The “reporters” who were outed by Wikileaks for their participation in media collusion with the Clinton campaign are being protected.
Drudge featured a headline on the media collusion that Wikileaks exposed: “No Consequences for Reporters Caught Colluding with Hillary…”
Elsewhere in America, when emails that the author assumed would never see the light of day became public he suffers some form of consequences—you know, stuff like plummeting poll numbers, possible jail time or forced resignation. This goes for everybody from Hillary Clinton and the former head of Sony Pictures on down.
But if you’re a Politico or New York Times scribe or CNBC anchor John Harwood and hacked emails emerge that reveal you outright colluding with Hillary Clinton campaign—by giving advice or providing the communications director “veto” power over what to include from your interview with the candidate or allowing campaign chair John Podesta veto power over your stories—that is another matter.
Your media friends will not censure you or even scold you—in fact, they don’t bother to contact you directly. Instead, you can hide between a crafty spokesman who won’t even answer specific questions but acts like he’s the publicist for some elusive Hollywood star and that a journalist determined to ask standard pointed questions is actually pining to profile him for Vanity Fair.
The writer, Evan Gahr, goes on to demonstrate his claim by naming all the [so-called] journalists and describing how they evaded answering questions. Their bosses are protecting them.
The media is ducking questions from the media.
This isn’t all that new. Below watch Tucker Carlson express his outrage several days ago for the media issuing a “no comment” on the story.
Getting to some reporters is now like getting a question answered by the President. Instead of getting to the President reporters often have to settle for a White House spokesman. So it is with these “journalists.”
In multiple email exchanges, Politico spokesman Brad Dayspring, who would not even give out his own phone, did not answer a single factual question about [Glenn] Thrush. But did call him one of the “top political reporters in the country.”
Really? Top reporters theoretically treat both sides equally. Has he ever given Republicans advance copies of stories? If so, who?
When Daily Caller reporter Alex Pfeiffer made similar inquiries to Dayspring about Thrush he was also stonewalled. The flack proceeded to question Pfeiffer’s objectivity because he had called Thrush a “f[…]ing joke” on Twitter. But again ignored specific questions.
Ironically, Pfeiffer’s bon mot was in response to Thrush tweeting something that illustrated his own rank bias. Thrush said that he would not have written one of his stories if he could have known it would end up helping the Trump campaign.
Gahr describes many other cases. The media is stonewalling. They are evading the journalists that are still doing their jobs.
Why are journalists hiding from the media behind PR spokesmen? Because they have become essentially politicians themselves! They are politicians campaigning for other politicians like the Obamas are doing while Hillary naps.