Washington Examiner

File:Washington Examiner vending machine.jpg

The publication now known as the Washington Examiner began its life as a handful of suburban news outlets known as the Journal Newspapers, distributed not in Washington D.C. itself, but only in its suburbs: Montgomery Journal, Prince George's Journal, Fairfax Journal, and Arlington Journal (later consolidated as the Northern Virginia Journal).{{Cite magazine|last=Robertson|first=Lori|date=April–May 2007|title=Home Free|url=https://ajrarchive.org/Article.asp?id=4307|magazine=American Journalism Review|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181116025350/https://ajrarchive.org/Article.asp?id=4307|archive-date=November 16, 2018|access-date=July 5, 2013|url-status=live}} Philip Anschutz purchased the parent company, Journal Newspapers Inc., in 2004.{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/weekly-standard-acquired-by-washington-examiner-parent-company|title=Weekly Standard acquired by Washington Examiner parent company|date=June 16, 2009|work=Washington Examiner|access-date=March 22, 2019|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190322214003/https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/weekly-standard-acquired-by-washington-examiner-parent-company|archive-date=March 22, 2019}}{{Cite web|url=https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/1108/anschutz-qwest-leiweke-bieber-staples-behind-curtain.html|title=The Man Behind the Curtain|last=Helman|first=Christopher|date=October 21, 2010|work=Forbes|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140321020614/http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/1108/anschutz-qwest-leiweke-bieber-staples-behind-curtain.html|archive-date=March 21, 2014|access-date=July 9, 2013}} On February 1, 2005, the paper's name changed to the Washington Examiner, and it adopted a logo and format similar to those of another newspaper Anschutz then owned, San Francisco Examiner.

The Washington Examiner became increasingly influential in conservative political circles, hiring much of the talent from The Washington Times.{{Cite web|url=https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/washington-examiner-newspaper-closing-becoming-weekly-magazine/|title=Washington Examiner Newspaper Closing, Becoming Weekly Magazine|last=Joyner|first=James|date=March 19, 2013|website=Outside the Beltway|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130323172238/https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/washington-examiner-newspaper-closing-becoming-weekly-magazine/|archive-date=March 23, 2013}} The website DCist wrote in March 2013: "Despite the right-wing tilt of [the Examiner's] editorial pages and sensationalist front-page headlines, it also built a reputation as one of the best local sections in D.C."{{Cite web|url=https://dcist.com/story/13/03/19/washington-examiner-to-cease-daily/|title=Washington Examiner to Cease Daily Publication and Become Political Weekly Archived 2013-07-28 at the Wayback Machine|last=Freed|first=Benjamin R.|date=March 19, 2013|work=DCist|publisher=Gothamist|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130728223720/http://dcist.com/2013/03/washington_examiner_to_cease_daily.php|archive-date=July 28, 2013|access-date=July 5, 2013}} The newspaper's local coverage also gained attention, including a write-up by The New York Times,{{Cite news|last=Peters|first=Jeremy W.|url=https://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/washington-examiner-helps-capture-fugitives/|title=Washington Examiner Helps Capture Fugitives|date=December 12, 2010|work=The New York Times|access-date=July 5, 2013|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130723054838/https://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/washington-examiner-helps-capture-fugitives/|archive-date=July 23, 2013|author-link=Jeremy W. Peters|url-access=limited}} for contributing to the arrest of more than 50 fugitives through a feature that each week spotlighted a different person wanted by law enforcement agencies.

In March 2013, the company announced that it would stop printing a daily edition in June and refocus on national politics. The print edition was converted to a weekly magazine, while the website was continually updated.{{Cite news|last=Bloomgarden-Smoke|first=Kara|url=https://observer.com/2013/03/the-washington-examiner-announces-a-shift-in-their-business-model/|title=The Washington Examiner Announces a 'Shift' in Their Business Model|date=March 19, 2013|work=The New York Observer|access-date=July 5, 2013|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160822173817/https://observer.com/2013/03/the-washington-examiner-announces-a-shift-in-their-business-model/|archive-date=August 22, 2016}} The new format was compared to that of The Hill. In December 2018, Clarity Media announced that the magazine would become a publicly available, expanded print magazine.{{cite press release|url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/press-release-washington-examiner-to-expand-into-a-nationally-distributed-magazine-with-a-broadened-editorial-focus|title=Press Release: Washington Examiner to Expand into a Nationally Distributed Magazine with a Broadened Editorial Focus|date=December 3, 2018|access-date=December 6, 2018|work=Washington Examiner|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191217082603/https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/press-release-washington-examiner-to-expand-into-a-nationally-distributed-magazine-with-a-broadened-editorial-focus|archive-date=December 17, 2019|url-status=live}}

