The blatant bias and conflict of interest for the Pulitzer Prize

American Thinker.com ^ | May 12, 2022 | Rajan Laad

[Kaslin]

When Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016, it sent shockwaves through Washington. For the first time in modern U.S. history, an individual had won the highest office purely on grassroots support and by challenging the Washington Democrat-led establishment.

Trump was a threat to the status quo in Washington. The establishment knew they not only had to personally denigrate him, but also delegitimize his victory to prolong their relevance.

They first concocted the Trump-Russian Collusion hoax. The mainstream media amplified the lie with their breathless coverage. The proponents of this hoax couldn't tell how Russia meddled with the ballots or how the votes were altered; they just knew it had happened. If you asked questions, you were accused of spreading "Russian disinformation."

The cacophony caused the appointment of a special counsel.

For the next two years, the media hysterically covered "leaks" from the office of the special counsel. With every leak, they claimed that "the walls are closing in on President Trump." This was a daily occurrence. If you followed their coverage, you would not be blamed for believing that it was not a question of if, but when Trump would be forced to resign in shame.

The hoax cost $32 million in taxpayer money and caused more than two years of uncertainty. It probably cost the GOP the midterms in 2019.

In the end, the report came out, and there was no evidence of collusion. President Trump was obviously found not guilty.

[No name given]

Funny how emperor Barry gets one for being useless, though.

[Tell It Right]

Here's everything you need to know about the Pulitzer Prize:

This man has one:

[AB AB AB]

You guys are talking about the Nobel Peace Prize.
This article is about the Pulitzer Prize, which relates to journalism.
See https://pulitzer.org/