It’s Mueller Time, exposing one of the worst disasters of media bias in history – the false claim that Donald Trump, his campaign or associates colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election.
Attorney General William Barr sent a letter to members of Congress Sunday stating that Special Counsel Robert Mueller found no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion – something the president has been saying repeatedly for more than two years.
Like the luxury liner Titanic, the supposedly unsinkable passenger ship that sank when it collided with an iceberg in 1912 in the Atlantic, the claim of Trump-Russia collusion was supposed to be unsinkable. At least that’s what we were told repeatedly by the anti-Trump media.
But down the collusion claim went when Barr revealed the findings of Mueller’s nearly two-year investigation.
The Mueller probe began with the allegations of Trump-Russia collusion, and those allegations were repeated again and again in media accounts.
But in reality, there’s nothing new about Russia’s attempts to influence our elections. The Washington Post has reported that Russia and its predecessor Soviet Union have been trying to influence American elections since 1960.
Yet ever since President Trump was elected – surprising media pundits who expected Democrat Hillary Clinton to defeat him – many news organizations have claimed he only got to the Oval Office because of help from Russia.
Forget that President Obama had promised Russia’s leader he’d have “more flexibility” working with Russia after the 2012 election. It had to be Trump who was the one working with Russia.
Journalists set aside ordinary things like honesty, professionalism and accuracy in their desperate quest to be the one who took down Trump.
The Russia collusion claim dominated the news for the past two years because much of the media couldn’t accept that their favored candidate – Hillary Clinton – was beaten by a man they could not stand.
There had to be another reason Trump won. The media had reported many times he was almost guaranteed to lose.
Except he didn’t lose. And many in the media have spent more than two years trying to overturn the result. Journalists set aside ordinary things like honesty, professionalism and accuracy in their desperate quest to be the one who took down Trump.
Buzzfeed published the uncorroborated dossier attacking Trump with salacious gossip and rumor even before he took office. Then it defended the foul result.
Three CNN reporters resigned after their false Trump-Russia story was removed from the CNN website.
On it went. ABC’s then-investigative reporter Brian Ross incorrectly reported that Trump directed Michael Flynn to contact Russia. ABC had to bail the lifeboats when it turned out that the contact was post-election. The Dow was underwater briefly for about 350 points. Ross was later suspended and he no longer works at ABC.
The list of such failures is almost endless. Now the press is forced to admit the Mueller report vindicated the president on collusion.
According to Barr, Mueller found that when the president said repeatedly that “there was no collusion” the president was right.
The narrative collapse would cause sane men and women to stop and reassess how they got here, how they got to a point where they violated every tenet of journalism they claim to support – just for revenge on Trump.
A few have noticed. Liberal writer Matt Taibbi released a whole chapter of his upcoming book “Hate, Inc.,” demolishing media coverage of Trump. The piece was headlined: “It's official: Russiagate is this generation's WMD,” comparing the false collusion claims to the incorrect claim that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction to justify the U.S.invasion.
Taibbi called the Mueller report “a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media.”
The media didn’t just ignore warnings like the Titanic captain. They aimed right at an iceberg (Trump) and were determined to smash it. Instead, the only thing that sank was their reputation.