Don's Tuesday Column

       THE WAY I SEE IT   by Don Polson   Red Bluff Daily News   2/26/2019

   Biased narratives, picking sides

It used to be the normal, expected practice of the news profession that any given story line, any apparent narrative would be looked at from multiple perspectives, with supporting facts, before presenting it to the public. It was (think about this) considered responsible journalism to provide those narratives, or sides, without preference for either one if that could be done, with supporting facts as time or space allowed. The reader or viewer could at least be satisfied that, at the very least, it was an “on one hand…on the other hand” case and wait for further revelations to start making their own conclusion.

News events that illustrate the failure of journalists to abide by the above: 1) the herd that ganged up on the Covington Catholic boys with the media’s preferred perspective (a factual statement that reveals how far the news media have fallen) rather than wait for—or even search out—the additional video that ultimately fully exonerated the MAGA hat-wearing, pro-life kids. Had reporters and editors simply played the available video they would have probably gotten closer to the truth than they did, saving, for instance, the Washington Post from a $250 million libel law suit.

2) With that cluster screw-up in mind, perhaps the coverage of actor Jussie Smollett could have been somewhat more cautious when his bizarre tale was first told. It wasn’t, for the most part, because a mentality has taken over most of journalism that there are “white hats” and “black hats” from the get go; events that have even a tangential overlap with the political realm can be blithely “pigeonholed” into preset good/bad analysis based on OrangeManBad (likewise, Trump’s supporters). His opponents are assumed to be, if not virtuous, at least commendable for their good intentions.

We are now seeing the results of a 2-year quasi-jihad waged by, first, the extended circle of Hillary Clinton/Barack Obama acolytes, campaign staff and Dept. of Justice officials; and second, virtually the entire national, coastal, beltway news media establishment that has morphed into little more than unelected mouthpieces of the Democrat National Committee. Their shared goals include 1) creating such hostile public opinion that President Trump leaves office, 2) dissuading anyone, with something to lose to the fury of the literal or virtual mob, from being part of Trump’s administration,

3) Elect Democrats to Congress (half way done) who can then use their committees and publicly-provided resources to so sully Trump’s reputation and image that not only do Republicans and voters run away from him in 2020 but they also associate the Democrat/media-created slime fest with Trump and Republicans in general. We know the media all vote, contribute and report in support of Democrats; what now becomes apparent is that they shamelessly propagandize to advance Democrat fortunes and beat Trump.

What more evidence do you need beyond the example of the highly edited clip of Trump’s May 2017 interview with NBC’s Lester Holt, a fine journalist who treated Trump respectfully and fairly. The abbreviated quote, where Trump talked about his thinking behind firing then-AG James Comey, was used to advance the charge that Trump fired Comey to obstruct the Russia investigation. In the little-played additional video, Trump made clear that he wanted “the Russia investigation to continue” and “be done properly,” as you can see and hear in “Unfake the news: Andrew McCabe is misleading America and the media is giving him a pass,” at the DailyCaller.com.

McCabe is touting the inaccurate edited assertion to charge Trump with obstructing Mueller’s Russia collusion probe, belied by the fact that Trump hasn’t taken one single step to stop Mueller. How the media can treat fired-for-lying McCabe with soft ball questions, fawning, credulous interviews and nary a skeptical raised eyebrow is beyond belief. The media has, in fact, picked a side—and Trump’s their enemy.

Together with the phony Hillary Clinton/DNC/FusionGPS/Steele dossier—the existence of which is irrefutable proof of collusion with Christopher Steele’s Russian sources—you have the near-entirety of “proof” of Trump’s perfidy. In other words, there is, as any objective observer has stated, not a shred of proof; on that, liberal legal scholar Alan Dershowitz agrees with Republican Sen. Richard Burr. What is disgustingly apparent is that such odious politicians as Rep. Adam Schiff won’t take “no evidence” for an answer as they crusade to unearth something, anything in Trump’s pre-presidency to fill an impeachment brief. His obsessive investigation will only help Trump sail to reelection.

Worth reading: “As The Russia Hoax Begins To Unravel, The Gaslighting Begins—The media has started backing away from the Russia collusion hoax. Many seem to know a reckoning is coming,” by blogger “Adam Hill” at TheFederalist.com. Suffice it to say that “Trump Is On Solid Legal Ground In Declaring A Border Emergency To Build A Wall,” the title of a lengthy piece also at The Federalist.com. Finally, Matt Margolis mines the deep well of Democrat hypocrisy in “I’m Old Enough to Remember When Democrats Loved Unilateral Executive Actions on Immigration.”

As is his wont, Mr. Minch continues to pick a fight by attacking me, “the Tuesday columnist,” over infanticide and race. He accused me of mistreating my dog; for the record, I haven’t had a dog since childhood. We care well for the indoor and outdoor cats, making the effort to have them spayed or neutered.

Liberals and progressives seem to place great stock in facts. A baby is still a baby if it survives a late-term abortion; when that living, breathing infant is either allowed or induced to die, that is literally “killing a baby.” I take it Mr. Minch thinks that a woman, a mother, has a right to make the decisive choice to kill that live baby. I don’t and, moreover, neither do most people whether they support abortion in early months or not. I answered his question; will Mr. Minch acknowledge and answer the above facts?