Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

DNC-Hillary Collusion Bombshell Ignored by Major Networks

DNC-Hillary Collusion Bombshell Ignored by Major Networks

“They didn’t want to ruin their narrative”

Earlier this week, Mary wrote about former DNC chair Donna Brazile throwing the Hillary Clinton campaign under the bus with her scathing Politico article about the Democrat primary being rigged against Bernie Sanders.  Brazile revealed that she found further email evidence that the Hillary campaign had struck an “unethical” deal with the DNC that effectively hobbled the Bernie campaign.

This is an enormous bombshell that one might imagine the major networks would deem worthy of a passing mention.  After all, they did occasionally spare a few moments to cover the Hillary email and server scandals.

One would be wrong, as President Trump noted yesterday.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/926481563214376961

While still a candidate, Trump was quite vocal about the way the 2016 Democrat primary was “rigged” against Sanders, as was Sanders himself.

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/732893573365010432?lang=en

By any measure, Brazile’s shocking revelations are news.  However, the major networks couldn’t find the time to squeeze it into their broadcasts.

Fox News reports:

Brazile admitted that Hillary Clinton’s campaign gained significant control over the Democratic National Committee’s finances and strategy in exchange for helping the party wipe out 2012 presidential campaign debt. In laymen’s terms, Brazile explains how the party rigged the primary for Clinton to defeat Bernie Sanders through shady financial deals – which would typically be major news.

An excerpt from her new book, “Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House,” was published by Politico at 5 a.m. ET on Thursday morning – over 12 hours before the big three networks air their newscasts.

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren even appeared on CNN at roughly 4:40 p.m. ET to discuss the scandal but ABC’s “World News Tonight,” CBS’s “Evening News” and “NBC Nightly News” skipped it completely. These programs start at 6:30 p.m. ET.

On Thursday, after CNN and Fox News both covered the Brazile claims, CBS opened with details on the deadly ambush in Niger, while NBC and ABC both opened with the proposed tax cut.

While Fox News reports that NBC planned to cover it in last night’s broadcast, the other two major networks didn’t respond to requests for comment.

. . . .  ABC and CBS did not immediately respond to request for comment regarding why they failed to cover the bombshell, but Media Research Center News Analyst Nicholas Fondacaro has a theory.

“They didn’t want to ruin their narrative that Clinton was a pure angel who was a victim of Donald Trump and Russian collusion,” Fondacaro wrote.

That sounds about right.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Long ago, I worked for a newspaper (in the IT department – so don’t blame me for the news). During frequent visits to the newsroom I learned that most news decisions are made not as reasoned judgments of the import or meaning of a story but simply on the basis of how they feel about the subject.

Things that made them happy got covered extensively. Things that made them angry got covered sometimes even more extensively. Things that made them sad or hopeless or anything similarly negative, were passed over.

Yet more evidence that Hillary is a career criminal who corrupted the entire party apparatus for her own benefit makes them very upset. So it must not be true. So it would be silly to cover it.

See how it works? It’s not about some mythical narrative. It’s just about feelings.

This may become a defining moment for the MSM. How many BernieBots will now consider them to be fake news.

They “knew” Trump was lying. And now they realize they were wrong and it was the MSM that was lying.

I’m sorry, but I find it very difficult to get upset about the DNC essentially working for Hillary and against an independent socialist. Anyone with any intelligence could clearly see that. Unless one primary candidate racked up 75% of the ordinary delegates, the super delegate pool, which was totally controlled by the DNC, would install the DNC’s preferred candidate as the nominee. That was HRC. Ho hum.

Now, the DNC is throwing HRC under the bus and blaming the Presidential loss on her, in order to improve their image and attract donors. And, the anti-Hillary forces are actually helping them in this. What the Republicans should be doing is pointing out that the DNC was wholly responsible for the state of affairs that it found itself in. It was broke through mismanagement. HRC had nothing to do with that. It willingly entered into the deal with HRC in exchange for money. And, it willingly supported HRC as its candidate in the general election and worked against Sanders. HRC is damaged political goods at this point. But, the DNC can still come back. Strategically, they should be the ones labeled as being responsible for Hillary’s loss.

    Milhouse in reply to Mac45. | November 4, 2017 at 9:22 pm

    Unless one primary candidate racked up 75% of the ordinary delegates, the super delegate pool, which was totally controlled by the DNC, would install the DNC’s preferred candidate as the nominee.

    The DNC is not supposed to have a preferred candidate. And it does not control the superdelegates; they each make up their own minds, and can change them at any time. Sure, at that time it seemed that most superdelegates would support Clinton, but the DNC was supposed to stay neutral until this became a certainty.

      Mac45 in reply to Milhouse. | November 5, 2017 at 12:17 pm

      You really believe that the super delegates are independent? I suspect that you have already mailed off your letter to Santa Clause as well. The whole purpose of the Democrat super delegate is to allow the party to off-set delegates won by other than the party’s chosen candidate. They exist to enforce the will of the DNC.

      Both parties attempt to control the outcome of their primary process in order to see their preferred candidate nominated. The Republicans flooded the field in their primaries in order to dilute the delegate numbers of any single candidate, thereby allowing the choice to be made at the convention, heavily influenced by the RNC. This failed to happen and the rules called for delegates to vote for the candidate who had won their vote in the state primary election.

      The Dems, not as worried about appearing fair as the GOP, have developed super delegates; who are all elected, influential members of the Party and vote the way the DNC wants them to. Sanders never had a chance to win the nomination. That was a foregone conclusion. What troubled the DNC was the intensity of the Sanders supporters. They were concerned that the Sanders voters would feel betrayed and stay home, as the conservative Republican have for many election cycles now.

      However, now it become common knowledge that the Dem nomination was rigged. and, as HRC lost the general, the DNC is trying to blame that on the Clinton campaign. This is an attempt to reclaim Sanders voters and donors. Nothing will change with regard to how the DNC does business. It is all for show.

If the MSM could cover up Fast and Furious, why not this?

The purpose of the media has changed from informing the public to controlling the flow of information.

What should really bother everyone is not how the MSM is essentially refusing to cover this scandal, rather it is how the DNC manipulated the primary election and how allegedly no law was broken. Here we have a democratic selection process consisting of millions of dollars being spent and thousands of hours of work being committed to inform liberals of the various candidates so that they can vote on who they want to represent their party and we now discover that it all is a sham meaning nothing. If I read it correctly, the courts said that there is no law requiring the DNC to run a “fair” election which gets to the very core of our governing system. While everyone is running about with their hair on fire over what Hillary did, no one seems the lest bit concerned about how no law was broken so there is nothing to stop this from happening again.

    Mac45 in reply to Cleetus. | November 5, 2017 at 12:21 pm

    Political parties are NOT government institutions. They can run their candidate selection process anyway they want to. There should be NO laws governing that. The laws should address maintaining a level playing field between parties.

If the media thinks to cover up news to keep the narrative that Hillary is a “pure angel” they have all ready failed.

The longer they do this the deeper the hole they dig for themselves and the more people believe in fake news.

You don’t have to be a Trump fan or supporter to hate what the media has become. Most people don’t like being lied to – even by omission.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend