Because they hate President Trump and are disgusted by his supporters, the mainstream media have recently started trolling us by adding “without evidence” to headlines and chyrons that bear Trump’s claims. And they only do it for claims made by President Trump and those who support him.
If you oppose President Trump, your claims — no matter how insane or unhinged — get published without any filters. But if you support President Trump, your claims are instantly refuted so as to prejudice readers and viewers.
And you need only look at how the media deploys “without evidence” for proof that it’s nothing more than that: Partisan hackery to deceive audiences with the added bonus of angering and disenfranchising those deplorable Trump voters, all under the guise of journalistic integrity and as such a brutal and sustained assault on the credibility of the entire Fourth Estate.
‘Adda boy, CNN.
CUZ MUH FREE PRESS!!!1!
I personally first noticed the “without evidence” troll a little more than 6 months ago. From a piece published on September 11, 2018…
Enter CNN with their version of events, kicking things off with their favorite two words when it comes to stories they don’t like: “Without evidence.”
CNN’s Jim Sciutto — a former Obama political appointee dishonestly held up by CNN as an impartial journalist — says, “Republican Congressman Mark Meadows without evidence suggests that new texts indicate misconduct by former FBI officials.”
Let’s pause for a moment to point out the first major problem with Sciutto’s butchered reporting.
He says “without evidence” in the exact same breath as he reports on “new texts,” which are themselves the evidence.
It was a passing annoyance at the time. As I saw it: He was fact-checking the news as he reported it, but doing so subjectively, and thus passing off his opinionated judgment as actual “news.”
No big surprise. Just another day at CNN.
But a week later I saw it pop up again. And again courtesy of the rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth partisans at CNN who claim to be impartial journalists. The worst part about this sighting of the “without evidence” troll was that the evidence not only existed, but it was glaring.
The claim: The Trump/Holt interview was being selectively edited by the media to make Trump look bad.
The evidence: The media was assigning a nefarious conclusion based on a very short clip that, when played in its entirety, debunked the media’s nefarious conclusion.
Both on air and in their headlines, CNN played the “without evidence” game when in fact the evidence was clear.
The full headline reads: “Trump’s attorney claims, without evidence, the President’s 2017 interview on Comey firing was edited.”
But it was edited. It was edited in many, many ways. But most egregiously, it was edited to reveal only a small portion of Trump’s remarks. And anchors and journalists then told their audiences to infer something from those remarks that didn’t actually happen. And they refused to show the rest of Trump’s remarks because they hurt the media’s dishonest interpretation. There was plenty of evidence, but CNN lied to readers and trolled Trump supporters by adding “without evidence” to the headline. (If you want to know more about that particular episode, which continues plaguing the media’s credibility today, click here for the complete story.)
After that early period, more people started noticing the “without evidence” troll and calling it out.
Of course that didn’t stop the Washington Post’s fact checker from employing the phrase for his own one-sided analyses.
And of course the media organizations themselves continued using it.
This keenly aware Twitter user captured a whole page of Google results.
And if we wanted to, we could keep pulling up more examples from individuals and news organizations.
Instead, let’s skip ahead to today which provides one of the most unserious, blatantly dishonest and biased examples of “without evidence.”
Seriously, Politico? You’re asking for hard evidence that Adam Schiff is a liar and leaker? That’s one of the most ridiculous things that anyone anywhere on the planet will ask for all day today.
Maybe all year.
And by the way, mainstream media: What’s your standard of “evidence” anyway?
You’re the same people who are 100% dug in on the claims that a deceptively edited interview with Lester Holt is hard evidence that President Trump obstructed justice, and “Hey Russia! Know how to find Crooked’s lost 33,000 emails?” is hard evidence that he colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election.
And yet Trump can’t state the obvious about Adam Schiff without you demanding he produce “evidence?” If you need evidence that Adam Schiff is a liar and a leaker, you’re even worse at this profession than most of us thought. But you don’t need evidence. You know it’s true. You’re just exerting the same partisan hackery that you have for the last two years.
You are utterly beclowning yourselves but, far more destructively, you’re personally responsible for obliterating the media’s credibility.
The Fourth Estate, esteemed as it once was, is now a laughingstock among virtually everyone who isn’t part of that industry. There are no more news professionals at ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, Washington Post and New York Times. They are virtually all partisan activists defending the swamp they call home from the President we elected to drain it.
And the “evidence” of that has become ubiquitous.
Make sure to check out WhatFinger News for all the best right-minded media content from around the web.