Watchdog tears up media’s ‘dismissive coverage’ of Durham bombshell

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks during the 2022 New York State Democratic Convention at the Sheraton New York Times Square Hotel on February 17, 2022 in New York City. |

While the corporate media remains silent or dismissive of a report that shows 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign spied on Donald Trump as presidential candidate and as president, a media watchdog insists their failure to cover the issue is leading many Americans to embrace other sources of news.

A deposit by former United States Attorney John Durham marks the latest development in the investigation into the origins of the investigation into Trump’s alleged ties to the Russian government and Vladimir Putin. The Feb. 11 filing, part of Durham’s investigation of Clinton attorney Michael Sussmann, claimed that a technology executive working on Sussmann’s behalf had “exploited his access to non-public internet data and/ or owners” to assemble the white papers intended to convince the FBI that Trump had a sinister relationship with Russia.

“The government’s evidence at trial will also establish that among the data Internet Tech Executive-1 and its associates exploited was domain name system (“DNS”) Internet traffic relating to (i) a particular healthcare provider, (ii) Trump Tower, (iii) Donald Trump’s Central Park West apartment building, and (iv) the Executive Office of the President of the United States (“EOP”),” the filing states.

Durham also said the allegations about Trump’s dealings with Russia were based on “purported DNS traffic that Tech Executive-1 and others had gathered regarding Trump Tower, Donald Trump’s apartment building in New York City. , the EOP and the aforementioned health care provider”.

In other words, this legal paperwork proves that despite multiple affirmations on the contrary by the mainstream media, the Trump campaign has been spied on.

In an interview with The Christian Post, Curtis Houck, the editor of conservative media watchdog NewsBusters, reacted to the media coverage, and lack thereof, of breaking news so far. He tagged MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough and his “humiliating [of] those who called this story” as “stupid or deliberately misleading” as the most outrageous media reaction to the story.

“I find it so predictable but still toxic,” he said.

Houck lamented the media’s “lack of seriousness” and “lack of curiosity about what we heard”, adding: “This is a medium that has spent years wasting our time and wasting the country’s time. with a Trump-Russia investigation that we now have serious questions about its origins.

Houck suggested that the media’s lack of interest in covering the story stems from a “defense of the narrative that the media has maintained for years, which is that Trump was a Russian agent and it was a slam case.” dunk”. He claimed that “they are really ready to do anything and everything to continue to defend their narrative because they see it as a reflection on themselves that this story is falling apart.”

If the media decided to show “some kind of humility about their mistakes and their ways”, Houck said they would have “more credibility”. He attributed the media’s “dismissive coverage” and “bias by omission” of the latest developments in the Durham Inquiry to a desire to avoid a “black eye” for their past coverage.

Houck said NBC is the only one of the three networks (NBC, ABC and CBS) to pay attention to the latest developments in the Durham investigation. NBC’s “Today” program spent 2 minutes and 55 seconds on the story Thursday morning. He described their coverage as “really dismissive”.

“They did what a lot of the mainstream media did when they cover it…which takes the Clintons literally.”

“We’re in our what… fourth decade of taking the Clintons at face value?” he applied. “It’s just laughable and inexcusable. People need to remember that… Michael Sussmann, Clinton’s attorney who was indicted by the Durham Inquiry, is being charged with what? Lying.”

Houck countered the corporate media’s eagerness to take the Clintons at face value with their coverage of Trump, which overshadowed their reporting of developments in the Durham investigation in some cases. He specifically noted that “last week they obsessed over the loss of his longtime accounting firm…which controls the books of the Trump Organization” and “visitor logs in early January 2021 until 6 January”.

“It’s always a conspiracy with Donald Trump,” he added.

While Houck told CP that MSNBC gave “lots of time” to the latest story developments, they did so with a “very condescending and dismissive tone.” CNN also gave the story “a bit of time,” while morning and evening news programs on ABC and CBS, as well as NBC’s “Nightly News” with Lester Holt, only got so far. present no time devoted to the story.

Houck identified the lack of media coverage of the latest developments in the Durham Inquiry as one of the many reasons why “people have ignored mainstream media and turned to alternative forms of media instead”.

“Despite all the problems we see in the information age with the internet and social media companies and censorship, I still believe this is a … net positive because you have all these alternative forms of media where people can get more comprehensive media. diet by looking at a variety of sources,” he added.

Examples of “alternative forms of media” Houck mentioned included “Writers on Substack” as well as Fox News, Newsmax and NewsBusters. He encouraged the American people to dig into the facts for themselves, pointing out that “there are documents [that] people can watch.

“History is not going away,” predicted Houck. “MSNBC coming out and trying to dismiss it as dangerous, stupid misinformation and being peddled by willful liars will only extend the life of the story further. [value] in the eyes of others. »

From Houck’s perspective, only “continued pressure” from the Tories will lead to further coverage of the latest development in the Durham Inquiry. “I think you don’t even have to be a conservative to want the press to be accountable and the press to cover a wide variety of stories. I often say that the news media can walk and chew gum at the same time when it comes to covering multiple stories on a wide range of topics and political fronts.

“On a newscast, people can talk about education or crime or COVID or Ukraine-Russia and what’s going on with John Durham,” he continued. Houck doesn’t expect to see “on the hour, five-minute segments” on the story, but would like “consistent coverage in the heads of these newscasts and on the front pages of newspapers” as opposed to “general dismissals” and a characterization of the story as “dangerous disinformation”.

Houck expressed hope that when Durham concludes its report, the media will provide “more coverage” of the investigation’s findings, stressing that “this story really matters”.

“It’s in everyone’s interest, regardless of their political ideology, to find out what happened and look into it and take it seriously.” He expressed concern that “looking at someone’s internet traffic…is seen as mundane when it shouldn’t be.”

As many media remained silent on Durham’s latest dossier, both Trump and Clinton weighed in.

Trump released a statement last weekend proclaiming that “the Special Counsel’s final closing [John] Durham provides compelling evidence that my campaign and my presidency were spied on by agents paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection with Russia.

“This is a much larger scandal and far greater in scale than Watergate and those who were involved in this spy operation and were aware of it should be subject to criminal prosecution. In a stronger time in our country, this crime would have been punishable by death, and reparations must be paid to those in our country who have been harmed by it.

Clinton took to Twitter on Wednesday to to reject the latest development of the Durham Inquiry as a “fake scandal to distract from its real ones”. She also included a link to an article from Vanity Fair, which she called “a good debunking of their latest nonsense.”

Former Attorney General William Barr appointed Durham, who at the time was the United States Attorney for Connecticut, to “investigate whether a federal official, employee, or other person or entity violated the law in connection with intelligence activities, counterintelligence or law enforcement directed against the 2016 Presidential Campaigns, individuals associated with the administration of President Donald J. Trump, including, but not limited to, Crossfire Hurricane,” codenamed investigation into Trump’s ties to Russia.

The Trump-Russia investigation led to the appointment of a special counsel, who spent nearly two years investigating the former president. Much of the media speculated about wrongdoing on Trump’s behalf and repeatedly assured the American public that the investigation would lead to impeachment and criminal charges against the former president. While Trump was impeached twice by the Democratic-controlled House, attempts failed in the Senate and neither impeachment was related to the Trump-Russia investigation.

Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be contacted at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com

Comments are closed.