Select Page

Christopher Phillips: “CNN ‘mistakes’ magically all go in one direction.”

Christopher Phillips: “CNN ‘mistakes’ magically all go in one direction.”

If you ask most folks “who is Christopher Philips?” they will not know.  But he is starting to get more than 15 minutes of fame.  Phillips is a freshman at the University of Chicago.  That is not a lot of help, is it?

Okay, let’s set the stage.

The University of Chicago – along with the New York City-based Atlantic Magazine – held a symposium on “Disinformation and the Erosion of Democracy.”  This particular session was entitled “How Media Platforms Shape Consumer Realities.”  If you take the title of the conference — I mean symposium — in conjunction with the title of the session, it is clear that the discussion is about how CERTAIN media outlets use disinformation in an attempt to mold public opinion.

But which media platforms are they talking about?

Weeell … when you look at the sponsors and the composition of the panel of presenters, it becomes rather obvious. Sadly, the University of Chicago is one of those institutions that is user-unfriendly to the personalities and opinions on the right side of the political spectrum.  Secondly, Atlantic Magazine is one of the major elitist east coast left-wing publications.  You getting it?

Oh yeah .… the panel.  It was composed of Lauren Williams, an alumnus of Vox Media who founded Capital B – a media producing black-oriented material; Stephen Hayes, of the Dispatch (the sole conservative voice); and Brian Stelter, the leftwing pit bull who is (allegedly) a media analyst for CNN.  The session was moderated by Jim Rutenberg of the New York Times, of course.

Stelter is one of the leading media personalities on the left who constantly attacks FOX News as corrupt purveyors of disinformation and propaganda.  An objective observer may see that as “projecting” – the practice of applying one’s own traits on an opponent.

That is where Christopher Phillips comes in.

Instead of seeing Stelter as an informed observer and legitimate reporter, Phillips saw him as the prime example of the disinformation – along with the rest of the CNN network, that claims to be the “the most trusted name in news” despite the collapse of its ratings.

Addressing his inquiry to Stelter, Phillips asked him to explain certain examples of media disinformation based on political biases.  The young student offered up several examples carried out by CNN – and other left-leaning media outlets.  

Phillips accused the network of pushing the Russian collusion hoax, the Jussie Smollett hoax, smearing Justice Kavanaugh as a rapist, and smearing another young man, Nick Sandmann. as a white supremacist.  In the latter case, CNN had to fork over money for slandering Sandmann.  

Phillips wrapped up his list by accusing CNN of dismissing the Hunter Biden laptop revelations as pure Russian disinformation during the 2020 presidential campaign.  And it worked according to the 10 percent of the Biden voters who now say they would not have cast their ballot for Biden had they known that the laptop was NOT a Russian concoction – and all those damning emails were legit.

Remember the name of the conference, “Disinformation and the Erosion of Democracy.”  If the sponsors were hoping to give definition to that title from a liberal bias, Phillips flipped it back onto Stelter and all those in the media that he personifies.

But Phillips was not done with Stelter.  In what would have been a great closing argument of a prosecutor in a court-of-law, Phillips asked “With mainstream corporate journalists becoming little more than apologists and cheerleaders for the [Biden] regime, is it time to finally declare that the canon of journalistic ethics is dead or no longer operative,” 

Phillips wondered why “all of the mistakes of the mainstream media, and CNN in particular, seem to magically all go in one direction.”

Then there was the closer. “Are we expected to believe that this is all just some sort of random coincidence or is there something else behind it?”   Game.  Set.  Match.

So, how was Stelter to respond to such harsh and accurate prodding?  

Understandably, Stelter looked a little stunned.  That nervous giggle was the giveaway.  After all, there was no easy credible answer.  I suppose that Stelter could have fallen on his sword and admitted that Phillips was right.  But no.  Why would a person who peddles lies for a living suddenly become honest? 

When you have no good answer you duck, dodge and distract.  Basically, you do not answer.  And that is what Stelter did.  

He first went for the laugh by suggesting that it was “time for lunch.”  Ha! Ha!

Without addressing any of the specific points, Stelter suggested that Phillips was “describing a different channel than the one that I watch.”  Watch?  (Memo to Stelter:  You are not a viewer of CNN.  You have a show on the network.)

Finally, Stelter said that Phillips was just repeating “a popular right-wing narrative about CNN.”  No response to the question.  No point-by-point defense.  Just duck, dodge and distract.  He did not even deny the fact that the “rightwing narrative” was true.

In a WTF moment, Stelter used his time to say how CNN and New York Times folks worked to help get FOX News’ badly wounded correspondent Benjamin Hall out of harm’s way in Ukraine.  Nice of them – but nothing to do with Phillips’ question.

