Sleazeball journalism from dizzy Buffalo TV reporter Charlie Specht
In what may be a new low in the reporting by Buffalo TV reporter Charlie Specht, on Friday Specht videoed a phone call he made to Bishop Richard Malone without telling Malone at the start of the call that he would be recording him.
How much lower can Specht go?
No, it's not about a search for the truth
While the state of New York has a "one party" law allowing anyone to legally record a phone call without a second party's consent, Specht's latest stunt further reveals that his reporting has absolutely nothing to do with "seeking the truth" or "getting at the facts" but is simply about personally embarrassing Bishop Malone with the hope that he will resign and thereby jack up Specht's station's ratings.
As we have previously reported, Specht has distinguished himself in his practice of low-rent journalism, even by the already low standards of broadcast journalism today:
1. Specht aired the impossible accusation that that a priest abused a man at a Buffalo-area Walmart "in the 1980s" when in fact Walmart did not even open a store in the area until 1995. We at TheMediaReport.com – with thanks to a reader – busted Specht lying in an email to a viewer that he indeed "did check" that a Walmart had existed in the 1980s. And to this day – depite the fact that Specht's report has been proven to be outright false – the story still remains on his station's web site today, deceiving visitors over and over again.
2. In another report, Specht trumpeted what he claimed to be a letter from 1992 chronicling an episode of abuse by a Buffalo-area priest. Yet as our reporting exposed, that letter is a complete forgery. Yet despite this, Specht's story remains on his station's web site.
3. Despite knowing full well that the personal assistant to Bishop Malone, Rev. Ryszard Biernat, had written a steamy gay love letter to a seminarian and bought a house with the guy, Specht muffled these important details in order to bolster Biernat's credibility as a purported "whistleblower" on Bishop Malone.
Let those facts sink in.
Specht's reporting is yellow journalism in search of attention and ratings for his failing station.
This satanic Bolshevik is definitely doing the work of his father the devil who was a liar from the beginning. He should have informed the bishop that the call would have been recorded for training purposes. Training how to lie, that is! As he tries to bring his station out of its broadcasting doldrums by trying to destroy the bishop, they are the ones with "egg on their face" Dan.
Specht is a moron. We get it already.
Bishop Malone had the best response for Mr. Specht:
"It is all I'll tell you because I don't know what you'll do with it".
It is sad that one has to treat an interview as a game of chess, trying to figure out what the interviewer’s angle is, instead of simply having a frank discussion about the truth.
Until journalists decide to quit their “gotcha” game and start reporting facts, not personal, unfounded opinions, silence should be the Church’s policy.
If you're dealing with people that are truthful then you can have a "frank discussion about the truth". When dealing with liars, deceivers and deniers, as witnessed from your church, then there is no choice but to play your "game of chess".
LLC states, " silence should be the Church's policy". Right, the silence, lies and deceptions that got the church in this mess is the very means that you think will fix things? Boy are you one confused and messed up hypocrite. God is exposing the wickedness of your church and all the crimes against innocence, and you think the best policy from here on out is silence. Maybe it's about time you try some of your own advice. SILENCE! servant of the Almighty
P.S. Julie, I haven't heard any of your boasting lately about your generous giving?
Dan,
“”. It is all I'll tell you because I don't know what you'll do with it.
Have a blessed day, moronic non-Christian brother.
WOW! You're able to quote a corrupt bishop embroiled in controversy over his poor handling of the catholic sexual abuse crisis that has destroyed countless lives of innocent children. How impressive! Can you teach me how to use equal signs in my writing so I can learn to lie like you and believe everyone will think I'm telling the truth because I use equal signs! You're one hilarious legend in your own mind. Laughable!
Dan,
"Can you teach me how to use equal signs in my writing so I can learn to lie"=gee, you already know how, so be silent!
While it may be legal in NY to record a call without the other party's permission, it's standard journalistic practice to do these things before an interview:
1. Get an explicit acknowledgement from the subject that the interview is on the record.
2. Get a consent from the subject to record the interview (which is normally also recorded at the beginning of the interview).
It sounds like Specht at least violated the second rule, if not also the first.
Rege1, Your fellow catholics claim they love to follow the law, especially concerning Statutes of Limitations that free their guilty asses, but you think Charlie violated the law because he didn't get consent? He didn't need to get consent according to the law, so he violated nothing. That's period! You catholics think you can change or make your own laws to suit yourselves, like you think your catholic doctrine superscedes the Bible. When are you fools going to wake up and realize you haven't fooled the Almighty one bit.
This is the very reason why I didn't answer your first comment directed towards me. Maybe if you read the article and read the stories highlighted in red, you woiuld understand how your church's sex offenders think they have a right to freedom and avoid registration as sex offenders. Oh! My mistake! I forgot how you right-winged bigots who voted for Trump think everything is "fake news", unless it's your twisted news. And hasn't your church in the past burned enough Christians at the stake and boiled them in hot oil, that you think this is what I'm "arguing" for? No! That's how your evil church meted out their horrible false ideas of justice. They have no right to any of their fake tribunals, phony commissions or crooked claims of handling crimes or justice at the Vatican. For justice to be served there has to be honesty and your church doesn't even know the meaning of the word, unless they can lie about it.
servant of the Truth
Dan, I'm tired of your lies and hate, so I am not going to actually read your last comment. I will just count the words and give a dollar per to the collection plate this Sundsy. Word of advice – accept Jesus and you will lose the late. Try it. I will pray for you at Mass this weekend. God bless.