On January 27, 2020, Roy Moore filed a $40 million defamation lawsuit against the Washington Examiner. A former chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court and candidate in the 2017 United States Senate special election in Alabama for the seat left open when Jeff Sessions joined the Trump administration, Moore claimed that the magazine repeatedly wrote "fake news" attacks stemming from allegations that he made unwanted sexual and romantic advances to girls as young as 15 when he was in his late 30s.{{cite news|last1=Gattis|first1=Paul|url=https://www.al.com/news/2020/01/roy-moore-files-40-million-fake-news-lawsuit.html|title=Roy Moore files $40 million 'fake news' lawsuit|date=January 28, 2020|work=AL.com|access-date=January 28, 2020|url-status=live|archive-url=https://archive.today/20200429235615/https://www.al.com/news/2020/01/roy-moore-files-40-million-fake-news-lawsuit.html|archive-date=April 29, 2020}}

In January 2020, breaking news editor Jon Nicosia was fired after showing a sexually explicit video to colleagues. Nicosia denied any wrongdoing, saying he had only shared the video "because he thought it might go viral ... and become a news story". Nicosia accused managing editor Toby Harnden of abusive workplace behavior. An employee's complaint seen by CNN said that Harnden had created a "toxic work environment" and a climate of "workplace terror and bullying". Editor-in-chief Hugo Gurdon then announced Harnden had departed and that he was "enlisting a third-party to conduct a thorough investigation" into the Examiner. But CNN reported that "current and former Examiner employees" said that "Gurdon was aware of Harnden's brutish managing style" long before it became a public issue and did nothing about it.{{cite news |title=How the Washington Examiner became a traffic monster |url=https://www.cjr.org/the_profile/washington-examiner-hugo-gurdon.php |work=Columbia Journalism Review |language=en |access-date=July 6, 2020 |archive-date=November 9, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201109202120/https://www.cjr.org/the_profile/washington-examiner-hugo-gurdon.php |url-status=live }}{{Cite news|last=Darcy|first=Oliver|date=February 14, 2020|title=Inside the climate of 'workplace terror and bullying' at the Washington Examiner, a conservative media outlet on the rise|publisher=CNN|url=https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/14/media/washington-examiner-workplace-harassment/index.html|url-status=live|archive-url=https://archive.today/20200405194314/https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/14/media/washington-examiner-workplace-harassment/index.html|archive-date=April 5, 2020}}

In October 2020, the Examiner hired Greg Wilson as the new managing editor. As online editor of the Fox News website, Wilson had previously published a news story supporting the conspiracy theory about murdered Democratic aide Seth Rich and WikiLeaks.{{Cite news|last=Rawnsley|first=Adam|date=2020-07-06|title=Washington Examiner Hires Editor Behind Fox News's Disastrous Seth Rich Story|language=en|work=Washingtonian|url=https://www.washingtonian.com/2020/10/14/washington-examiner-hires-editor-behind-fox-newss-disastrous-seth-rich-story/|access-date=2020-10-27|archive-date=November 1, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201101060555/https://www.washingtonian.com/2020/10/14/washington-examiner-hires-editor-behind-fox-newss-disastrous-seth-rich-story/|url-status=live}}

In June 2020, the Examiner published an op-ed by "Raphael Badani", a fake persona who was part of a broader network pushing propaganda for the United Arab Emirates and against Qatar, Turkey, and Iran. The Daily Beast subsequently disclosed that Badani's "profile photos are stolen from the blog of an unwitting San Diego startup founder" while his "LinkedIn profile, which described him as a graduate of George Washington and Georgetown, is equally fictitious."{{Cite news|last=Beaujon|first=Andrew|date=2020-10-14|title=Right-Wing Media Outlets Duped by a Middle East Propaganda Campaign|language=en|work=The Daily Beast|url=https://www.thedailybeast.com/right-wing-media-outlets-duped-by-a-middle-east-propaganda-campaign|access-date=2020-07-07|archive-date=July 7, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200707020036/https://www.thedailybeast.com/right-wing-media-outlets-duped-by-a-middle-east-propaganda-campaign|url-status=live}}

