The post-election MSM narrative
Here’s a post-election prediction that I was completely wrong about. I wrote this on November 9th:
The Wikileaks release of John Podesta’s emails have been almost entirely ignored by the mainstream media because they were acting as an extension of HRC’s campaign, so they suppressed any news stories that were unfavorable to her.
But now that it no longer affects the outcome of any election, and after the mainstream media gets bored covering the aftermath of Trumps victory (I give it just a few days before that happens), they will discover a huge treasure trove of news stories in the Wikileaks emails, and they won’t be able to resist covering a big scandal.
I guess I underestimated how much the mainstream media (MSM) hates Donald Trump and overestimated their journalistic integrity. I apologize for my wrong prediction.
The MSM has created three post-election narratives which they are following in order to weaken Trump and set him up for impeachment (or so they hope). Listed below in declining order of importance:
1. Trump has MASSIVE conflicts of interest with his business.
You would think that if this were such a big deal, the MSM would have reported on this before any votes were actually cast. You know, to warn voters about who they were voting for? The MSM had many months to write stories about this before the election, but it was almost completely ignored until after election day.
My explanation is that the MSM was out to make sure Trump lost the election, and they believed that the best way to do that was to keep the focus on Trump’s alleged “racism” and “misogyny.” Besides, if they brought up conflicts of interest, Trump could easily deflect that and put more attention on how the Clinton family made more than $100 million while HRC was a U.S. Senator and Secretary of State, and during that time WJC received speaking fees from foreign governments. And the Clinton Foundation raised $2 billion dollars of donations, including donations from foreign governments.
But now that HRC is out of the picture, the MSM is using this angle to attack Trump. I suspect they are trying to set up a legal justification to impeach Trump, because they think that having said mean things in the past and enforcing the immigration statutes previously lawfully passed by Congress and signed into law by previous presidents isn’t a valid justification for impeachment.
2. Trump is reneging on his campaign promises.
Given that the MSM hates all of Trump’s campaign promises, you’d think they’d be delighted if this were actually true and they’d cover it in a favorable light, praising it as “statesman-like flexibility” and “presidential leadership.”
However, the real purpose of this narrative is to drive a wedge between Trump and his supporters. If Trump loses his popular support, then it becomes more of a possibility that the Senate would impeach him.
3. Trump was elected because of “fake news” and Russian propaganda and he lost the popular vote
This is a continuing attack on Trump’s mandate (weakening his authority with Congress), and to keep the Trump-haters incensed and angry so that they keep fighting him and making his presidency as miserable as possible.
The same journalists touting the Russian propaganda angle probably delightfully laughed in agreement when Obama told Romney in the debate that “the 1980s are calling to ask for their foreign policy back.”
We have learned that someone programmed a fake website that looked like Google and tricked Podesta with a phishing email. This is something that private hackers with no connection to the Russian government do all the time. Julian Assange said that the leaks didn’t come from the Russian government. The MSM is pushing mere speculation as if it were the rock-solid truth. So it’s very ironic that they are incensed by “fake news” when blaming Russia for Trump losing the election is a borderline fake story.
And no, a few scammers in the former Soviet Union taking advantage of fake stories as clickbait to get ad revenue is not a Russian government plot and did not swing the election.
* * *
Regarding your third point, I think you underestimate what they’re doing here. Facebook, Google and Twitter have come out with plans to crack down on “fake news”. Merkel has recently come out decrying the use of fake news and bots on social media ahead of elections she fears will go against her. I don’t think delegitimizing Trump’s mandate is their primary goal. Their primary goal is to purge social media of messages they don’t control. Their goal is to create a pretext for censorship.
I agree with this. The liberals can’t legally censor conservative media, but they can get their corporate allies (Google, Facebook, Twitter) to do it for them. Today, I see Twitter censoring my link to the Washington Times.