MRC Watchdogs churn out breaking news on a daily basis. Don't miss Today's Highlights, where you can keep up with the top MRC content, whether it's the latest study on media bias, a glaring omission from the elitist media, or how the Big Tech companies are serving up the same leftist spin as the media.  Top Stories: Top CBS, NBC Shows Ignore Case of Actual Journalist Being Jailed by Actual Dictator Big Four News Apps Erase Don Lemon’s Grand Jury Indictment Finally, Some Journalisming! NY Times Front-Pager Exposes Epstein Ties to Clinton Machine January Job Growth Shocks Analysts by More than Doubling Expectations   Top CBS, NBC Shows Ignore Case of Actual Journalist Being Jailed by Actual Dictator CBS and NBC Flagship Shows Completely Ignore Jimmy Lai's 20-Year Sentence — Top evening and morning programs on CBS (CBS Evening News, CBS Mornings) and NBC (NBC Nightly News, Today) provided zero coverage of pro-democracy journalist Jimmy Lai's February 8, 2026, sentencing to two decades in prison by the CCP-controlled Hong Kong judiciary — with CBS offering only a fleeting scrolling headline during a commercial break. Actual Journalist Jailed by Actual Dictator Gets Minimal Airtime — While an "actual journalist" like 78-year-old Jimmy Lai faces what his family describes as a de facto death sentence for running a newspaper that defended freedom and accountability (after Apple Daily was forced to close in 2021), major networks largely skipped the story — unlike their intense focus on domestic cases involving figures like Don Lemon. Media Hypocrisy Exposed in Selective Outrage Over Authoritarianism — ABC's Good Morning America gave the only notable segment among big-three morning shows (February 10), but evening broadcasts ignored it; PBS and niche outlets covered it more extensively — highlighting how U.S. networks prioritize narratives of "authoritarianism in America" while downplaying or erasing real oppression by the Chinese Communist Party, even as Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the sentence "unjust and tragic."   Big Four News Apps Erase Don Lemon’s Grand Jury Indictment Big Four News Apps Shield Don Lemon from Indictment Scrutiny — Apple News, Google News, MSN, and Yahoo News collectively erased or buried Don Lemon's federal grand jury indictment (January 29, 2026) tied to the Cities Church riot, limiting coverage to just 8 stories — all from left-leaning outlets — and avoiding any headlines that mentioned the grand jury's probable-cause finding. Misleading Framing as 'Arrest' Instead of Indictment — Rather than highlighting the grand jury's role in charging Lemon with conspiracy and religious-freedom violations, the apps' rare coverage fixated on a "simple arrest" by the DOJ, creating a softer narrative that downplays evidence and insulates the former CNN anchor from accountability. Yahoo News Delivers Total Blackout, Others Offer Token Left-Leaning Coverage — Yahoo News completely ignored the story across its top 20 promoted slots (promoting distractions like dog breeds and clickbait), while the other three apps provided minimal, biased exposure exclusively through sympathetic left-leaning sources — exposing how dominant news aggregators act as gatekeepers to control narratives and protect favored figures.   Finally, Some Journalisming! NY Times Front-Pager Exposes Epstein Ties to Clinton Machine Rare Accountability from the Prestige Press — Even liberal outlets like The New York Times occasionally deliver real investigative journalism on Democrats, as seen in its front-page exposé on Ghislaine Maxwell's key role in launching the Clinton Global Initiative — including budget input, coordination with aides, and arranging $1 million in funding — based on newly released Epstein files. Media Double Standard Exposed — While broadcast networks have lavished over 1,000 minutes on Epstein stories since last summer (almost entirely focused on Trump connections), they largely ignored or downplayed the Times' major Clinton-related scoop: CBS and NBC provided zero coverage, ABC offered just ~20 seconds, and follow-up discussions (e.g., PBS's extended Epstein segment) conveniently omitted the Clintons entirely. Strategic Media Monitoring Tactic — When a "prestige press" outlet like the Times breaks a damaging story on Democrats from the front page, the real test of bias comes next: Do the major networks amplify it? In this case, their near-silence on Maxwell's documented aid to the Clintons — despite heavy Epstein-Trump focus — underscores a clear pattern of selective outrage and uneven scrutiny.   January Job Growth Shocks Analysts by More than Doubling Expectations January Jobs Report Delivers Major Beat — U.S. employers added 130,000 nonfarm payroll jobs — more than doubling economists' forecasts (55,000–70,000 consensus) — with private-sector growth surging to 172,000 and the unemployment rate dropping to 4.3%, signaling a stronger-than-expected labor market rebound. Federal Downsizing Fuels Efficiency Gains — Federal government payrolls fell by another 34,000 in January (total drop of 327,000 since October 2024), hitting the lowest level since 1966 as a share of the workforce — proving that reducing bureaucracy can coexist with overall job growth and even contribute to broader economic improvement. Solid, Broad-Based Progress Amid Prior Weakness — Despite downward revisions showing 2025 added only 181,000 jobs (far below initial reports), January's gains — driven by health care, construction, and declining part-time/underemployment — mark the strongest monthly increase since April 2025 and highlight positive momentum under current policies.

