The Democrats’ impeachment farce is intended to smear President Trump, in part because that party’s leaders know they don’t have a decent candidate to run against him next year. This is why Congressional Republicans prominently displayed a quote from Rep. Al Green at today’s sham hearing:
“I’m concerned if we don’t impeach this President, he will get re-elected.” Unimpeachable logic.
As always, the Democrats count on their media arm to amplify their slurs and irrational attacks. The Media Research Center watches our networks’ appalling news broadcasts, so you don’t have to. Their findings show how deeply in the tank for the Democratic Party America’s news networks are:
MRC analysts have reviewed all coverage of President Trump and his administration on the ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts since 2017. Following the beginning of the impeachment inquiry on September 24, this coverage has been even more hostile than normal: Out of 684 evaluative comments included in these broadcasts, a whopping 96 percent have been negative, vs. a meager four percent that have been positive.
TV’s fascination with Democrats’ impeachment push has crowded out nearly all other news about the administration. During the six weeks since Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announced the start of the inquiry (September 24 through November 5), the ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts churned out 398 minutes of coverage to the Ukraine scandal, or more than three-fifths of all administration news during this period (645 minutes).
This nearly matches the 438 minutes of airtime these newscasts produced during the most hyper-intensive six weeks of the Russia “collusion” scandal, starting when the President fired James Comey as FBI Director on May 9, 2017…
With most of the developments behind closed doors, the majority of the networks’ impeachment coverage has been based on secret leaks from anonymous sources. Out of 172 news reports, a large majority (59%) relied on unnamed sources for their facts about the impeachment probe. …
Only two other Trump administration topics have been granted much airtime since the inquiry began: the successful U.S. mission that led to the death of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (45 minutes before it faded from the newscasts), and the earlier decision of the President to pull U.S. troops out of northern Syria (121 minutes).
The withdrawal of U.S. forces was given witheringly (98%) negative coverage on all three networks, whose journalists routinely framed it as “abandoning” an ally (the Syrian Kurds) in the fight against ISIS.
But while media coverage of the U.S. mission against al-Baghdadi was mostly positive, the President’s role in it was not. Out of nine evaluative statements about the President himself, two-thirds (67%) were negative. These focused on his refusal to brief congressional leaders, as well as his belittling description of the cruel ISIS leader’s last moments….
Currently we are enjoying what might be the best economy in world history, with strong economic growth, record employment, and wage gains, with minorities benefiting the most. One might think this would be worthy of news coverage.
Nah, just kidding:
Despite record highs in the stock market and a fifty-year low in the unemployment rate, the President’s handling of the economy was given a stingy 4 minutes, 6 seconds of airtime during these six weeks, or less than one percent of all Trump administration news (645 minutes).
And we haven’t yet gotten to what is surely one of the Democrats’ prime objectives; that is, to use their absurd impeachment drama to minimize news coverage of the DOJ Inspector General’s report that will be released any day now, and John Durham’s report into the corrupt (and perhaps criminal) origins of the plot by the FBI and the CIA against candidate, then President-Elect, then President, Donald Trump. I suspect that the Democrats want, more than anything else, to keep these bombshell revelations off the air. I also suspect that the networks will do their bidding by seizing on the all-important impeachment drama as an excuse to deep-six coverage of these far more significant stories.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.