OPINION
Premium

Daily Beast Has a Desperately Deceptive Epstein Hit, and the BBC Appeases Dog-Hating Muslims in Britain

Brad Slager
Brad Slager  |  Mar 31, 2026
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Get access to Brad Slager's "Riffed From the Headlines," a daily VIP feature where he looks to bring accountability to the mainstream media. Use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!

Low-Octane Gaslighting – THE DAILY BEAST

  • Yes, TECHNICALLY, the headline is accurate.

This is possibly the shining example of how the press will manipulate an Epstein file story to say something that it is not. Start with the headline from the Beast:

"New Evidence Corroborates Claims of Trump Sex Accuser, 13"

Now to the details. The new evidence concerns details the accuser gave the FBI about items surrounding her testimony centered in South Carolina. The article is based on a lengthy report from a South Carolina paper looking into the details of another man she accused of assault. But when it comes to the Epstein files…

The woman’s claims of assault against Epstein, Trump, and (a third party) remain unproven, while no direct evidence backing up the alleged crimes has been uncovered.

Even in the sourced article from Carolina, there is zero evidence of Trump’s involvement, and even the connections to Epstein are completely tenuous, at best:

Her assault claims against Epstein, (the third party), and Donald Trump remain unproven, and the White House has vigorously denied the assertions about the president. No direct evidence has been uncovered supporting the assault claims.

This was a completely deceptive framing by the Daily Beast, another sign of the desperation in the press that has yet to come up with anything conclusive to implicate the president.

BlueAnon – DAILY MAIL

  • Your legal assessment needs a few tweaks to trend toward accuracy.

In another case of claimed explosive evidence that instead goes off like a smoke bomb in the toilet, the Daily Mail comes out with the claim that results have come back showing the bullet used to assassinate Charlie Kirk does not match the gun confiscated from the accused assassin.

Yeah…about all of that…

First off, it was not a case of the bullet not matching. It was ruled “inconclusive.” The ammo fragment recovered at the scene was too damaged to deliver markings that would be compared to the tooling from the gun. The reason for this differing analysis? The Daily Mail was going off the claims made by the alleged shooter’s lawyer, in classic “my client is innocent” fashion.

Prose & Contradiction – THE NEW YORK TIMES

  • Expecting a seasoned journo to have access to the archives is too much to ask.

New York Times reporter Peter Baker posted a piece from The New York Times that covered the quandary faced by a dairy farmer as a result of labor becoming more scarce after the immigration crackdowns.

You can almost sense the glee from Baker as he delivers this “what you wished for” result of President Trump’s deportation efforts. But there is a brightness on the horizon for these beleaguered bovine merchants in dairyland.

Many of them have been moving to automated and robotic milking processes, which have seen them reduce costs and deliver far more output as a result. Lowering expenses while increasing their yields will only benefit everyone, down to prices for the consumer.

Oh, and Peter? We found all of this reported just last month – in The New York Times.

Reporting on the Mirror – TMZ

  • It feels wrong, then again – this is D.C. we are talking about.

So, on Monday, there was a – curious report, we guess – about Sen. Lindsey Graham at Disney World. This was positioned as significant for a couple of reasons. For one, he was seen clutching a bubble wand, and for another, there was no known reason for him attending, since he was not known to be with kids. Then there was the matter of his not being in Washington during the partial shutdown crisis.

Whichever angle you wanted to approach this from, it was an entry delivered by the celebrity gossip site, TMZ. That alone made the report more inconsequential, for some, but following this, the site came out with the announcement that it was expanding its scope of coverage. The outlet will now have a dedicated team in the political realm.

Considering the quality of journalism we have been delivered from D.C., this could be considered an upgrade.

Anti-Social Media – THE BBC

  • Apparently, dog allergies are a recent phenomenon.

There has been a mounting controversy surrounding the growing presence of Muslims in the West and their opposition to dog ownership. We recently had the conflict raised in New York City, where the rise of Zohran Mamdani saw more Muslims in prominent positions, and they have voiced their displeasure at the animals, leading to a backlash.

This has been a more pronounced battle in Britain, with some instances reported of police barring residents from certain areas with their pets, out of sympathy for Muslim opposition. Now, we see the BBC going with the British tradition of bending the knee, as we get a report pondering the possibility of curtailing dog access.

The report is couched otherwise, as a possible awareness for those allergic, and even brings up the case of one woman who reportedly feels “trapped” because of all of the canine access granted in the country. Sure, alter the entirety of British culture over one woman’s complaint.