It is interesting what the Elitist Media evening news networks choose to report, and what they choose to omit. The CBS Evening News completely omitted, for example, the deaths of four Indiana Amish at the hands of an illegal alien truck driver. But taking down a rainbow flag? That’s just a bridge too far.  Watch the report on the removal of a Pride flag from the Stonewall National Monument in its entirety, as aired on the CBS Evening News on Tuesday, February 10th, 2026: If only the 4 Indiana Amish killed by an illegal alien truck driver were rainbow flags, they might garner coverage on the CBS Evening News pic.twitter.com/OgH42Pz6Jp — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) February 11, 2026 TONY DOKOUPIL: The Stonewall National Monument in New York City marks what is widely considered to be the birthplace of the LGBTQ rights movement, but it can no longer fly this Pride flag under a new directive from the Trump administration, part of a wider rolling back of diversity initiatives nationwide. Here is what it looked like today after the flag that flew for years was quietly removed. City lawmakers have condemned the removal, one posting on social media, quote: “they can not erase our history.”  I will remind you, again: not a second to spare for another fatal accident caused by an illegal alien truck driver with yet another non-domiciled license that entered into the country during the Biden years. But they found time for the Stonewall flag. It wasn’t that long ago that removing monuments was all the rage. The city of Boston removed a statute of a freed slave rising from his bondage. Likewise, a statue of Thomas Jefferson was removed from City Hall in New York City. You didn’t see such uproar coming from the media. Five years later, the media are more dismayed at the removal of a Pride flag than at the removal of historic monuments, treating it as a moral calamity more deserving of coverage than the aforementioned deadly illegal alien-induced truck accident. Decline is a choice.  

According to emails obtained by the great people at Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT), reporters from The New York Times and Politico worked alongside the Biden-Harris administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to try and concoct a record of climate leadership for then-Vice President Kamala Harris’s failed campaign. And, when it was all over, one fretted to their fellow liberals about the agency’s future under President Trump. On the latter example, reporter Kevin Bogardus — who works for Politico’s E&E News — fretted on January 6 that he was “reaching out to former EPA officials who served in Democratic and Republican administrations to hear what they think about what the agency accomplished during these past four years as well as what is under threat or will last during the incoming administration and beyond.” “Under threat”? The horror! Of course a D.C. journalist would frame the change of administrations that way. His questions even implied impending doom, wondering how much EPA had yet to spend from the bipartisan infrastructure act. Specifically, he expressed concern that about the EPA’s “Clean School Bus Program,” which “was appropriated $5 billion[.]” Bogardus did the same with the boondoogle known as the Inflation Reduction Act and EPA employees overall (given what Americans already knew would be mass layoffs). Going back to the campaign, Politico’s Zack Colman sought help in a July 25, 2024 e-mail to the EPA in confirming whether it’s “accurate to say VP Harris was instrumental in formulating the idea to send $20B in climate funding under the Inflation Reduction Act to community lenders.” An EPA officially replied to Colman and Bogardus with a comical word salad with political buzzwords looking to make fetch happen, alleging Harris was instrumental in what was called the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) as part of the Inflation Reduction Act: Vice President Kamala Harris is a leader who doesn’t do surface, she digs in and she was a driving force behind EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, a $27 billion program from the Inflation Reduction Act. The Vice President was actively engaged during the development of the program and emphasized the importance of community lenders in the work to reach underserved communities. Her engagement resulted in a program that will help ensure that families, small businesses, and community lenders, especially in disadvantaged and underserved areas, have access to billions of dollars of new capital they need to make climate and clean energy projects a reality in their neighborhoods. Now, just how absurd is this GGRF? Check out this definition from a far-left group called Evergreen Action: [T]he Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) is the largest grant program within the IRA. Not only does this provide a massive investment in pollution-reducing, clean energy technology, but it targets communities that have been historically overlooked and underserved and brings equity to the clean energy transition. And the program’s flexibility puts decision-making into states and communities’ hands—allowing local leadership to design and implement programing for maximum impact. This financing will have both immediate and long-lasting impact, by deploying clean energy projects in communities now, and supporting the creation of green banks that can finance clean energy projects well into the future.  With buzzwords like “equity,” “flexibility,”  “green banks,” and “undeserved,” theat sure seems like a slush fund to us! He was back for more on August 19, 2024 asking about Regan’s future if Harris were to win (or lose) the election. When there didn’t appear to be a response, he added another question hours later: “How would you characterize Administrator Regan’s working relationship with Vice President Harris? Have they worked closely together during the Biden-Harris administration? If so, on what issues?” They apparently called him the next day, leading Bogardus to give his fellow liberals a preview of how their comments to him would be characterized prior to publication (click “expand,” italics original to the e-mail): Many thanks for the phone call just now, Nick. I really appreciate it. As we discussed, regarding my questions about Administrator Regan’s future plans, you directed me to prior comments from Administrator Regan, including whether he is interested in being part of a potential Harris administration. I will use that in the following in italics in my story: EPA spokesperson Nick Conger directed E&E News to prior comments Administrator Michael Regan made about his future plans, including whether he was interested in being part of a potential Harris administration. “I’ve learned not to get out ahead of any conversations I’ve had with the president and the vice president,” Regan said at an event last month. Also, as we discussed as well, please pass on that on-the-record statement regarding Vice President Harris and Administrator Regan’s working relationship as soon as you can. Thanks so much again for your help and talk to you later! It must be nice to have the power to see how the elite press will characterize you beforehand. Rewind a week to August 12, 2024 and Times White House reporter Zolan Kanno-Youngs emailed this to an EPA official asking for help in finding examples of how Harris “shaped” the administration’s climate agenda through “big decisions”: Hope you’re well. I was referred to you by the vice president’s office for a story we’re doing on Vice President Kamala Harris’s time as vice president. We’re curious about exploring what the VP did and did not do on policy. What were the big decisions she made? How did she help shape some of the policies in Biden’s agenda? I thought the Administrator would be able to provide his perspective? The thing we’re looking for here is examples of the VP’s work, rather than just analysis. Of course, EPA press aide Timothy Carroll replied just over half an hour later: “Administrator Regan would be happy to chat on this and I think he can speak to a few examples, especially on the VP’s engagement in the development of EPA’s $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.” A search of Kamala Harris and Michael Regan in The Times’s database showed quite the sad trombone as such a story never materialized under his byline.

