Accuracy in Media

Once again the dominant media narrative has shifted overnight. Last week the media exploded with stories about Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ admitted contacts with the Russian ambassador to the U.S., the latest attempt to somehow derail and delegitimize the Donald Trump presidency. It is part of the narrative concocted by the Democrats and their allies in the media to claim that Trump won the election thanks in part to help from Russia. Collusion has been the word of choice, though no evidence has surfaced to support it.

The narrative changed over the weekend when President Trump sent out a series of tweets asserting that former President Barack Obama had wiretapped him “during the very sacred election process,” and that it was “Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”

It turns out that the Obama administration, according to reports, did go to the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) court to gain permission to spy, or electronically eavesdrop, or wiretap some members or elements of Trump’s campaign. They apparently were turned down back in June, and approved in October, after taking Trump’s name out of the request.

Former federal prosecutor and journalist for National Review Andy McCarthy examined how disingenuous the denial coming from an Obama spokesman was. In essence, it comes down to, “It depends on what the definition of ‘surveillance’ is,” and who is a “White House official.”

The media called foul after Trump’s tweets, and the word of the day became “baseless,” as in baseless accusations by Trump. They said he had “no evidence” to support these very serious charges against his predecessor, Barack Obama.

But the allegations of Russian influence were largely orchestrated by the Obama administration, and were ramped up when Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in November. That is when he decided to impose new sanctions and expel Russian diplomats, which never would have happened if Hillary had won.

Now, using his group Organizing for Action (OFA), Obama intends to continue influencing the political scene with a shadow government apparatus. OFA has been coordinating with groups such as the Soros-linked Indivisible. “Obama is intimately involved in OFA operations and even tweets from the group’s account,” writes Paul Sperry for the New York Post. “Run by old Obama aides and campaign workers, federal tax records show ‘nonpartisan’ OFA marshals 32,525 volunteers nationwide.” It has also raised over $40 million, according to Sperry.

The New York Times recently reported that Obama’s intelligence agencies kept documents related to the alleged Russian influence operation “at a relatively low classification level to ensure as wide a readership as possible across the government—and, in some cases, among European allies.’”

In other words, President Obama wanted information potentially damaging to his successor kept at the forefront of the national discussion whenever possible. It could be even better for Obama if there were Congressional investigations; that might distract Trump from rolling back Obamacare or the unsigned Iran deal. The Times also reports that the administration “sent a cache of documents marked ‘secret’ to Senator Benjamin Cardin of Maryland days before the Jan. 20 inauguration.” These documents were shared with Congressional Republicans, as well.

It should come as no surprise that the Obama administration would be aggressive, since the Obama administration waged a war on leakers, prosecuting more cases than all previous administrations combined, while harassing numerous media figures.

But while Trump appears to have stumbled by not producing evidence to support his claim, in fact his move may result in changing the narrative once again. Now the investigation could include Obama’s and Hillary’s ties to the Russians. After all, the same Russian ambassador who met twice with then-Senator Sessions visited the Obama White House at least 22 times during Obama’s presidency, including four times in 2016. Were any of those meetings about presidential politics? Hillary’s ties to the Russians have been well documented, including the Uranium One deal and Skolkovo, the Silicon Valley of Russia that provided them with dual-use technology and handed millions of dollars to Hillary’s campaign manager, John Podesta.

Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) argued on Fox News Sunday this past weekend that based on statements from Trump’s Cabinet appointments, they will be much tougher on the Russians than the Obama administration, including Hillary. Cotton said:

“If you want to know what a pro-Russia policy would look like, Chris, here’s some elements of it. You’d slash defense spending. You’d slow down our nuclear modernization. You’d roll back missile defense systems. You would enter a one-sided nuclear arms control agreement. And you’d try to do everything you could to stop oil and gas production. That was Barack Obama’s policy for eight years. That’s not Donald Trump’s policy.”

He might have added that you empower Russia’s ally Iran with more than $100 billion dollars, and a pathway to becoming a nation with nuclear weapons, to go along with its current status as the number one state sponsor of terrorism.

We at Accuracy in Media find the allegations of Russian interference in the election to be flimsy at best.

And as Andy McCarthy points out in another piece, the new Obama/media narrative that his administration was never surveilling the Trump campaign for ties to Russia, cuts against what they have been arguing for months now:

“Now that we’re supposed to believe there was no real investigation of Trump and his campaign, what else can we conclude but that there was no real evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russia…which makes sense, since Russia did not actually hack the election, so the purported objective of the collusion never existed.”

Monday night’s Nightline on ABC picked up on this theme, with reporter David Wright stating that “It’s important to note that there’s an equally outlandish narrative on the other side [besides Trump’s claim about Obama]. The other narrative, also in the mix, is that the Trump campaign may have colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 election. Again, allegedly. No proof of that either. No smoking gun of collusion.”

Brian Ross then added that former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said he had seen no evidence of collusion when he left the government in January. With the Republicans controlling every committee in Congress, as well as the executive branch, they should be able to shape the scope of the investigations. We hope they are just and honest, as well as tough and fearless.




Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.