Tell me Julie, what is it that you're claiming I lie about? The idolatry of your Queen of Heaven? Just today, as if Pachamama wasn't bad enough, take a look at the pagan Buddhist service the pope had today in Thailand. The pedophilia and pederasty rampant among your clergy? And then the lies, excuses and denials of all you brainwashed catholics, muddying the waters and attempting to convince us that the number of creeps in your hierarchy is somehow small? And then you think you can call me a liar? Really? You had better think twice before pointing your finger at anyone. Your ridiculously stupid accusations against me are dumbfounded and worthless, just like your bragging about all your ignorant giving to your pagan church. Maybe they can have more gold drenched ceremonies devoted to your false goddess. servant of the Truth, immuned to all you phony false catholic accusers
Dan,
“what is it that you're claiming I lie about?” = Sister Julie may provide her own answer; from my point of you, you lie just about everything, starting from your self-assigned titles.
But let’s go in order, shall we?
“The idolatry of your Queen of Heaven?” = lie #1 (a favorite among non-Christians, like yourself).
“Pachamama” argument = lie #2
“pagan Buddhist service the pope had today in Thailand” = Pope Francis visited a Buddhist temple; given your xenophobia, your reaction is not difficult to understand. Lie #3
“The pedophilia and pederasty rampant among your clergy?” = lie #4. Rampant: From Merriam-Webster, “profusely widespread”. Are there cases of pedophilia and pederasty among Catholic clergy? Yes, unfortunately. Nobody here denies it. Is it a rampant phenomenon? No, by all available statistics (I forgot, your degree is in math. Perhaps you should ask for your money back).
“the lies, excuses and denials of all you brainwashed Catholics” = lie #5. The numbers don’t lie, unlike you.
“muddying the waters and attempting to convince us that the number of creeps in your hierarchy is somehow small?” = lie #5a
And so on and so forth.
The biggest lie, of course, is your self-professed Christianity (sorry, you ain’t).
Have a blessed day, non-Christian brother, and Happy Thanksgiving to you, PC, sister Julie and all the other contributors to this blog.
Myself, I have a lot to be thankful for, starting with Jesus’ promise that His Church will never fail (Matthew 16:18), despite (puerile) attempts from the earthly powers.
Happy Thanksgiving to you also LLC, and to all, even Dan!
You guys ought to try real Christianity. I'm happy and thankful everyday and don't have to wait until that once a year. Same goes for Christmas and Easter, because I celebrate Christ daily. I guess that's why you think I'm fanatic and I'll take that as a compliment. Hope you all had a good one.
Dan,
“You guys ought to try real Christianity” = Catholics “do” real Christianity every day; we don’t have to try.
“I'm happy…” = your posts, actually, suggest otherwise.
“don't have to wait until that once a year” = neither do we. In fact, Catholics celebrate Thanksgiving, around the world, every single hour of the day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. It’s called the Eucharist. Look it up.
“why you think I'm fanatic” = nope; you are a fanatic because your mind is made up (incorrectly) and can’t change subject in your posts, regardless of the argument in discussion.
“I'll take that as a compliment” = no doubt. You always read what you want in these commentaries.
“Hope you all had a good one” = I did, thanks. Same for you!
Have a blessed week, non-Christian brother.
I don't have to "Look it up." I've seen your pagan pachamama eucharistic worship of your priests raising the host to their Sun God many a time. Ever gave any thought as to why you sheep never got to partake in the wine? The alcoholic priests weren't about to share their precious juice with their brainwashed goats. Ever wonder why they sat in their scarlet red velvet gold framed kings chairs, while the sheep who donated to the frauds sat on cold wooden benches? If you had ever learned how to read the Word, you would've realized all their wrongs were described in Matthew 23. Keep your head in the sand and let them pull your strings like a puppet, LLC.
I'm a "fanatic" against horrible sins done in high places, especially when done under the guise of holiness. That would include against protestants who live greedy and lustful lives of sexual immorality also. Likewise, you seem to be a fanatic at attacking every sentence I write. Would seem to me that you have the much bigger problem. servant of Truth
Dan,
Just this pearl from your rant: “Ever gave any thought as to why you sheep never got to partake in the wine?”. Evidently, you’ve not been to a Mass in recent years (centuries?).
“Ever wonder why they sat in their scarlet red velvet gold framed kings chairs, while the sheep who donated to the frauds sat on cold wooden benches?” = moronic brother, have you ever been invited to a wedding banquet? Do you take the seat of the Groom? Because He is what the priest represents at the Mass (Persona Christi, remember?).
“I'm a "fanatic" = good, we agree.
“horrible sins done in high places, especially when done under the guise of holiness” = interesting thought, coming from a self-professed servant of the Lord. Sister Julie is, once again, right.
