posted by Jeffrey Lord - 5.08.16

Whatever happened to Amazon?

I enjoyed it. I’m an Amazon Prime member. In my world of “I need X book ASAP,” the system worked like a charm. Find a book at Amazon website, order book, doorbell rings within days with the book. Ya can’t ask for more than that.

Now? Now I see one story after another – from both liberal and conservative sources at that – that say of Amazon individually and collectively, something disturbing. What follows are the headlines, with links:

A large number of Amazon workers rely on food stamps for assistance
The latest troubling revelation regarding the online retail giant’s working conditions

Source: Think Progress

Peeing in trash cans, constant surveillance, and asthma attacks on the job: Amazon workers tell us their warehouse horror stories

Source: Business Insider

Bezos’ net worth soars, while 10% of Amazon’s Ohio employees are on food stamps, according to the liberal-leaning think tank

Source: CNBC

Jeff Bezos Screws Over Workers At Amazon. Now He Wants To Do The Same At The Washington Post
Can Silicon Valley’s anti-labor attitude survive actual contact with a labor union?

Source: The Huffington Post

Jeff Bezos Can Thank Exploited Workers for His $100 Billion


7 Examples of How Amazon Treats Their 90,000+ Warehouse Employees Like Cattle

Source: Paste Magazine

Washington Post writer slams Jeff Bezos in an op-ed for mistreating workers

Source: Fox Business

Jeff Bezos deemed the richest man in the world while Amazon warehouse workers suffer grueling conditions
Bezos’ net worth increases — while many factory workers report enduring unbearable work conditions

Source: Salon


Source: Newsweek

Amazon Warehouse Employees’ Message to Jeff Bezos — We Are Not Robots
Amazon employees risk termination if they sit down on company time, two workers say

Source: The

Jeff Bezos: how the world’s richest man can change his stingy reputation
The Amazon boss became the world’s richest man on Thursday, but he’s still looking for ways to do good with his money. He could start by improving the lives of his workers

Source: The Guardian

Why Are Amazon Warehouse Workers On Food Stamps?


So. There we are with not one, not two, not three but twelve stories – from both liberal and conservative sites – that report some version of the same thing. To wit: Amazon is mistreating its employees badly, so badly some are forced onto food stamps, others are peeing into trashcans, can’t even sit down for a moment and are working under “unbearable” and “grueling” conditions.

The free market soul that I am, the fact that Jeff Bezos could take his idea for Amazon and make it a seriously profitable, thoroughly useful reality is something to be admired.

But most decidedly, life, as they say, is short. If all these stories – and there are others out there of a similar note – are anywhere close to true, something is decidedly wrong at Amazon. There is no excuse – none – for such wretched treatment of hardworking employees and a work culture that is, from these reports, appalling.

The “buck”, as President Harry Truman used to say, “stops here.” By which Truman meant his own Oval Office desk. In this case? The buck stops with billionaire Bezos. And if there is anything all these stories have in common, it is the unhappy tale of a serious problem at Amazon – with Billionaire Bezos Busted.

Jeffrey Lord is a frequent contributor to  You can follow him on Twitter @realJeffreyLord

DEEP STATE TANGO: Dems Accused Brennan of Lying

posted by Jeffrey Lord - 3.25.18

In what might be called a Deep State tango, Obama CIA Director John Brennan has rushed to defend fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe in a classic illustration of how the Deep State works. The Washington Times headlined it this way:

John Brennan blasts Trump over McCabe firing, says the U.S. will send him to ‘dustbin of history’

The story quoted Brennan as follows:

“When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America…America will triumph over you.”

The paper also noted Brennan had earlier accused President Trump of being “small, petty, and banal with your tweets.”

“What is telling here is the accusation that Brennan has a penchant for lying came from Democrats – not Republicans…”

Got all that? Now, let’s take a stroll down memory lane to this story in The Guardian – in 2014. Columnist Trevor Timm headlined this in the leftist UK paper:

CIA director John Brennan lied to you and to the Senate. Fire him

Calling Brennan “a talented liar” this column came on the heels of the realization that the CIA, under Brennan’s leadership, had been spying on….the United States Senate. And in the day, Democrats were fit to be tied.

Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, a senior Democrat, tweeted this:

The Guardian also headlined this about another Senate Democrat:

Feinstein accuses CIA of ‘intimidating’ Senate staff over torture report

The paper reported on Feinstein’s unhappiness with Brennan this way:

“The chairwoman of the Senate intelligence committee, Dianne Feinstein, on Tuesday accused the Central Intelligence Agency of a catalog of cover-ups, intimidation and smears aimed at investigators probing its role in a “un-American and brutal” programme of post-9/11 detention and interrogation.

In a bombshell statement on the floor of the US Senate, Feinstein, normally an administration loyalist, accused the CIA of potentially violating the US constitution and of criminal activity in its attempts to obstruct her committee’s investigations into the agency’s use of torture. She described the crisis as a ‘defining moment’ for political oversight of the US intelligence service.

Her unprecedented public assault on the CIA represented an intensification of the row between the committee and the agency over a still-secret report on the torture of terrorist suspects after 9/11.”

Feinstein was supported after her speech by Democrats Patrick Leahy (VT) and Mark Udall (CO). Udall issued a statement saying that he had “directly pushed CIA director Brennan” to tell the truth about “misrepresentations about the CIA’s brutal and ineffective detention and interrogation program.”

DEEP STATE TANGO: Dems Accused Brennan of Lying

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)

What is telling here is the accusation that Brennan has a penchant for lying came from Democrats – not Republicans. Whether it was Feinstein’s floor speech or the comments of her fellow Senate Democrats or the assessment of The Guardian’s left-leaning columnist, the accusation could not have been clearer. In the words of columnist Trimm: “The nation’s top spy is, in fact, a proficient and skilled liar.”

And now? Now there is Brennan coming to Andrew McCabe’s defense. And what is McCabe accused of? Lying. As noted here at Fox by the former assistant secretary of state for President George W. Bush:

“Reportedly, McCabe lied to the inspector general, or in the euphemistic and delicately modern parlance, he “had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor – including under oath – on multiple occasions.”

There can be no better or clearer illustration of exactly how the players of the Deep State play the game. While Democrats of this moment are ignoring it, only four years ago they themselves were up and arms over Brennan’s conduct at the CIA and quite specifically accused him of lying. Now comes the McCabe episode, with McCabe being fired for, yes, lying to the FBI. And Brennan? He jumps in to stick up for McCabe.

Right there, in miniature, the Brennan-McCabe tango gives an idea of just how arrogant these people of the Deep State can be. The Deputy Director of the FBI is fired for lying to the FBI, and the guy who defends him is an ex-CIA Director labeled a “skilled liar” himself for

what Senator Feinstein, a Democrat, said was breaking the law and violating the Constitution. And what does John Brennan say in response?It is President Trump – not even in office in 2014 – who is guilty of “venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption.”

You can’t make it up.

The views and opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sean Hannity or

Jeffrey Lord is a frequent contributor to  You can follow him on Twitter @realJeffreyLord

Dear Chuck Todd

posted by Jeffrey Lord - 4.24.18

Hi Chuck. It’s me again. Your favorite schmenge.

I don’t want to belabor your angst here, but a reminder that something you told Bernie and Sid and their radio audience is, well, not so.

You told them “that anytime I’ve interviewed somebody that my wife has professionally worked for I let people know.” You also said, “Sean Hannity can do what he wants to do, but I’m surprised Fox isn’t making him, at a minimum, disclose a conflict every time he talks about this.”

When they challenged you with my information from my column you replied to me: “That person who wrote that did no research.”

“You and so many others in the media have decided to make relationships and guilt by association the cause of the day…”

Shocking as it may be to you Chuck, I most certainly did do my research. Here, Chuck, is the link to your show of February 12, 2017, as thoughtfully transcribed by NBC News – your employer. I have also watched the video of this.

The interview in question is with former Virginia Senator Jim Webb, whom your wife served as communications director in his Senate race as well as advising in his short-lived presidential run. It begins as follows:


“Is Flynn’s job already in danger? And hostile takeovers, angry posters jam Republican town halls. Have Democratic voters found their voice after the election? I’ll talk to a leading progressive, Senator Bernie Sanders and a former senator, Jim Webb of Virginia, a Democrat who says the Trump victory may have been necessary for the political system. Joining me for insight and analysis are Katty Kay, anchor of the BBC’s World News America, Washington Post columnist, Eugene Robinson, Greta Van Susteren, host of MSNBC’s For the Record, and former North Carolina governor, Pat McCrory. Welcome to Sunday. It’s Meet the Press.”

