Palm Beach Post Court Reporter Admits to Bias in TracyvFAU Coverage

“Nobody Likes Tracy”

What Might Have Coverage Looked Like?

A source close to MemoryHoleBlog has informed us they contacted Palm Beach Post courts reporter Jane Musgrave via telephone following the December 2017 trial of TracyvFAU wherein FAU Professor James Tracy sued his former employer for civil rights violations. This individual asked the reporter why the Post‘s coverage was so egregiously biased against Tracy and favorable toward FAU.

“Well, nobody likes [Tracy],” Musgrave replied. “He got what he deserved” because “kids died.”

When the party pressed Musgrave on why the newspaper’s coverage included so many glaring omissions of important evidence and testimony–content that would have put Tracy in a more positive light–the reporter responded, “We weren’t allowed to report that,” and that at the end of the day the Post would never publish anything supportive of the plaintiff.

This conversation confirms what the TracyvFAU plaintiff and his legal team observed as both the Post and South Florida Sun-Sentinel‘s sensational and flagrantly misleading coverage throughout the trial and even after the jury verdict was rendered.

The story titles alone suggest the Post‘s clear bias, with the Post referring to Tracy as the “Sandy Hook denier.” In one “opinion piece” the newspaper even solicits an embellished defamatory account of Tracy’s teaching style from one of its salaried employees.

-“FAU Professor James Tracy Claims School Fired Him for Sandy Hook Rants,” Palm Beach Post, November 30, 2017

-“Ex-FAU Prof on Trial Tries To Downplay Attack on Sandy Hook Parents,” Palm Beach Post, December 1, 2017

-“Christie: Tracy-vs-FAU More about Arrogance Than Free Speech, Insubordination,” PalmBeachPost.com, December 5, 2017

-“What It Was Like in the Class of FAU’s Conspiracy-Spinning Professor,” Palm Beach Post, December 8, 2017

-“Claims against FAU by Sandy Hook Denier Headed To Federal Jury Monday,” Palm Beach Post, December 8, 2017

After lengthy litigation and a trial where a federal judge repeatedly defended FAU and its administrators from the bench, the Post continued to ignore crucial testimony given by Tracy’s colleagues that demonstrated just how haphazardly the university’s provosts and deans applied the “Outside Employment/Activities Policy,” and how Tracy was virtually the only employee required to submit an “Outside Employment Form” for his protected speech on a personal blog.

One must keep in mind that FAU is among South Florida’s largest employers, with thousands of taxpayer dollars to spend on largely ineffective advertising  in both newspapers. As one Post staffer explained to journalist and private investigator Jose Lambiet in 2017,

“Business people in the community are no fools. They know advertising in the Post no longer gets results. The news content is so weak that nobody’s reading. It’s like to trying to sell shit.”

Both the Post and Sun-Sentinel are so desperate to please this large advertiser that they are willing to effectively skew their coverage of one of the most significant First Amendment trials in recent history to fit what they perceive to be their readers’ prejudices–in fact, misconceptions that these papers and national news media played a major role in creating via slipshod if not fraudulent coverage of the December 2012 Newtown shooting. In this vein Musgrave is forced to function as an anti-journalist–one who documents an event then proceeds to deliberately deceive her readership.

More recently, Musgrave reported on US District Judge Robin L. Rosenberg’s decision to revisit her misguided Halloween day summary judgement ruling and deny the plaintiff a new trial, pointing to the judge’s “stinging rebuke of Tracy’s claim that the jury got it wrong …

“The central premise in (Tracy’s) motion for new trial is that the jury’s verdict was against the great weight of the evidence,” Rosenberg wrote in a 31-page ruling. “This contention is without merit. Instead, the court concludes that the great weight of the evidence at trial was in favor of (FAU).”

Musgrave’s reportage, probably at her editor’s behest, repeatedly emphasizes Rosenberg’s  ruling to deny the plaintiff a new trial.

Further, it is obvious that Musgrave never read Tracy’s Motions (here and here) since her slapdash piece attributes their authorship to Louis Leo IV, when in fact they were primarily authored and signed by co-counsel.