In a last-ditch defensive move, Stelter said that by “regime,” Phillips was referring to the Biden administration.  As proof of his and CNN’s innocence on all charges, Stelter said, “The last time I spoke with a Biden aide, we yelled at each other.”  When there are no good answers, you get stuck with bad ones.

Ironically, Stelter’s non-answers actually enhanced the credibility of Phillips’ accusations.  I suspect that the bosses at CNN were not very happy with Stelter’s feckless and ineffective handling of a question from a college freshman.  How long can this man survive – even at CNN?

Finally, Stelter said, “I know, we can keep going but there’s lunch right out in the hallway!”

Sorry Stelter, Christopher Phillips already ate your lunch.

So, there ‘tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.


  1. Jerry

    Shelter is a joke. Hell they all are. . I don’t know about y’all , but grown men here in Texas shake our frickin head .

  2. Tom

    Good for the college kid!!

  3. B4CE

    Hey Larry,
    I pretty much quit your blog with the emergence of Joe. His shit is so out there.
    But, I have a question for you. What do you know about Texas Governor Abbott stopping EVERY semi crossing from Mexico to the US? The guise is a “safety inspection” , but it seems to be having a deliberate impact on supply chain issues and inflation. Do you think Abbott is purposely inflicting harm on the American people to further Republican agenda? Or is this all just a coincidence ?

    • larry Horist

      B4CE … Not exactly on topic, but to answer your question. I do not think Abbott is intentionally trying to disrupt the supply chain. His concern is that the federal government is not inspecting truck traffic entering the United States and the Mexican authorities are rather lax. There is no doubt that migrants and counterbond are coming across in some of those trucks. No way to know which ones unless you inspect them all. Abbott eased the inspections at one checkpoint because the Mexican governor tightened security measure on the other side. It is reasonable to not inspect trucks crossing from Mexico into the US? If we do not, the bad folks have easy admission. It seems the real solution rests with Washington — and that is to increase personnel so that they volume of truckers can be handled expeditiously. What you think?

      • frank stetson

        IMO, this is one of those “everyone is wrong” sort of scenarios. Yes, it’s bad that bad people do bad things to get into this country, smuggle goods in, etc. It is also, IMO, too soon to reverse Title 42, designed to stop covid by hindering asylum seekers. We are not through covid, we have spent over two years marching 99 yards down the field, we are on the goal line, and this is no time to take our helmets off……

        Likewise, adding 30 or more hours of wait time to cross the boarder ruins produce, adds a lot of pollution, disrupts the supply chain just like the ships held in Long Beach. At the beginning of this week, TX proudly announced they have put “out of service” status on 800 of the 3,000 trucks inspected. There was no notice of illegals, drugs, or other illegal acts. Just bad breaks I guess….. One would think Abbot would crow about the value of his actions.

        Yes, he opened one bridge up after Mexico verbally agreed to inspect…yeah, sure. NTW, the problem will cure itself. Texas gets 2/3rds of it’s produce from these routes; I am sure 30 extra hours of border heat on “just-in-time” delivered lettuce will frost Texas consumer’s cupcakes pretty fast. Experts figure either prices rise, shelves get depleted, by end of this week.

        Thank you Mr. Abbot for protecting us from valid asylum seekers. Can’t wait to hear your results from this widely advertised program bound to capture billions of illegal acts…… FYI: I hope the current surge, not expected to be delta-level, slows the reversal time of Title 42…..

        • larry Horist

          Frank …”valid asylum seekers” Ha ha ha ha ha ha. You sooooooo ignorant of facts. You have no idea what a valid asylum seeker is. You have no idea of the laws that describe a legal asylum seeker. Only a fraction of those coming to the border are eligible asylum seekers. Part of the open borders policy is to ignore the law. Come on, Frank. Join the real world.

          • frank stetson

            Quit being such a jerk. You, as usual, provide an assault that I am ignorant, with no idea, with, and, as usual, scant facts. Your only fact is this rabid rant is: “Only a fraction of those coming to the border are eligible asylum seekers.” Well, of course it’s is a fraction, dumbshit. Otherwise it would be everyone. Only a fraction of the eligible seekers are valid and successful. So, you have all crossers, inside that “eligible seekers,” inside that, those who pass the “immediate removal” gate, in side that, the smallest circle of those who complete the process successfully.

            Under Biden, that’s 37% validity of those passing the “immediate removal gate” known as “expedited removal.” Some open borders, yeah, sure. Wow, under Trump, it was 29%. Obama was in the middle.

            However, you need to factor covid since, believe or not, Trump’s raw numbers are higher: 60,079 in the asylum process in Trump’s world of 2020 for about 18,000 valids versus 23,800 in 2021, the first year of Biden which for about 8,000 valids.