As you can see, there is no reference to Webb’s tie with your wife or of the tie between Bernie Sanders and your wife’s consulting firm. After interviewing Trump advisor Stephen Miller, you bring on Senator Sanders, saying:


And joining me now is one of the leaders of the Democratic Party these days, though he’s actually still not technically a member of the Democratic Party, it’s Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Senator Sanders, welcome back to Meet the Press, sir.

The Sanders interview proceeds with no reference that he had anything at all to do with your wife’s consulting business. After bringing on your panel for a chat, they leave and you get to former Senator Webb. And that interview begins:


“Welcome back, my next guest is part of a rare and dying breed, a centrist and a moderate. A moderate Democrat. Jim Webb was secretary of the navy under Republican President Ronald Reagan. He voted for George W. Bush over Al Gore. But by 2006 he had switched parties to become a Democrat and he won a U.S. Senate seat in Virginia. Jim Webb takes a somewhat more optimistic view of the potential for a Trump presidency. And he joins me now, Senator Webb, welcome back to the show.”

After talking about Webb’s views and his plans, you end the interview by saying:


Are you done with politics?


I’m over here with you right now.


All right. I will leave it there. Senator Jim Webb apparently coming back to the journalism world. We’d welcome you back–


Thank you.


For sure. Anyway, thanks for coming on. Coming up, voting with your wallet……

The panel comes back, more panel chat. Then you end the show this way:


“Thank you all. That’s all we have for today. We’ll be back next week. I hope you took my advice on the Wizards. I told you. See? They’re paying off. It’s a good bandwagon to jump on. If it’s Sunday it’s Meet the Press.”

Chuck, respectfully? Not once – not once – in that interview did you at any time do what you claimed to Bernie and Sid. You told them, again: “…that anytime I’ve interviewed somebody that my wife has professionally worked for I let people know.” As anyone can plainly see, on your February 12th show from last year you most certainly did not do what you said you do. Which was, again, saying “that anytime I’ve interviewed somebody that my wife has professionally worked for I let people know.” And recall, again, that you also said: “Sean Hannity can do what he wants to do, but I’m surprised Fox isn’t making him, at a minimum, disclose a conflict every time he talks about this.” Which is to say, you were demanding one standard on disclosure for Sean and Fox, another (double) standard for yourself and NBC.

Maybe you intended to do it, Chuck. Maybe you just forgot, although as we all know anchors of TV shows have teleprompters with pre-written scripts right in front of them, not to mention usually notes in their hand or on the desk in front of them. But whatever happened that day, Chuck, you most assuredly – as both tape and transcript show clearly – never once mentioned your wife’s association with former Senator Webb or that of her firm with Senator Sanders.

Look. We all make mistakes. But going on Bernie and Sid’s show and quite specifically saying you did something when it is crystal clear in both video and transcript that you did not – then saying I didn’t do my research when quite clearly I did- is compounding a mistake with an untruth. Unless, of course, you yourself did not do your research and you never bothered to look at the tape of the February 12th show or read the transcript and just assumed something that in fact did not happen.

You have said my column was an effort to “get” you. Not so.

Before I wrote a single word you and your wife’s situation were mentioned by….Rush Limbaugh. On his April 17th, show Rush made a considerable point of focusing on what he (and I and so many conservatives) feel is exactly an example of the liberal media bias and double standards that have been going on for decades. A bias and double standard that was so bad that it virtually begged for the corrective that is Fox News and talk radio, not to mention in today’s world all those conservative sites on the Internet.

In this case, the double standard revolved around the blatantly false accusations against Sean Hannity for a conflict of interest. But that being the accusation, Rush took it and ran. He went through a long list of media figures – by name – and specifically highlighted conflicts of interest. Of you – after mentioning you earlier – he said:

“F. Chuck Todd! F. Chuck Todd’s wife is a Democrat activist. He’s the host of Meet the Press, NBC head honcho. She makes lots of money working on the Bernie Sanders campaign!”

And, as mentioned, he named a slew of others – it wasn’t just Chuck Todd – asking why all of them never talk about their conflicts every time they discuss or interview someone with whom there is such a blatant conflict in one fashion or another. Which is exactly what you suggested – but for Sean and Fox, not for you and NBC.