 

The Sun-Sentinel‘s brief story of Rosenberg’s ruling is (unsurprisingly) more reckless, as education reporter Marc Freeman fails to even mention the fact that the case is on its way to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

At the end of the day the eight-hundred pound gorilla in TracyvFAU must necessarily be overlooked by the Palm Beach Post, who ultimately answer to its owners-in-abesntia, the politically liberal Cox family. James Tracy stands accused of calling out Democratic President Barack Obama’s administration of staging a mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in order to institute more stringent gun control laws. In December 2015 Tracy was (falsely) accused of criminally harassing the ostensibly Jewish “Sandy Hook parents” while consorting with “holocaust deniers.” These inflammatory accusations ultimately led to his termination.

According to the Post itself, Judge Rosenberg’s ultra-wealthy “Palm Beach parents are both well-known Democratic donors.” Rosenberg was appointed to her federal judgeship by President Obama in 2014. Rosenberg’s spouse, former Palm Beach County state attorney Michael McAuliffe, is a career Democratic Party politician. It is no secret in South Florida that he has major congressional and quite possibly gubernatorial aspirations.

Such ambition requires maintaining the good graces of Democratic Party power brokers whose central political platform is celebrating Obama’s political “achievements” and stampeding the US public into enacting stricter gun control. If this isn’t enough McAuliffe’s law partner, Martin Reeder, is the Palm Beach Post‘s attorney. One can only ponder how thick the “firewall” is between the newspaper’s editorial room and the McAuliffe-Reeder firm.

Rosenberg is also a former board member of the radical Anti-Defamation League, the Zionist espionage and agit-prop organization that stands vehemently against extending free speech to all and believes that any Gentile who so much as sneezes the wrong way is “hateful” or “anti-semitic.” The ADL is typically so extreme that its mention often elicits embarrassed eye-rolls from many in the Jewish diaspora.

Despite these conflicts of interest Rosenberg apparently never considered recusing herself. She instead allowed the plaintiff to embark on a costly litigation process then slammed the door in his face with a comprehensive October 31, 2017 summary judgement order in favor of FAU. With the trial the court simply gave defendant FAU, with the assistance of its advertising clientele, full exoneration in the court of public opinion.

Imagine for a moment if Tracy was a progressive-left professor terminated from his tenured faculty position for blogging about “climate change,” the villainous President Trump, and the conspiracy theory that Trump allied with Russia to subvert the 2016 election process. One need only look at the many Facebook pages, Twitter accounts, and blogs of American academics that fit this very mold–some of whom work at Florida Atlantic and the state’s other publicly-funded universities. Imagine that the judge comes from a “well-known” Republican Party donor family and was appointed to the bench by Donald Trump.  Imagine the judge is married to a prominent Republican Party politician. Imagine the judge was Episcopalian and an active member of the National Rifle Association.

Then imagine just how different the Post‘s coverage of TracyvFAU would be?

 

0

Leave a Reply

7 thoughts on “Palm Beach Post Court Reporter Admits to Bias in TracyvFAU Coverage”

  1. OMG – this is SO HARD to imagine. Sadly.

    The tactics outlined here are typical of those utilized by universities (and others with substantial resources) when sued for their misdeeds – to make the plaintiff spend huge amounts of money on legal fees, bankrupting him if possible, while buying off the judiciary and the press so that said plaintiff loses not only his case but also his reputation.

    And then if the plaintiff has the chutzpah to appeal, bankrupting him even further in an attempt to ruin his life utterly. This is how TPTB get away with their criminal abuse. I think there may be a few honest judges in the system. Hopefully Prof Tracy v FAU will encounter one in the appeal process.

  2. I’m not buying this reporter’s claim that she “… wasn’t allowed…” to report facts favorable to Tracy. It implies that she penned an entirely different and balanced article first, sans all the defamatory messages hidden between the lines. Then she was either told to completely restructure the article or it was done for her.

    It looks more to me like she was given the assignment with very clear parameters, which she carried out without question. Although I’ll bet she was very willing to deceive her readers and knew the score right from the start. I think it’s very unlikely that she’s a victim of the paper’s editorial direction.