            Yes, I know more about asylum than you. I know the definition of a valid asylum seeker and how Trump illegally redefined that, the process and how Trump broke our own International agreements in changing the process, how he broke our own law, not to mention creating a human travesty, by forcing Mexico to hold seekers on their side of the border, known as the MPP and all the human abuses that causes.

            Of course only a fraction of crossers are successful even after clearing the immediate removal gate. It would be just stupid to assume elsewise, as you accused me.

            What is the “open borders policy?” I only know our border policy? I mean it appears that Trump approved more asylums in 2020 than Biden did in 2021, although the Trump %%% of denials is higher.

            And, as usual, in your tepid rant, you miss the point….

            “IMO, this is one of those “everyone is wrong” sort of scenarios. Yes, it’s bad that bad people do bad things to get into this country, smuggle goods in, etc. It is also, IMO, too soon to reverse Title 42, designed to stop covid by hindering asylum seekers.”

            Likewise, adding 30 or more hours of wait time to cross the boarder ruins produce, adds a lot of pollution, disrupts the supply chain just like the ships held in Long Beach.”

            “Texas gets 2/3rds of it’s produce from these routes; I am sure 30 extra hours of border heat on “just-in-time” delivered lettuce will frost Texas consumer’s cupcakes pretty fast.”

            “Can’t wait to hear your results from this widely advertised program bound to capture billions of illegal acts.”.

          • larry Horist

            Frank…. you are correct. I should have said only a “very small fraction.” I forgot your inability comprehend and deduce. In fact, many of those being admitted under Biden policies are NOT legally qualified. That is just more evidence of the Dems open borders policies. And finding bad brakes is also a benefit .. can save lives. That is why we have vehicle inspection, too. The inspections also serve as a deterrent … meaning that they take away the opportunity to smuggle contraband and people. You just do not believe in defending the border, Frank. Admit it. Like a Dem zombie, you offer no solutions and specious arguments — mostly uninformed, irrational and irrelevant. No efforts to stop the crisis at the border. Everything in your world seems to be about Trump whataboutism. You are the reason the GOP is likely to do very well in November. You cannot fool all the people all the time. Hell .. you hardly get passed fooling yourself.

        • larry Horist

          By the way, Frank … did you actually read the commentary or you just using this space to vent your spleen on unrelated subjects?

          • frank stetson

            and what unrelated subjects are you referring to?

            and yes, I read it.


          • larry Horist

            Geez! Frank. Have you no comprehension skills” I will explain. It should have been obvious that the “unrelated subject” to which I referred was the subject of the commentary — nothing to do with what you are haranguing about. You are off on another of your spleen-venting tangents.

        • Ben

          Valid asylum seekers get documentation and come in legally. But Frank is delusional and ignorant of the facts. Abbot is trying to stop illegal wet backs. Not legal entry But not much can be learned from mama’s basement

          • frank stetson

            so in his first report he only talks about inspection failures. no wetbacks, you racist. no asylum seekers, no human trafficers…… just bad brakes.

            Let me be Frank with you: bite me.

  4. Ben

    Define racist. And what do you want bitten? People do get their backs wet sweating and swimming rivers trying to get into the country. And that should carry a mandatory 30 year sentence with no parole. We wouldn’t end up having full prisons once the wetbacks realize what is happening.

    • Ben

      Define racist you ask. Easy.

      Look in mirror. That’s racist.


  5. Ben

    It’s ok to be racist. Everyone is to some degree. Like the goons destroying people’s property that had done nothing wrong

  6. Ben

    Evil Ben says: “It’s OK to be racist.” Nuff said.

    No, Evil Ben, it’s not OK to be racist. Ever. It’s a sin.

    And the fact that everyone might be, to a degree, will never change that.

    And you know that which makes this even worse for you.

    • Frederick

      Double standard here. Many of the idiots in the democrat party are racist as hell. They make it clear what they think of white people. And to the left the violence from BLM is heroic. So stfu

      • Ben

        Any democrat that’s racist against whites is wrong.

        As are all the Republican racists, still, forever, and all time.

        Shame on those attempting to minimize it.

        And no, freddy, I will not stfu.

        • Jerry

          You’re just like Al sharpton. You see a klansman behind every bush. Get a life asshole

          • Ben

            Please, gfy. Then, sit on it and rotate. Slowy. To the right, as is your way. Then, suck on a big one and choke on your own vomit.

            Happy Easter.

            Are we entertained?

            And I don’t see a racist behind every bush or a Klansman. However, while all Republicans are not racist, most overt racists vote Republican. Not the unintended circumstance, or other subtle forms of racism, but the overtype, those who call names, want to do violence against a certain race, etc.

            Generally, they are people just like you I like to deflect the entire conversation because it makes them uncomfortable. Ha ha ha ha.

  1. The story of Tyre Nickol’s and his tragic death at the hands of Memphis police officer is impossible for understanding.…