The magazine's publisher said in 2013 that it would seek to distribute the magazine to at least "45,000 government, public affairs, advocacy, academia and political professionals". The publisher also claimed the Examiner{{'}}s readership is more likely to sign a petition, contact a politician, attend a political rally, or participate in a government advocacy group than those of Roll Call, Politico, or The Hill.{{cite web |url=http://influence.mediadc.com/pages/washington-examiner/audience-and-readership |title=MediaDC {{!}} Audience and Readership |website=influence.mediadc.com |access-date=July 17, 2016 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160711081859/http://influence.mediadc.com/pages/washington-examiner/audience-and-readership |archive-date=July 11, 2016 }} Its publisher claims that the Examiner has a high-earning and highly educated audience, with 26 percent holding a master's or postgraduate degree and a large percentage earning over $500,000 annually, likely to be working in executive or senior management positions.

{{div col start}}

• Kristen Soltis Anderson
• Michael Barone
• John Bolton
• Tim Cavanaugh
• David Freddoso
• Quin Hillyer
• Timothy P. Carney
• Philip Klein
• Julie Mason
• Larry O'Connor
• Tara Palmeri
• Bill Sammon
• Geovanny Vicente
• Byron York

{{div col end}}

{{Conservatism US|media}}

The Examiner has been described as and is widely regarded as conservative.{{cite magazine|last=Adler|first=Ben|date=May–June 2009|title=Heresy on the Right|url=https://archives.cjr.org/feature/heresy_on_the_right.php|magazine=Columbia Journalism Review|archive-url=https://archive.today/20200429231806/https://archives.cjr.org/feature/heresy_on_the_right.php|archive-date=April 29, 2020|access-date=September 18, 2018|url-status=live}} When Anschutz started it in its daily newspaper format, he envisioned creating a competitor to The Washington Post with a conservative editorial line. According to Politico: "When it came to the editorial page, Anschutz's instructions were explicit—he 'wanted nothing but conservative columns and conservative op-ed writers,' said one former employee."{{cite news|last=Calderone|first=Michael|url=https://www.politico.com/story/2009/10/phil-anschutzs-conservative-agenda-028355|title=Phil Anschutz's Conservative Agenda|date=October 16, 2009|work=Politico|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170327095941/https://www.politico.com/story/2009/10/phil-anschutzs-conservative-agenda-028355|archive-date=March 27, 2017}}

According to the Columbia Journalism Review, among the conservative media landscape, the Examiner "is structured more or less like a mainstream newspaper—complete with clear distinctions between news reporting and commentary roles. The outlet has one of the largest newsrooms in online conservative media, with dedicated breaking news reporters and more specialized beat reporters, and a full editorial hierarchy." According to Editor in Chief Hugo Gurdon, the paper's conservatism on the news side was largely based on story selection, citing The Daily Telegraph as an inspiration.{{Cite web|title=Conservative Newswork: A Report on the Values and Practices of Online Journalists on the Right|url=https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/conservative-newswork-report-on-the-values-and-practices-of-online-journalists-on-the-right.php/|website=Columbia Journalism Review|language=en|access-date=2020-05-06|archive-date=April 20, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200420212214/https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/conservative-newswork-report-on-the-values-and-practices-of-online-journalists-on-the-right.php|url-status=live}}

The Examiner endorsed John McCain in the 2008 presidential election{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-examiner-endorses-mccain-palin-30489|title=The Examiner endorses McCain-Palin|date=September 24, 2008|work=Washington Examiner|access-date=May 13, 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180514064713/https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-examiner-endorses-mccain-palin-30489|archive-date=May 14, 2018|type=editorial}} and Adrian Fenty in the 2010 Washington, D.C., mayoral election.{{cite news|url=http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Why-Fenty-deserves-and-DC-needs-four-more-years--102302259.html|title=Why Fenty deserves – and D.C. needs – four more years|date=September 7, 2010|work=Washington Examiner|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20101204002556/http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/examiner-editorial-why-fenty-deserves-and-dc-needs-four-more-years|archive-date=December 4, 2010|type=editorial}} On December 14, 2011, it endorsed Mitt Romney for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, publishing an editorial saying he was the only Republican who could beat Barack Obama in the general election.{{cite news|url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/influential-conservative-newspaper-backs-romney-for-gop-nomination|title=Influential Conservative Newspaper Backs Romney for GOP Nomination|date=December 14, 2011|access-date=May 25, 2012|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181119010713/https://www.foxnews.com/politics/influential-conservative-newspaper-backs-romney-for-gop-nomination|archive-date=November 19, 2018|publisher=Fox News}}