Mark Levin was blunt in talking about this, citing this piece about The Sean Hannity Standard by Breitbart’s John Nolte. Said Mark: “This is a big lie what’s taking place here, a big lie. And if this is the standard now, as Nolte points out over there at Breitbart, if this is the standard now, the ‘Sean Hannity Standard,’ then let’s apply it to every d–n one of these people – every d–n one of them.”

Dear Chuck Todd

Chuck, you are not the problem here. You are merely a symbol of the problem. The moment Sean Hannity’s name was disclosed in the Michael Cohen case – and since he had in fact said on his radio shows from time to time that he was a friend of Michael Cohen’s the fact of a connection should have come as no shock – you and your many liberal media colleagues went gunning for Sean and for Fox News. The latest attack is about Sean’s private real estate dealings. This says everything one needs to know about the state of the press in America today.

Why? Why these attacks on Sean? Because Sean is a certifiable star in the conservative media of long standing, and in the present day well identified as a friend and supporter of President Trump. And not to put too fine a point on it, but it is Sean Hannity who has been looking into -with multiples of serious investigative reporters like Sara Carter – the real and massive scandal behind the phony “Trump-Russia” collusion story. It is very safe to say that without all of Sean’s dogged efforts to put on air many of the people who have appeared on his two shows to report the results of their thorough, persistent and far-reaching

investigations these kinds of attacks on Sean would never have happened. Now they are after his private real estate deals? Really, Chuck? Really?

The moment I realized all of the commotions about Sean and his friendship with Michael Cohen I had one instantaneous reaction: these multiples of attacks on Sean would boomerang on his accusers – and big time.

And sure enough, very quickly more people than Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin were making the same point. Yes, Chuck, I used you as a poster boy for this because you chose to put yourself out there on the issue. But it took a conservative media nano-second for others to jump on this on their own and mention a lengthening list of liberal media figures who were pushed forward with specifics as to their conflicts of interest. Journalists from CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS and The New York Times were all mentioned, their conflicts laid out there as I did with you.

Chuck, I worked in Washington a long time. If “conflict of interest” is the game, Washington, D.C. is the name. Washington is the most conflicted town in America, bar none. And journalists are at the top or near the top of the conflict-of-interest totem pole.

A few years back you were kind enough to invite me on Meet the Press. I couldn’t do it. But suffice to say I have no animus against you. I understand why you think this attention paid to you and your wife is personal – but I assure you on this end nothing could be further from the truth.

As mentioned, you are not the problem here. You are merely a symbol of the problem. The problem comes when so-called “objective” journalists really are not. When those who masquerade as being neutral and objective are in fact liberals or one-time Democratic Party activists. Note well that column from the newly fired conservative Kevin Williamson fired after leaving National Review from a mere two days at The Atlantic. When Kevin brought up the sharp, sometimes offensive writings of the late Christopher Hitchens in the pages of The Atlantic, editor Jeffrey Goldberg replied: “Yes. But Hitchens was in the family. You are not.”

Dear Chuck Todd

Well said. Sean Hannity is not in the liberal family. And so the effort to Get Hannity is the current – not to mention seemingly eternal – obsession of the liberal media. This time, I genuinely think my liberal friends have overstepped – and now this has turned back on them. You, in this case.

To close? You have also said, “What I take offense to on that is that’s my wife, that’s not me.” And, “I think it’s a ridiculous place that we’re in a society that it’s guilt by association.”

You are not your wife. Sean Hannity is not Michael Cohen. But you and so many others in the media have decided to make relationships and guilt by association the cause of the day. Now, clearly, you are both surprised and angry that people on my side are agreeing with you on the problem.

I agree with you, Chuck. It is, in fact, a ridiculous place that we’re in a society that it’s guilt by association. Perhaps all of this will lead a lot of media people to agree with you and stop doing it. Call me skeptical, but by all means, lead the way!

Thanks for your time.

Your favorite schmenge.

The views and opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sean Hannity or

Jeffrey Lord is a frequent contributor to  You can follow him on Twitter @realJeffreyLord

Thank you for visiting You are about to leave and proceed to a site owned and operated by a third party. has no control over the content of this third-party site.
Click OK to proceed.
You may if you would no longer like to receive a newsletter.
You have been successfully unsubscribed!
Please see our Terms of Use and Privacy Notice .
If you have any questions or concerns please contact us.