(As I write this, at least one other Republican Senator is wavering on whether to vote for calling witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.)
Senator Lamar Alexander announced that he won’t vote for witnesses in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump. He called the current impeachment proceedings “highly partisan” and that it is “tearing the country apart”. He also feels that the highly partisan nature of the impeachment, both on the House and Senate sides, sets a bad precedent for the future. The reports are that, without Senator Alexander, there may not be enough votes to call for witnesses.
“tearing the country apart”. He’s only half right. It isn’t the current process that’s tearing the country apart. It’s the overwhelmingly misleading news reports and “analysis” that are failing to fully inform The People of the flaws and one-sided nature of the House proceedings that led to two textually-vague articles of impeachment.
The “press” has sometimes been called “the 4th estate” because, as an organ that implements a Constitutionally-guaranteed freedom, the press has incredible power. It can shape both national opinion and politics by how and what it reports to The People. The problem is that the press has failed in its responsibility to exercise “due diligence” far too often since the establishment of The Republic. Instead of acting as a check against government to ensure that governmental power is not being misused, it has used its own power to interfere with the workings of government. It has too often had a knee-jerk reaction to a story without following up whether the story was true. And it has failed to correct the record when it - the "press" - is proven wrong.
In the movie “All The President’s Men”, the executive editor of the WAPO – Ben Bradley – refuses to print any of the rumors about the Watergate incident until Woodward and Bernstein have confirmed those rumors with second sources. As well as finding witnesses and second sources, they have documents with names on them as well as eye-witnesses to actual conversations that took place, conversations that discuss actual crimes. Eventually, even some of the accused members of the Nixon staff pled guilty, meaning that they did it and they knew they did it.
Ever since Watergate, it seems that every reporter on the Washington “beat” is looking for the next “big breaking bombshell” story. Something big enough to earn a Pulitzer. Every unsourced (meaning “anonymous” and thus unverified and sometimes unverifiable) rumor is printed as fact. Every “news agency” is looking for a story to scoop all of the other “news agencies”. Far too often, the “scoop” ends up being a nothingburger, a lie, or a huge distortion. Instead of truth, the press prints speculation disguised as opinion. Reporters bury the lede in the 20th paragraph of a 21 paragraph story.
There is no more due diligence, no more requirements for a “second source”. Ben Bradley may be rolling in his grave over the lack of verification in today’s “press”.
“Because that’s what I think” is an insufficient standard to formally accuse anyone of a crime. In court, what you think is not evidence: what was done is evidence. And if you didn’t actually see it happen, your testimony is worthless – and can be thrown out. The courts require due diligence, and the presiding judge can stop the proceedings if he/she believes that the prosecution is gaming the system merely for a conviction. But in the 21st century, a media opinion writer’s “here’s what I think” takes on the imprimatur of fact. The press gets away with it because it is relying on its own history and standing as justification to publish, and because the Constitution says that that Congress shall make no law "...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."
Freedom without responsibility: this should be the motto of today's press.
“The Newspaper Of Record” may have meant something in the early 20th century when the NYT was faced with printing facts to defeat the lies and deceptions of Hurst's “yellow sheets”. And it may have meant something when the NYT and WAPO were fighting to publish the Pentagon Papers – actual printed evidence of corruption in the DOD - against the orders of the White House. And it may have meant something during Watergate, when actual crimes were being investigated and “deep throat” was pointing Woodward and Bernstein toward actual corruption in the White House.
But something happened in 2008. The election of Barack Obama changed everything. The press had pushed “the chosen one” into the White House and were ready sell their souls and use all of their power to protect him and his administration. The press knew about “Fast and Furious” and stayed silent. They knew that the IRS was being used as a weapon against political enemies and stayed silent. They knew of the numerous accusations of corruption in the Obama administration and stayed silent. Why? Because they had chosen Obama. They were protecting “one of their own”.
Then along comes the most unlikely of candidates for President: Donald J. Trump, who is a creature of media. He understands the media and how it can be used. Trump begins to use one of the media's favorite social media platforms… and the mainstream media watches their carefully self-crafted reputation begin to crumble. They use all of their power to try to stop Trump from being elected: everything from false accusations of sexual misconduct to replays of “locker room” talk to accusations of corruption in his past businesses.
But Trump is elected President – against the full-throated opposition of the press.
Trump immediately starts “pulling back the covers”, “turning on the lights”, and Tweeting about what he’s finding… and the press realizes that they no longer have control or influence over the highest official in American government. So, the press turns its eye toward the public. It violates Bradlee’s “get verification before we print” standard… and quickly begins to lose the public’s confidence. The harder the media fights to regain the public’s confidence by reporting false evils about Trump, the faster they continue to lose the public’s confidence. They enlist members of Congress to assist them ...
… and here we are, nearing the end of a process that began with nothing more than rumor and innuendo, consisting of nothing more than rumor and innuendo, with a set of impeachment articles based on nothing more than rumor and innuendo.
With at least one Senator now walking away from demanding witnesses that the House never called, and with at least one other wavering, Trump will be acquitted. The media will go absolutely nuts, accusing the Left of betraying them, of being unable to prove the unprovable, and to convict without hard evidence.
I have a strange feeling that this episode – the attempt to impeach the president without a prosecutable crime – may be a turning point. Either some in the press will begin the process of self-examination and ask “why didn’t we do our own unbiased investigation” and return to printing fact-based, verified, and unbiased reports , or some in the press will go even deeper into recrimination and accusation, thus proving – even to their friends – that they are irredeemably biased and untrustworthy.
Either way, it’ll be good for the country. I’m hoping that the current press destroys itself. This could actually free the public to find fact-based media reporters who can point back and show how “the press” corrupted itself in its own chase for political power.
No comments:
Post a Comment