“Likewise, you seem to be a fanatic at attacking every sentence I write” = not all of them; if I recall correctly, you have been right two times, so far (just like a broken clock).
“Would seem to me that you have the much bigger problem” = perhaps, but as a Christian, I have Jesus’ assurance that I can be saved. You do not.
Have a great week, non-Christian brother.
Keep yammering Dan lol. I read your first couple of sentences. Yawn. Written by an ex-Christian who is bitter.
Let us investigate this. Hypocrites who babble incessant prayers to their false goddess, the Queen of Heaven, find themselves fit to accuse me of lying and yammering. As if that's not enough, they've judged me as being a self-professed, bitter, non or ex-Christian. Thankfully their judgments are as worthless as their idolatry, excuses, denials, sexual sins and outright lies. I am angry and hate the sins of those who harm innocent children, especially sexually. Anyone belonging to such an organization has no right to cast judgment on any Christian.
“A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject” = this quote, attributed to Sir Winston Churchill, describes perfectly our non-Christian brother Dan.
It's too sad that he can't seem capable to entertain the (high) possibility of being completely, helplessly wrong. Oh well, he’ll find out, sooner or later.
The coming of the lawless one will be accompanied by the working of Satan, with every kind of power, sign and false wonder, and with every wicked deception directed against those who are perishing, because they refused the love of the truth that would have saved them. For this reason God will send them a powerful delusion so they will believe the lie, in order that judgment will come on all who have disbelieved the truth and delighted in wickedness.
2 Thessalonians 2:9-12
Obviously, Dan, you are an ex-Christian. I still have hope that you will accept Jesus.
Jesus answered, "See to it that no one deceives you. For many will come in my name claiming, 'I am the Christ.' and will deceive many." Matthew 24: 4-5
Julie, You are aware that the pope in catholicism is considered 'Vicar of Christ'? Priests are considered 'little Christs'. In Roman Catholicism the priest acts 'in the person of Christ'.
I'm sorry, but I don't need to accept your version of Christ, your Vicar of Christ, your little Christs or any other false Christs. There is only one Christ and no one is worthy to take His place. That is the one I accepted and will continue to accept. I will never accept the fakes or frauds. Thoise who have are terribly deceived.
Dan,
Matthew 24:4-5 was written after Matthew 16:18, when Jesus instituted the Papacy with Peter as the first Pope, so it refers to those who claim to represent “real” Christianity in opposition to the Catholic Church, i.e. the Protestant movement, of which you are a (small) part.
“Vicar”, from the Latin “vicarius”, simply means “in stead of”, as a steward, substitute or deputy. As the title implies, the Pope is the Earthly head of Jesus’ Church until His second advent, and holds the office of Peter, the prince of the apostles, who was commissioned to "feed" the sheep of the Lord Jesus.
“In Roman Catholicism the priest acts 'in the person of Christ' = correct. The priest simply provides the hands and mind so that the Eucharist sacrifice can be performed, as Jesus told us to do in Scriptures. The same way you, me or anyone else allow our earthly bodies to be used by Jesus for His purposes.
“but I don't need to accept your version of Christ, your Vicar of Christ, your little Christs” = and that’s why you have free will. It’s also your own responsibility.
“There is only one Christ and no one is worthy to take His place” = correct; that’s what the Church has taught from the beginning.
“That is the one I accepted and will continue to accept” = actually, nope, you haven’t, since you are clearly rejecting His teachings.
“Those who have are terribly deceived” = and there, my non-Christian brother, you are accurately describing yourself, again.
Have a blessed week.
Thanks for your brilliant input. "VICARIUS FILII DEI", as in 666 – The Number of the Beast. Maybe the church meant it "simply means 'in stead of' " Satan, "prince of the" darkness. All your church does is "feed" off the sheep.
It's way past time that the heathen deceiver stops judging me as a non-Christian and surely not your brother, by any means. And you can keep your hypocritical blessings to yourself and your idols.
"The spiritual man judges all things, but he himself is not subject to anyone's judgment." 1 Corinthians 2:15 Seeing that you're far from anything spiritual, you may want to stop your misquoting scripture, as if you think you know what you're talking about. servant of the Lord
Dan,
“Vicarius Filii Dei”, or Vicar of the Son of God, is not one of the Pope’s official designations. Another thing about the Church that you are ignorant of, or choose to ignore.
“It's way past time that the heathen deceiver stops judging me as a non-Christian and surely not your brother, by any means” = as already said, you bring judgment upon yourself. You are not a Christian, and nothing you say can change it (until you accept Jesus and all His teachings, it is).
“And you can keep your hypocritical blessings to yourself and your idols” = not really. It’s not for you to decide whom I elect to bless, my non-Christian brother.
"The spiritual man judges all things, but he himself is not subject to anyone's judgment." = you wish. You are not Christian, nor a spiritual man, therefore this verse does not apply to you.
I think I indulged your ignorance a little too long this time. Unless you have something concrete and intelligent to add to this discussion, I bid you farewell.
Have a blessed week, non-Christian brother.