Durham Analysis: Media Lies and Political Bias -- Circumstantial Evidence of Biased Investigations
They lied.
They deceived the public for years, alleging collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. President Trump and his advisors, the agents of Russia, were guilty of treason. The FBI investigation was above reproach, led by career agents and civil servants, and insulated from politics or influence from FBI leadership.
Their sources, anonymous to the public and known to only them, were from within the US intelligence and law enforcement communities. These were the originators of the falsehoods; the journalists were merely vessels. In return for this cynical tradecraft, the media protected – and continues to protect – high ranking current and former US government officials. Anything to keep the information flowing.
The list of publications and “journalists” (for purposes of this exercise, any of these other terms might apply: stenographers or adulators or parasitic hosts) who put out the now-discredit claims of the Trump-Russia hoax is long and distinguished. They were nearly all guilty; the skeptics were few. The volume of lies, spread in print and on TV and on social media, would take months, if not years, to compile. The Columbia Journalism Review’s “The press versus the president”, a thorough analysis of some of the worst Trump-Russia era reporting (including stories from The New York Times and The Washington Post), was a four-part series that only touched the surface.
Narrative supported by lies.
Durham was to find the predicate to launch the Witchhunts on President Trump.
Big surprise>No predicate
Durham report has 306 (??) pages. Where is Halpren, Steele, and Misfud interviews and commentary?
Durham figured out, and demonstrated, DOJ FBI and Intel would subvert and upend ANY prosecution.
Congress must find the courage to bring charges of Treason
Great link and insight. It goes deeper than the known payers in all likelihood as they want ‘ plausible , not me , deniability “ if ever caught