  3. Does not almost everyone in our society who does almost every type of job or occupation or profession have a supervisor? A supervisor is someone to whom one may lodge a complaint against any employee for alleged misconduct and expect consideration of the complaint and favorable action if the allegations are sustained. The supervisor is employed by the owners or operators of the business or school or government which may be the responsible party. For example a mechanic at a car dealer has a supervisor, usually the shop manager. If you have work done on your car which was not done properly you complain to the manager for consideration and attention and expect action on your complaint. When I was a professor in the physics department at UGA my supervisor was the department head or the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. Once a student missed a final examination without permission. When I gave them a different examination than others took at the regular time, her mother drove down from another state and complained to the Dean that I had been unfair to her daughter by giving her a different test than all the others took. My response to this was that she could have discovered the questions from others and therefore I was justified in giving her a different test. The Dean sustained my position because I was maintaining academic standards instead of possibly allowing some one to discover the questions and unfairly find the answers to the test in advance.

    Almost everyone has a supervisor except Federal Judges in Federal Courts who are usually former lawyers. These are considered very special people in our society and have conned the lawmakers, who are also usually all lawyers, that they must not have have a supervisor because it might infringe on “justice”. The duped public is told these judges are so ethical and honest and perfect as humans and lawyers that they do not require supervision like all other employees in all fields in society. They are prohibited from having any conflicts of interest but they are not required to prove they do not have such conflicts.

    For example Judge Rosenberg would be prohibited from talking to any friends or even other judges or lawyers about James Tracy in telephone or private conversations yet she was not forced to document that she had complied with such rules and demands. In other words, she cannot be asked rude questions and be compelled to answer them under oath and penalties of perjury like she can force others to do in her court. She is basically a dictator in her court. The only recourse for these unethical and improper and even illegal activities, in secret, behind closed doors, is to appeal to another court, a very difficult and expensive and unfair process also full of the same conflicts and problems as the lower court was. There is no supervisor of this judge to whom one may write a letter or talk to or complain about possible conflicts and failures to follow the rules and law as was discussed in this good article.

    This is a dismal failure to treat judges as if they are some sort of royalty or king or queen with assigned powers to basically do as they please and not have to provide the same proof of their own actions as they demand of lowly citizens who appear in their corrupt courts. This is all a shameful disgrace. This has all been documented by a very disturbing and profound book “IBM and the Corruption of Justice in America” by Earl Carey, Bismarck House, St. Louis, 1992, 354 pages. Carey acted as his own lawyer pro se. He lists 42 Federal Judges, by name and location, from Anchorage to Phoenix, from Pasadena, to St. Paul, who patently and with malice, violated all the rules and law they took a meaningless oath to follow. He even tried to have federal judges arrested by the FBI for failures to follow the law and rules and lied about facts. Of course he got no help from the FBI because the “profession” of judges has perpetuated the scam and con that somehow they are above all scrutiny as lowly citizens are who are not to be trusted.

    Judges are to be fully trusted with their word they are telling the truth and acting according to the law at all times without being forced to prove their claims as they hypocritically demand of all citizens in their corrupt courtrooms. Judge Rosenberg is no exception as documented in the article and many others. Our so called legal system is a dismal failure and disgrace. Could the “profession” of law be the “oldest” profession? Even lawyers were banned in the mythical society of Utopia which was “perfect”, because they “disguised” matters. This is polite way of saying they lie and cheat and steal. This was in the year 1516! Americans must wake up to the con pulled off by lying cheating lawyers who become the corrupt judges who shaft good professors and citizens like Professor James Tracy, Ph.D. The “profession” of law is the only one taught to lie and cheat in law school. This is a shameful disgrace.

    Winfield J. Abbe, Ph.D., Physics

    1. A New York judge was removed from a soft $187,200 per year job after 5 years. Here is a quote from the article:

      https://nypost.com/2018/06/08/callous-judge-booted-for-lack-of-judicial-temperament/ Quote:


      METRO
      Callous judge booted for lack of ‘judicial temperament’
      By Julia Marsh
      June 8, 2018 | 12:20pm | Updated
      Modal Trigger

      “An “unfeeling” Manhattan Housing Court judge who once ridiculed a disabled attorney was booted from the bench this week after a review panel determined she lacked the “judicial temperament” needed to do her job.
      Judge Susan Avery lost her cushy, $187,200-a-year political appointment on Wednesday following years of complaints.
      SEE ALSO