The horrific mass shooting as a high school in Canada wasn't just embarrassing to the Canadian establishment because of their passionate advocacy of gun control, especially so-called "assault weapons." It's another mass shooting committed by a transgender individual, and they just don't know how to handle it. They ended up sounding more sensitive to the T-Police than to the crime victims. One AP story just stuck vaguely to "her" pronouns:  VANCOUVER, British Columbia (AP) — The suspect in a Canada school shooting was an 18-year-old who had a history of police visits to her home to check on her mental health, authorities said Wednesday, a day after the attack that killed eight people in a remote part of British Columbia. Police said Jesse Van Rootselaar was found dead from an apparent self-inflicted wound following the assault on a school in the small mountain community of Tumbler Ridge. Royal Canadian Mounted Police Deputy Commissioner Dwayne McDonald said Van Rootselaar first killed her mother and stepbrother at the family home before attacking the nearby school.  A different AP report said  "A woman who police believed was the shooter was found dead, apparently from a self-inflicted wound, police said. The motive remained unclear." Not "a shooter who police believed was a woman." Time magazine echoed that online: A woman believed to be the shooter was found dead at the school from what police described as a “self‑inflicted injury.” Later, they said police described a “female in a dress with brown hair.” CNN.com reported "Police identified the alleged shooter in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, as Jesse Van Rootselaar, an 18-year-old female resident of the town who had “dropped out of school approximately four years ago.” Canada's National Post newspaper quickly went into Trans Defense mode:  The Tumbler Ridge shooter was a trans female. How rare is that? Five transgender people have previously been implicated in mass shootings, but U.S. organizations say they account for less than one tenth of one per cent of such shootings, despite being a larger proportion of the population On X, Libs of TikTok underlined this truth-defiance mode happened all over the internet:  NEW HOAX JUST DROPPED The media is reporting that a "female" shooter was responsible for massacring people at a school in Canada. Jesse Strang was a MAN pretending to be a woman. Media is covering up trans violence pic.twitter.com/ivkWbjrT64 — Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 11, 2026

On Tuesday, NewsBusters pointed out that the three major news networks aren't always interested in reporting on stories that don't fit their liberal agenda. That story referred to a violent anti-ICE protest in Minneapolis last Saturday, with over 40 arrests, which was passed over by the nightly newscasts of ABC, CBS and NBC, with only Fox News's Special Report covering it. Tuesday's House Ways & Means Committee hearing on "Foreign Influence In American Non-Profits" resulted in all three networks skipping the story. While the topic may seem like a big yawn on the surface, one of the goals of the hearing is to expose left=wing non-profits, who Committee Chairman Jason Smith accused of "sowing chaos" in the United States. That could include the Minneapolis anti-ICE protests.  According to The New York Post, "Radical leftist groups, including one financed with $7.8 million from progressive billionaire George Soros" are behind those protests. Despite all of this, Fox's Special Report was the only nightly newscast of the four to take on the hearing. Host Bret Baier introduced the report: "Foreign adversaries maybe targeting nonprofits to gain access inside the U.S. Lawmakers heard testimony today over how foreign cash funneled through those groups could be financing U.S. politics, protests, and the White House. Senior Foreign Policy Correspondent Gillian Turner reports from Capitol Hill." Turner's report opened with a clip of Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO), "To the tax-exempt groups hiding in darkness, and stirring up unrest in this country, know that this committee is coming for you." The stated purpose of the hearing alone makes it a newsworthy story, but apparently not if the groups doing the stirring up are left wing groups.  TURNER: The Chairman of House Ways And Means issued a warning to U.S. nonprofit groups in today's hearing. In the committee's crosshairs Code Pink  and The People's Forum, a left wing group focused on marginalized communities. Chairman Smith then added, "One of their largest donors is a wealthy former U.S. tech executive living in Shanghai." Turner followed up with the revelation that, "The Chinese government spent $11 billion last year according to the State Department, promoting pro-communist propaganda around the world." Again, extremely troubling and newsworthy stuff, one would assume. And there was more.  Turner played a clip of Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, Sarah Rogers, who claimed that some U.S. non-profits like Code Pink and The People's Forum take their money and relay their "pro communist" messages. She also said that some of causes pushed by, "this dark money network include pro-Palestine, pro-Hamas, anti-Israel causes, pro-communist, pro-Maduro causes."   As if all of that wasn't enough, Turner says Rogers told Fox that the State Department has traced CCP (Chinese Communist Party) money to groups involved in the anti-ICE protests.  Given the seriousness of these accusations, I'm sure it was an easy call for the Big 3 to stay far away. However, by doing so they did miss out on the predictable Democrat responses, including this one from Committee member Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), which Turner included in her report, "No tax-exempt organization has been more vulnerable or more welcoming to malign foreign influence than Donald Trump." It's the Left's answer to everything.