Schiff strikes again

We have to take note of Melanie Zanona’s illuminating Politico article “Schiff may have mischaracterized Parnas evidence, documents show.” Subhead (understated): “Unredacted material shows he may have referred [Ed.: strongly suggests he referred would be more like it] to the wrong ‘Mr. Z.'”

One thing we know about House Intelligence Committee Chairman and impeachment manager Adam Schiff: the man has a strained relationship with the truth, but it doesn’t bother him. It doesn’t bother him at all. Nor does it bother his media enablers. They freely disseminate his line and never call him to account.

Mark Hemingway pauses over the Politico story and the larger media context in the RCP column “Media Keep Giving Adam Schiff the Benefit of a Doubt.” Hemingway asks: “How many times does the California congressman who spearheaded the Democrats’ impeachment effort — and is prosecuting the case in the Senate — have to mislead the public before the press stops cutting him so much slack?”

As Hemingway’s column makes clear, the press is on Schiff’s team. The press is his public relations arm.

Hemingway doesn’t put it that way, but that is the moral of the story. Hemingway puts it this way: “Trump does seem like a special case when it comes to policing honesty. However, the media have long portrayed Washington as a place where Democrats never screw up and Republicans always ‘pounce’ – and these double standards were on display well before Trump descended down that golden Trump Tower escalator.”

Responses