Comments

  • TPS12

    The gop continues to be a major disappointment. They should be out there defending the President and the good of the country and all they do is lay there like broken toys useless. They need to stand up to the msm dems/libs and rinos now!

  • Danny S.

    This is Democrates politics as usual. GOP should steam roll past all these baseless alligations. Dem’s have had weeks now to present some type of evidence. None produced to date smile and move on. GOP should know that Dems are now only a party of disruption. They will continue to disrupt the GOP as long as the GOP allows them to.

  • Delores Cooper

    I KNOW! It is so frustrating. That’s one thing the D’s have always had going for them – “circulating the wagon” no matter how rotten the person or cause. Plus they’ve got the powerful MSM as well.

  • eddie kay

    Supposedly the Russians hacked Hillary who were then hacked by U S intel.My question is why has Hillaries emails(33,000)not been released.We know the US gov has them.

  • Harleys R. Toofuknloud

    Someday we may actually have media that sticks to the facts instead of speculating and spreading uncertainty.

  • ellray

    If you really want us to believe your website name, you should probably include an occasional article that finds bias toward conservatives. No one believes that “fake news” all points one way. Nor should they. You come off just as Fox does with its “fair and balanced” mantra–that one needs a shaker full of salt to use while reading your analyses.

  • TED

    So, Kincaid, your theory here is since Bill and Hillary were crooked and were obviously in cahoots with the Russians, it is, therefore, perfectly fine if Trump and his minions are also crooked and in cahoots with the Russians?

    You’re getting as nutty as the extremerighwingnut radioheads!

  • TED

    It could be that the GOP establishment is just not into the nuttiness that is the Trump administration.

  • TED

    What percentage of the voters do you think can distinguish a fact from an ‘alternative fact’? Most schmucks out there believe what they want to believe … right, wrong, or indifferent.

  • dirtflyer

    OBomba, the illegal EX-POS needs to be ARRESTED and turned over to EGYPT., along with HILLARY,McCain,KERRY, along with a Bunch of other Un0named Traitors. They are all Blocking / Meddling with the Democratic process of the American poeple. Conspiring to over-throw the legal elected government of the U.S. Pizzagate,Pedophelia is rolling forward. That atta clean some out. Draining the SWAMP, GO Pres. TRUMP.

  • mioahu

    Yeah , it pretty much goes one way, and all the pathetic “mainstreams” are leftist buffoons. So is the so called “paper of record”, the new york SLIMES, a shameful leftist con job. They should all be ashamed of themselves, they are just operatives for the leftists that have taken over the pathetic democratic party (can I say more than facelift braindead Pelosi, pocahontas face native Warren, communist Sanders, radical muslim Keith X Elliot and comedian Al Franken ??? ahahahhahahah)

  • Matt Burns

    Or not into the nuttiness that is you,Ted.

  • Rose of Sharon

    Yes, and if the Russians had indeed hacked Hillary her emails would have been released by now.

  • Tannim

    Maybe they’re simply using the Trump/media circus as cover to quietly get real work done, according to plan.

  • ellray

    mioahu, you are only excepting yourself from the class of people who think and reason. I’m fine with that, but would advise not advertising it so loudly.

  • mioahu

    Yeah, i am gladly excepting myself from that class of idiots. I am sure you consider Karl Marx and Noam Chomski geniuses, and with your above mentioned “leaders” , you are right on, definitely don’t want to be part of that 🙂

  • ellray

    Just go with your gut. What could go wrong?

  • mioahu

    It is pretty hilarious how leftists like you think they are smart, they think and reason, while not being able to have a debate on any issue with conservatives, being morally bankrupt and contradicting themselves at any sentence. It is leftism that is based on gut and feelings masquerading for reason. And that’s what lost you the election, the inability to debate , have a real message. Every time you have to debate, you just call the other people racist, homophobes, etc you name it cause leftism has no arguments other than name calling. So keep feeling good about yourself, while Trump and the conservatives dismantle the leftist utopia created by Obama. Aren’t you at a day without women march ? Pathetic.

  • ellray

    My only point was that no website is believable (especially one whose name is “Accuracy in Media”) that only tells one part of a story. How hard is that to agree with? What’s eating you?

  • Harleys R. Toofuknloud

    Most people can formulate their own opinions although the “daily scream” confuses many. Yes, most will believe what they want to believe as is their right. But the media has been in the spin game for far too long and needs to revisit its business model since their monopoly on the screaming and mindfuck has been broken by the web.

  • mlentz

    Some commentaries also lack believability, like yours.

  • ellray

    Wait, what commentary? That there are inaccurate news stories favoring conservatives as well as liberals? Crazy. 🙂

  • mlentz

    I was referring to yours.

  • missieb2000

    Paul Ryan has disappointed me time and again. The GOP under his leadership is ‘the Gang that Couldn’t Shoot Straight’ Where is Speaker Gingrich when you need him??

  • mioahu

    well, enough to win the election AHAHAHAHHA. It’s amazing how all the lies from media, education, artists, leftist politicians were uncovered as what they really are, LIES, by enough people to defeat the leftist lying machine

  • Jen Gurd

    It’s not meeting with Kislyak that is the problem. It’s LYING about it! And Hillary was not helped by the Russians! That’s the difference!