In January 2019, the Washington Examiner published a story with the headline, "Border rancher: 'We've found prayer rugs out here. It's unreal{{'"}}. Shortly thereafter, President Donald Trump cited the story as another justification for a border wall amid the 2018–19 federal government shutdown. The story in question cited one anonymous rancher who offered no evidence of prayer rugs. The story provided no elaboration on how the rancher knew the rugs in question were Muslim prayer rugs. The author of the story formerly worked as press secretary for the anti-immigration group Federation for American Immigration Reform. Stories of Muslim prayer rugs at the border are urban myths that have frequently popped up since at least 2005, but without evidence.* {{cite news|last=Sommer|first=Will|url=https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-tweets-discredited-right-wing-meme-about-muslim-prayer-rugs-at-border|title=Trump Tweets Discredited Right-Wing Meme About 'Muslim Prayer Rugs' at Border|date=January 18, 2019|work=The Daily Beast|access-date=January 20, 2019|url-status=live|archive-url=https://archive.today/20200430001509/https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-tweets-discredited-right-wing-meme-about-muslim-prayer-rugs-at-border|archive-date=April 30, 2020}}

• {{cite news|last=Graham|first=David A.|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/trump-tweet-prayer-rugs-border-shutdown/580765/|title=Trump's Entire Shutdown Approach, Encapsulated in One Tweet|date=January 18, 2019|work=The Atlantic|access-date=January 20, 2019|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190326164222/https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/trump-tweet-prayer-rugs-border-shutdown/580765/|archive-date=March 26, 2019|url-access=limited}}
• {{cite news|last=Oprysko|first=Caitlin|url=https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/18/trump-prayer-rugs-border-wall-1111213|title=Trump touts story about finding 'prayer rugs' along border|date=January 18, 2019|work=Politico|access-date=January 20, 2019|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190327101959/https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/18/trump-prayer-rugs-border-wall-1111213|archive-date=March 27, 2019}}
• {{cite news|last=Joseph|first=Rebecca|url=https://globalnews.ca/news/4863205/trump-prayer-rugs-border/|title=Trump uses migrant caravan, prayer rugs to defend border wall, despite little proof|date=January 18, 2019|access-date=January 20, 2019|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190327091807/https://globalnews.ca/news/4863205/trump-prayer-rugs-border/|archive-date=March 27, 2019|publisher=Global News}}
• {{cite news|last=Qiu|first=Linda|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/18/us/politics/fact-check-trump-prayer-rugs-border.html|title=Trump's Baseless Claim About Prayer Rugs Found at the Border|date=January 18, 2019|work=The New York Times|access-date=January 20, 2019|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190327093103/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/18/us/politics/fact-check-trump-prayer-rugs-border.html|archive-date=March 27, 2019|url-access=limited}}
• {{cite news|last=Wagner|first=John|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-points-to-a-migrant-caravan-and-unverified-claim-about-muslim-prayer-rugs-as-he-continues-push-for-wall/2019/01/18/b31f4ea2-1b13-11e9-9ebf-c5fed1b7a081_story.html|title=Trump points to a migrant caravan and unverified claim about Muslim prayer rugs as he continues push for wall|date=January 18, 2019|newspaper=The Washington Post|url-status=live|archive-url=https://archive.today/20200430002727/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-points-to-a-migrant-caravan-and-unverified-claim-about-muslim-prayer-rugs-as-he-continues-push-for-wall/2019/01/18/b31f4ea2-1b13-11e9-9ebf-c5fed1b7a081_story.html|archive-date=April 30, 2020|url-access=limited}} The Examiner never issued a clarification or retracted the story.