      Controversial housing court judge to finally get the axe

      In 2013 she reprimanded a lawyer with cerebral palsy for his sloppy handwriting, allowed “excessive” adjournments for cases about tenants without heat and hot water, and failed to disclose a conflict of interest, according to a review panel.
      Last year, the 14-member Advisory Council for the Housing Part of the Civil Court of New York City called the judge “unfeeling” for the handwriting reprimand.
      The council also criticized Avery, who was appointed in 2012, for “excessive multi-week adjournments” for cases where residents lacked basic services.
      The council was “disturbed further” by Avery’s failure to disclose that a law firm administering her family’s trust fund also regularly represents landlords in cases before the judge.
      Avery’s garnered two “not approved” ratings by the city Bar Association and voters twice rejected her bids to become an elected judge.
      “Judge Avery’s application for reappointment to a five year term as a New York City Housing Court Judge was denied earlier this week,” a court spokesman told The Post.
      “That determination was made by the Chief Administrative Judge after considering the recommendation by The Housing Court Advisory Council along with discussions and input from her four supervising judges and his own assessment that she lacked the judicial temperament needed to perform her job,” the spokesman added.
      Gail Prudenti, the former chief judge who appointed Avery in 2012, has said she doesn’t recall choosing her.”
      Wasn’t federal judge Rosenberg guilty of much worse violations of ignoring or distorting the law and the facts regarding the gross improper treatment of him by his corrupt and prejudiced employer Florida Atlantic University from a tenured “lifetime” job all based on media lies and evil machinations by federal judge Rosenberg in secret behind closed doors? Unlike the New York judge in the article judge Rosenberg does not have a supervisor and therefore does as she pleases. Wouldn’t you like to have a job where you can’t be fired at all? The impeachment process for judges is about like impeachment for a president. It sounds good but is totally worthless and ineffective and all judges know this. That is why so many of them ignore the law and the facts in making their prejudiced biased decisions in the lives of unfortunate victims like professor James Tracy Ph.D. This was vividly illustrated below in the long list of 42 corrupt federal judges provided by another victim Earl Carey about 30 years ago! An ordinary citizen randomly selected off the street and appointed temporary judge could have given him a much fairer shake than this prejudiced federal judge. But then this random citizen would not have been in bed with and favor the corrupt FAU either would they?

  4. The Known Carey-Gate Judges quoted from “IBM and the Corruption of Justice in America” by Earl Carey, Bismarck House, St. Louis, 1992, page 354:
    Alsop St Paul, Arnold Little Rock, Battey Rapid City, Beam Lincoln, Beezer Seattle, Bilby Tucson, Bowman Kansas City, Broomfield Phoenix, Browning San Francisco, Browning Tucson, Cahill St Louis, Canby Phoenix, Enright San Diego, Fagg DeMoines, Farris Seattle, Filippine St Louis, Gibson Kansas City, Goodwin Pasadena, Hall Pasadena, Holland Anchorage, Ingram San Jose, Lay St Paul, Lew Los Angeles, Magill Fargo, McMillian St Louis, McNamee Phoenix, Melloy Cedar Rapids, Noce St Louis, Noonan San Francisco, O’brien Sioux City, O’Scannlain Portland, Peckham San Francisco, Quackenbush Spokane, Reasoner Little Rock, Reinhardt Los Angles, Stevens, Jr. Kansas City, Strom Omaha, Tang Phoenix, Wallace San Diego, Webb Fargo, Wolle Des Moines, Wollman Pierre. This is the group which gang raped Earl Carey out of his “Constitutional” rights to a jury trial “guaranteed” by Amendments 5-7. If Judge Rosenberg were around then she would likely have been part of this group of gangsters who raped our Constitution with impunity and no supervisor to whom an injured citizen could complain to. Evidently the inmates have taken over the asylum in America today. Wouldn’t a small room with bars for walls be a more appropriate place for these rapists of our Constitution who wear black robes while shafting citizens out of basic rights in secret? Winfield J. Abbe, Ph.D., Physics

  5. A “tempest in a teapot” at the University of Pennsylvania Law School? Read this articles by or about the lying lawyer hypocrites at Penn:

    FOX & FRIENDS
    Penn trustee emeritus resigns over treatment of professor

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/5797494652001/?#sp=show-clips

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/03/15/penn-law-professor-who-said-black-students-rarely-perform-well-loses-teaching-duties/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.57efc0111cf1

    Then observe their deafening silence about the basic right of professor, or former professor James Tracy to speak up about vital issues of public concern too without being fired for false , fake unjustified reasons.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *