the wealthiest American families" are asked to pay transfer taxes such as the estate tax, gift tax, and generation-skipping transfer (GST) tax.
As the letter lays out:
Tax avoidance through grantor trusts starts with the ultrawealthy putting assets into a trust with the intention of transferring them to heirs. Grantor trusts are trusts where the grantor retains control over the assets, and the structures of some of these grantor trusts allow the transfer of massive sums tax-free. Tax planning via grantor trusts, including grantor retained annuity trusts (GRATs), is a kind of shell game, with a wealthy person and their wealth managers able to pass assets back and forth in ways that effectively pass wealth to heirs while minimizing tax liability.
Some of the wealthiest families further compound this tax avoidance with perpetual dynasty trusts, which can be used to shield assets from transfer tax liability indefinitely. For example, aggressive valuation discounts can artificially reduce the value of assets transferred into a trust below the GST tax exemption threshold, after which the assets can grow in perpetuity within a trust exempt from transfer tax.
"The ultrawealthy at the top of the socioeconomic ladder live by different rules than the rest of America, especially when it comes to our tax system," the letter charges. "As the richest Americans celebrate and take advantage of these favorable tax opportunities, middle-class families struggle with inflation and Republicans threaten austerity measures and the end of Social Security and Medicare."
To help force the richest Americans to "pay their fair share" in taxes, the senators are calling on Treasury to revoke a pair of tax code rulings from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS); require GRATs to have a minimum remainder value; reissue family limited partnership regulations; clarify that intentionally defective grantor trusts (IDGTs) are not entitled to stepped-up basis; and put out clarifying regulations on certain valuation rules for estate and gift taxes.
The senators also sent a series of questions—about potential administrative action, how much is estimated to be held in grantor trusts, and how much could be raised from cracking down on abuse—and requested a response from Treasury by April 3.
Their letter comes after President Joe Biden earlier this month introduced a budget blueprint for fiscal year 2024 that would hike taxes on the rich—proposed policies praised by progressive experts and advocates as "fair, popular, and long overdue."
Yellen last week appeared before the Senate Finance Committee—of which Warren and Whitehouse are members—to testify about the administration's proposal. She said in part that "our proposed budget builds on our economic progress by making smart, fiscally responsible investments. These investments would be more than fully paid for by requiring corporations and the wealthiest to pay their fair share."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden DOL Praised for Historic Suit Over Using Debt Threat to Stop Workers From Quitting
The department's "action against predatory stay-or-pay contracts sends a monumental message to employers: Obey the law or face repercussions," said the head of Towards Justice.
Mar 21, 2023
Workers' rights advocates are applauding the Biden administration this week for filing a historic lawsuit against a Brooklyn-based healthcare staffing agency for coercive contracts that allegedly violate federal labor law.
Biden's Department of Labor (DOL) says in a complaint filed against Advanced Care Staffing (ACS) and CEO Sam Klein in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York that "in flagrant disregard" of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the company "has entered into contracts purporting to require employees to complete at least three years of full-time work for ACS in order to retain their wages."
"The contracts warn employees that if they leave ACS's employ before three years' time, they will face ACS and its lawyers in an arbitration behind closed doors, where ACS will demand that employees kick back much of their hard-earned wages—including wages to which they are entitled under federal law," the complaint continues.
"Under this scheme, the pay that ACS promises its employees may be converted into nothing more than a loan that employees must repay with interest and fees, leaving some employees with no compensation at all, much less the wages required by the FLSA," the document adds. "The FLSA prohibits an employer from holding employees' wages hostage, allowing employees to keep their wages free and clear only if employees remain in the service of their employer."
The DOL, led by acting Secretary Julie Su, aims not only to end this "unlawful conduct" but also "to recover unpaid wages and liquidated damages due to the former employees from whom ACS has already initiated arbitrations, and to restrain defendants from withholding unpaid wages from their former employees."
Solicitor of Labor Seema Nanda reiterated in a statement Monday that "federal law forbids employers from clawing back wages earned by employees, for employers' own benefit."
"Employers cannot use workers as insurance policies to unconditionally guarantee future profit streams. Nor can employers use arbitration agreements to shield unlawful practices," Nanda said. "The Department of Labor will do everything in its power to make sure employees are being paid their hard-earned wages, and to safeguard them from these types of exploitative practices."
Bloomberg last September reported on Benzor Shem Vidal, a nurse who immigrated to the U.S. from the Philippines and took legal action against ACS for forcing him to work in "brutal and dangerous conditions," including simultaneously caring for 40 patients.
As Bloomberg detailed:
Under Vidal's contract, Advanced Care Staffing could sue him in arbitration for damages if he quit within three years of starting work—and make him pay the legal costs, according to the complaint in federal court in Brooklyn. The conditions were so onerous that they violate human trafficking laws meant to protect people from being exploited for labor, Vidal said.
"Mr. Vidal believed it was impossible for him to provide adequate care to patients but was also terrified to resign," his lawyers wrote. "He knew that his contract with Advanced Care Staffing purported to allow the company to pursue legal action against him, with potentially ruinous financial consequences, if he decided to terminate his employment."
Advanced Care Staffing did not immediately respond to an inquiry. The company has placed thousands of employees at facilities in New York and surrounding states, according to its website.
The DOL complaint lays out his experience over several pages and concludes that "defendants have a policy and practice of entering into contracts with employees with identical or substantially similar contract provisions to the 2022 contract with Vidal."
Celebrating the new case against ACS, Towards Justice executive director David Seligman declared Tuesday that "DOL's action against predatory stay-or-pay contracts sends a monumental message to employers: Obey the law or face repercussions."
"A fundamental premise of our labor laws is that employers pay workers, and not the other way around," said Seligman. "This lawsuit builds on a multiagency effort from the Biden administration to curb coercive contracts that rob workers of bargaining power. We look forward to what's next."
As Seligman noted in a series of tweets, other actions include the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) last June launching an inquiry into practices and products that may leave workers indebted to their employers, and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in January proposing a ban on noncompete clauses.
After noting that the DOL is taking on the ACS case as a minimum wage fight, Seligman said another important aspect is the department's allegation that the company's "arbitration requirements violate federal law too, not just because the employer is attempting to shield unlawful practices but also because the arbitration requirement itself shifts costs onto workers."
The DOL complaint states that ACS's arbitration and contract demands "have an impermissible chilling effect on their employees' ability to effectively vindicate their federal statutory rights, including the protection to be free from an unsafe or hazardous workplace, and to obtain unpaid wages due."
Student Borrower Protection Center senior policy adviser Chris Hicks on Tuesday stressed that such problems stretch far beyond one company, saying that "whether it's training repayment agreement provisions (TRAPs) or stay-or-pay contracts, employers are using debt as a tool of coercion to force workers to stay in low-paying, unsafe jobs."
Hicks also highlighted that "the Biden administration has been strengthening its whole-of-government approach to ensure workers are able to fully and freely exercise their rights—including their right to depart without the looming threat of debt."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Investigation Belies UK Claim That No Civilians Were Killed in Iraq-Syria Bombings
"Britain claims a 'perfect' war against Islamic State in Iraq," said a report co-author. "It isn't credible, and it isn't true."
Mar 21, 2023
British airstrikes targeting Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria likely killed dozens of noncombatants despite claims by U.K. military leaders that no civilians died during such bombings, a major investigation by the monitor group Airwars and The Guardian revealed on Tuesday.
"Britain claims a 'perfect' war against Islamic State in Iraq. Thousands of missiles fired, thousands of fighters killed, and not a single civilian harmed," Guardian senior international affairs reporter and report co-author Emma Graham-Harrison tweeted. "It isn't credible, and it isn't true."
Airwars obtained via Freedom of Information Act requests previously classified documents from which the group identified eight airstrikes that may have been carried out by U.K. warplanes in which at least 32 civilians were killed.
"Working with The Guardian, we visited Iraq to search for the victims mentioned in the original casualty allegations and piece together what happened," said Airwars. "One of those we found was the Younis family in Mosul."
Using declassified reports, coalition statements, survivor and other witness interviews, and 3D modeling, Airwars reconstructed the November 29, 2016 strike that killed a 6-year-old member of the Younis family in the Iraqi city.
"We found that shortly before 4:00 pm a mission commander requested a strike on ISIS militants firing at Iraqi allies. After the strike was approved, coalition analysts reported losing sight of their initial targets," the group said. "They ultimately identified another group of males on the sidewalk carrying a 'possible' weapon."
Around this time, Enam Younis and her children left their home "looking for safety a few streets away. Both Enam and her father said there were no ISIS fighters within 30 meters. As they walked past the door of the neighboring house, the missile detonated."
As The Guardian reports:
Enam Younis, 31 at the time, was thrown to the ground by the blast and has never walked again. Her older daughter, Taiba, 6, inquisitive and desperate to start school, was killed instantly. Zahra, just 3, was hurled over a fence. She survived but was peppered with shrapnel that tore into her stomach and is still lodged deep in her skull. Doctors have said that if it moves, it could cause devastating brain injury.
There was a third child, Ali, a toddler too young to walk, who was shielded from the drone cameras—and the worst of the blast—by his mother's arms, but who still lost part of a foot and hand.
Younis was taken out of Mosul for treatment and even six years later, her memories are too painful for her to return to the city she called home. "It is still impossible for me to think about going to Mosul now," she said weeping. "I didn't even visit my daughter's grave. I can't do it."
A U.K. Ministry of Defense spokesperson declined to confirm or deny whether British forces carried out any of the airstrikes detailed in the investigation while insisting that "there is no evidence or indication that civilian casualties were caused by strikes in Syria and Iraq."
"The U.K. always minimizes the risk of civilian casualties through our rigorous processes and carefully examines a range of evidence to do this, including comprehensive analysis of the mission data for every strike," the spokesperson told The Guardian.
However, according to Airwars:
Politicians, campaigners, and civil society groups have consistently raised concerns about the U.K.'s lack of civilian harm monitoring and accountability in Iraq and Syria. The Netherlands has since paid millions in compensation to victims of its strikes, while the United States has launched major policy reforms to learn the lessons of the campaign. The U.K. remains an outlier, claiming it had robust mechanisms for monitoring the impact of its strikes—including post-strike battle damage assessments—and refusing to review its policies.
Airwars has also accused U.S. officials of habitually undercounting the number of civilians killed by American bombs and bullets.
The report notes that while "civilian victims of U.K. airstrikes can theoretically claim condolence payments from the British government," those attempting to do so "would face severe procedural and legal hurdles."
"The U.K. has not publicly compensated a single victim of a British airstrike and there is no clear process for victims and their families to apply," Airwars said.
Airwars estimates that between 8,197 and 13,254 Iraqi and Syrian civilians have been killed by U.S.-led coalition forces in 1,525 separate strikes since 2014. This figure stands in stark contrast with a coalition estimate of 1,437 civilians killed in 342 separate incidents.
Since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq 20 years ago, between 550,000 and 580,000 Iraqis and Syrians have died, according to Airwars.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
SUPPORT OUR WORK.
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100%
reader supported.
reader supported.