In April 2019, Quartz reported that White House advisor Stephen Miller had been purposely leaking information on border apprehensions and asylum seekers to the Washington Examiner so that the paper would publish stories with alarming statistics that sometimes criticized DHS secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, which he could then show to Trump to undermine her. Nielsen was fired in April 2019, reportedly for being insufficiently hawkish on immigration.{{Cite news|last=Timmons|first=Heather|url=https://qz.com/1589527/stephen-miller-is-behind-a-purge-at-homeland-security/|title=Trump's anti-immigration zealot Stephen Miller is behind the purge at Homeland Security|date=April 8, 2019|work=Quartz|access-date=May 19, 2019|url-status=live|archive-url=https://archive.today/20190410231926/https://qz.com/1589527/stephen-miller-is-behind-a-purge-at-homeland-security/|archive-date=April 10, 2019|url-access=limited}}{{Cite news|last=Wemple|first=Erik|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/09/report-washington-examiner-was-used-undermine-dhs-boss-kirstjen-nielsen/|title=Report: Washington Examiner was used to undermine DHS boss Kirstjen Nielsen|date=April 9, 2019|newspaper=The Washington Post|url-status=live|archive-url=https://archive.today/20200430023925/https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/09/report-washington-examiner-was-used-undermine-dhs-boss-kirstjen-nielsen/|archive-date=April 30, 2020|type=editorial|url-access=limited}}

The Washington Examiner has published opinion pieces that oppose or deny the scientific consensus on climate change.{{Cite journal |last=Chapa |first=Alec |date=2020 |title=In Trump We Trust: Epistemic Isolation, Conflict Narratives, and Climate Change Denial In Significant Portion of Trump's 2016 Election Base |url=https://mackseyjournal.scholasticahq.com/article/21908.pdf |journal=The Macksey Journal |volume=1 |access-date=July 4, 2023 |archive-date=July 4, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230704174848/https://mackseyjournal.scholasticahq.com/article/21908.pdf |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |first=Scott |last=Waldman |title=Climate Denial Spreads on Facebook as Scientists Face Restrictions |url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-denial-spreads-on-facebook-as-scientists-face-restrictions/ |access-date=2023-07-04 |website=Scientific American |language=en |archive-date=January 26, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210126020628/https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-denial-spreads-on-facebook-as-scientists-face-restrictions/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |date=2019-08-31 |title=Washington Examiner op-ed cherry-picks data and misleads readers about climate models |url=https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/washington-examiner-op-ed-cherry-picks-data-to-mislead-readers-about-climate-models-patrick-michaels-caleb-stewart-rossiter/ |access-date=2023-07-04 |website=Climate Feedback |language=en-US |archive-date=October 25, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191025133549/https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/washington-examiner-op-ed-cherry-picks-data-to-mislead-readers-about-climate-models-patrick-michaels-caleb-stewart-rossiter/ |url-status=live }} In February 2010, it published an op-ed in which Michael Barone, a pundit who writes frequently promoting skepticism of climate science,{{Cite journal |last1=Elsasser |first1=Shaun W. |last2=Dunlap |first2=Riley E. |date=June 2013 |title=Leading Voices in the Denier Choir: Conservative Columnists' Dismissal of Global Warming and Denigration of Climate Science |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002764212469800 |journal=American Behavioral Scientist |language=en |volume=57 |issue=6 |pages=754–776 |doi=10.1177/0002764212469800 |s2cid=145593884 |issn=0002-7642 |access-date=July 4, 2023 |archive-date=October 19, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231019180737/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002764212469800 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription }} citing the Climatic Research Unit email controversy to argue that the scientific consensus on climate change was "propaganda ... based on ... shoddy and dishonest evidence".{{Cite web |last=Barone |first=Michael |date=2010-02-03 |title=How climate-change fanatics corrupted science |url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/how-climate-change-fanatics-corrupted-science |access-date=2020-07-04 |website=Washington Examiner |language=en |archive-date=July 4, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200704201645/https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/how-climate-change-fanatics-corrupted-science |url-status=live }} Daniel Sarewitz of Arizona State University criticized Barone, writing that Barone and other conservative climate change pundits erroneously "portrayed deviation from scientific certainty and highly idealized notions of 'the scientific method' as evidence against climate change", which he compared to "equally naïve and idealized" presentations on the other side of the debate, such as the film An Inconvenient Truth.{{Cite journal|last=Sarewitz|first=Daniel|date=March 3, 2010|title=World view: Curing climate backlash|journal=Nature|volume=464|issue=7285|pages=28|doi=10.1038/464028a|pmid=20203581|doi-access=free}}

