It makes me sad to say this, because I am part of it, but today’s “media” have completely abdicated their role as truth-telling government watchdogs.

They are narrative-driving Democrat lap dogs.

Oh sure, there used to be a liberal bias in the news. You took it with a grain of salt and moved on. But today, it’s full on push the narrative of the left. Not sure exactly why. Perhaps it’s the internet. Perhaps it’s the election of Donald J. Trump. Who knows. But regardless of the issue, whether it’s climate change, immigration, taxes – name one – the media take the side of the Democrats and run with it – even when they know it’s wrong.

The two most jarring issues – and troubling from a free press standpoint – are the Mueller investigation and the more recent release of the inspector general’s report on the origins of the Mueller Investigation.

For two years, the national media drove the Democrat narrative that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia and that Trump’s election was invalid. You could literally make a 40-hour video mashup of “news” anchors saying there was “collusion.”

Dozens of reporters covering D.C. quoted dozens of unnamed sources, all of whom pushed the narrative. There was collusion. There just had to be.

Then, following all the breathless anticipation, the anchors faces went blank as the Mueller report came out. No collusion.

Huh. How about that. Oh well, let’s move on.

Was there a single correction posted? Was there any soul searching about how they got it so wrong for so long? Were there any opinion pieces written to apologize or assure the public that they would do better in the future?


Let’s just move on to the next Democrat talking point and push that until we’re blue in the face.

Enter the inspector general’s report.

The media narrative here is that the inspector general found no political bias as motivation for beginning the Mueller investigation.

Of course, later on the report reveals FBI behavior that is a scandal of historic magnitude. But never mind, the media won’t latch onto that because it doesn’t fit the narrative. The narrative in this case being the FBI did nothing wrong in launching an investigation into the Trump campaign for Russian collusion, which we now know didn’t exist.

Nothing to see here. Let’s move along.


I think Glen Greenwald, at The Intercept, says it best:

“If you don’t consider FBI lying, concealment of evidence, and manipulation of documents in order to spy on a U.S. citizen in the middle of a presidential campaign to be a major scandal, what is? ... In this case, no rational person should allow standard partisan bickering to distort or hide this severe FBI corruption. The IG Report leaves no doubt about it. It’s brimming with proof of FBI subterfuge and deceit, all in service of persuading a FISA court of something that was not true: that U.S. citizen and former Trump campaign official Carter Page was an agent of the Russian government and therefore needed to have his communications surveiled.”

He notes, the IG report documented, “a multitude of lies and misrepresentations by the FBI to deceive the FISA court into believing that probable cause existed to believe Page was a Kremlin agent. The first FISA warrant to spy on Page was obtained during the 2016 election, after Page had left the Trump campaign but weeks before the election was to be held.”

Even though Page wasn’t a Kremlin agent, the U.S. media reported that he was – over and over again. Clearly, he was the reason there was collusion, they said. A Trump campaign official was a Russian agent. Collusion. There it is. It’s plain to see. Problem is, it wasn’t true.

And the way the media portrayed the request for the FISA warrant also was untrue.

Face it. They screwed up. They trusted Adam Schiff, the head of the House Intelligence Committee.

Remember when Schiff said the FBI met the “rigor, transparency and evidentiary basis needed” when they applied for the FISA warrant? No they didn’t. Remember when he said the FBI didn’t rely on the discredited Steele Dossier to get the warrant? Yeah they did.

And now we know that not only did they rely on the dossier, they concocted evidence and left other stuff out to make the dossier look better – or worse – depending on your perspective – than it really was.

And you know what? Schiff knew better. He had the briefings. He knew precisely what the FBI was up to and told us all the exact opposite. Why? Surely there’s no political bias. Cough, cough.

And remember the infamous Devon Nunes memo, where he dared to suggest that the Steele Dossier was the impetus for the FISA warrant? He was mocked, ridiculed and vilified by the media.

Matt Taibbi, a liberal Rolling Stone journalist who I admire for the level of integrity in his reporting, said this about that: “Democrats are not going to want to hear this, since conventional wisdom says former House Intelligence Chief Devin Nunes is a conspiratorial evildoer, but the Horowitz report ratifies the major claims of the infamous ‘Nunes memo.’”

Now, will the venerable free press in American hold Schiff or anybody else to account for lying to the American people about all this? Will they apologize to Devon Nunes?

Nah. Doesn’t fit the narrative.

But what they did report – repeatedly for days – was that the inspector general found “no political bias” or “improper motivation.” And, of course, nobody in the media would ever ask the next obvious questions. If it wasn’t politics, what was it that motived the FBI to use bogus methods to wiretap a Trump campaign official? If there was no “improper motivation,” what was the proper motivation for that behavior? You know the answer.

Attorney General William Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham have expressed concerns over the inspector general’s report. Barr told NBC:

"I think our nation was turned on its head for three years based on a completely bogus narrative that was largely fanned and hyped by a completely irresponsible press.”

Cleary, the facts are on Barr’s side.

But, of course, that doesn’t fit the narrative, so here are a few Washington Post headlines:

“What Bill Barr doesn’t understand about the office of attorney general.”

“John Durham has a stellar reputation for investigating corruption. Some fear his work for Barr could tarnish it.”

“Eric Holder: William Barr is unfit to be attorney general.”

“William Barr’s deceptions are more dangerous than you think. Here’s the latest.”

You get the picture. All across the media landscape Barr is painted as a dangerous partisan hack. Meanwhile, the FBI’s behavior – a scandal of historic proportions – goes virtually unreported.

I must admit, however, that since the inspector general’s report confirmed what folks on the right have been saying for years about the FISA warrant and the FBI’s investigation into Carter Page, at least all the media blather of “right-wing conspiracies” has toned down a bit.

But this really isn’t about Trump or Republicans or Democrats, is it?

This is about the underpinnings of what makes America work as a constitutional republic. We need a vigorously nonpartisan free press that is willing to investigate the activities of government regardless of who’s running the show.

Whether it was warrantless wire tapping, or intelligence failures that led to the Iraq war during the Bush years, or IRS scandals and illegal gun running during the Obama years, we need a press that is vigorously holding government officials to account regardless of their politics.

We simply don’t have that.