Brazile’s sins a microcosm of biased media
CNN was asking for it when it let Donna Brazile take a seat on the pundit desk.
A plugged-in Brazile, now the interim chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, seized on the opportunity and leaked questions to Hillary Clinton’s camp — one on Flint’s toxic water disaster before a CNN Michigan town hall in March and another a few days later on the death penalty before an Ohio showdown.
CNN revealed yesterday — after WikiLeaks kept pointing out the embarrassing journalistic sins — that Brazile was no longer employed by the station.
Unfortunately, it’s too late for Bernie Sanders.
It’s also too late for voters hoping for an even playing field. There’s nothing wrong with having strong political opinions — I certainly have mine — but at least don’t cheat.
To put how serious this is into context, if Brazile traded stocks off inside information, the SEC would toss her in jail faster than you can say Martha Stewart. Yet, despite all of the above, the White House yesterday praised her integrity. You read that right. When asked about the hacked emails White House spokesman Josh Earnest said, “No, the president believes she has done a fine job stepping in during a very difficult situation to lead the Democratic Party ... she is a person of high character. She is a true professional who is a tenacious and effective advocate for Democrats.”
Guess rigging a debate is just being a good advocate. Talk about a lack of ethics. But after the targeting of conservatives via the IRS — and recent undercover videos showing how Democratic operatives deployed paid agitators to disrupt Donald Trump rallies — who’s surprised?
But that’s not all Donald Trump and other candidates are up against when challenging the almighty Democratic machine.
In a study conducted by Media Research Center of TV coverage during this election, a whopping 91 percent of Trump coverage was hostile toward the businessman compared to a small fraction of negative stories on Clinton.
If that’s not a stacked deck, what is?
Can you imagine in the World Series if the umpires made 91 percent of bad calls against one team and not the other?
A biased media is risking its lifeblood — followers — by giving an unfair advantage to the candidate of their choice.
A week from today voters will decide if they’ve had enough.