In 2017, the Washington Examiner editorial board supported Trump's unilateral withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accords, which the Examiner editorial board called "a big flashy set of empty promises... The Earth's climate is changing, as it always has. And part of the reason it is changing is due to human activity. But those two facts are excuses neither for alarmism and reflexive, but ineffective action, nor for sacrificing sovereignty to give politicians a short-term buzz of fake virtue and green guerrillas another weapon with which to ambush democratic policymaking."{{Cite web|url=https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-brief/trump-will-withdraw-us-paris-climate-agreement-california-new-york-washington-unite-back-climate-pact|title=Trump will withdraw US from Paris climate agreement while California, New York, Washington unite to back climate pact|date=June 2, 2017|publisher=Carbon Brief|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170617084140/https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-brief/trump-will-withdraw-us-paris-climate-agreement-california-new-york-washington-unite-back-climate-pact|archive-date=June 17, 2017|access-date=September 30, 2019}}{{Cite magazine|last=Corneliussen|first=Steven T.|date=June 9, 2017|title=Paris climate accord critics praise and defend US withdrawal|magazine=Physics Today|issue=6 |doi=10.1063/PT.6.3.20170609a|doi-access=free}}

On August 31, 2019, the Examiner published an op-ed by Patrick Michaels and Caleb Stewart Rossiter titled "The Great Failure of the Climate Models".{{Cite news|last1=Michaels|first1=Patrick|url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/the-great-failure-of-the-climate-models|title=The great failure of the climate models|date=August 25, 2019|work=Washington Examiner|access-date=April 29, 2020|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200225034815/https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/the-great-failure-of-the-climate-models|archive-date=February 25, 2020|last2=Rossiter|first2=Caleb Stewart|type=op-ed|author-link=Patrick Michaels}} It claimed that overwhelmingly accepted climate models were not valid scientific tools. Scientists described the Washington Examiner op-ed as highly misleading, noting that there were numerous false assertions and cherry-picked data in the op-ed.{{Cite web|url=https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/washington-examiner-op-ed-cherry-picks-data-to-mislead-readers-about-climate-models-patrick-michaels-caleb-stewart-rossiter/|title=Washington Examiner op-ed cherry-picks data and misleads readers about climate models|date=August 31, 2019|publisher=Climate Feedback|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191025133549/https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/washington-examiner-op-ed-cherry-picks-data-to-mislead-readers-about-climate-models-patrick-michaels-caleb-stewart-rossiter/|archive-date=October 25, 2019|access-date=September 30, 2019}}

On the day after former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified before the House select committee on the January 6 attack, the Examiner published an editorial titled "Trump proven unfit for power again," writing in part:

{{blockquote|Cassidy Hutchinson's Tuesday testimony ought to ring the death knell for former President Donald Trump's political career. Trump is unfit to be anywhere near power ever again ... Hutchinson's testimony confirmed a damning portrayal of Trump as unstable, unmoored, and absolutely heedless of his sworn duty to effectuate a peaceful transition of presidential power ... Trump is a disgrace. Republicans have far better options to lead the party in 2024. No one should think otherwise, much less support him, ever again.{{cite news |last1=Mastrangelo |first1=Dominick |title=Washington Examiner: Hutchinson testimony shows Trump should not hold office 'ever again' |url=https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3541643-washington-examiner-hutchinson-testimony-shows-trump-should-not-hold-office-ever-again/ |work=The Hill |date=June 29, 2022 |access-date=June 30, 2022 |archive-date=July 15, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220715044002/https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3541643-washington-examiner-hutchinson-testimony-shows-trump-should-not-hold-office-ever-again/ |url-status=live }}{{cite news |title=Trump proven unfit for power again |url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/trump-proven-unfit-for-power-again |work=The Washington Examiner |publisher=Editorial Board |date=June 29, 2022 |access-date=June 30, 2022 |archive-date=June 30, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220630225326/https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/trump-proven-unfit-for-power-again |url-status=live }}}}

{{Reflist}}

• {{official website|1=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/}}
• {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050830001406/http://www.dcexaminer.com/ |date=August 30, 2005 |title=The Washington Examiner }}

{{Anschutz}}

{{White House James S. Brady Press Briefing Room Seating Chart}}

{{authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Washington Examiner}}

Category:2005 establishments in Washington, D.C.

Category:2013 disestablishments in Washington, D.C.

Category:2013 establishments in Washington, D.C.

Category:Anschutz Corporation

Category:American conservative websites

Category:Climate change denial

Category:Magazines established in 2013

Category:Magazines published in Washington, D.C.

Category:Political magazines published in the United States

Category:Newspapers disestablished in 2013

Category:Newspapers established in 2005

Category:Weekly magazines published in the United States

Category:Conservative magazines published in the United States