On election night, we all saw clear and unambiguous evidence in their facial expressions of the rank partisanship of supposedly objective journalists.

As Trump won swing states like Ohio and Florida, and edged towards victory, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow looked grimly into the camera, furrowed her forehead, heaved a big sigh, and delivered a sky-is-falling dirge:

take our poll - story continues below
Completing this poll grants you access to DC Clothesline updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“You’re awake by the way. You’re not having a terrible, terrible dream. Also you’re not dead and you haven’t gone to hell. This is your life now, this is our election now, this is us, this is our country – it’s real.”

Joe Barnes reports for the UK Express, Nov. 9, 2016, that a critic observed this about Maddow’s public meltdown:

“Rachel Maddow is so clearly disgusted with American voters that she has lost touch with reality. Trump did not win on anti-Muslim.”

Maddow was not alone. ABC News Martha Raddatz, who was a presidential debate moderator, got all choked up on live TV discussing Donald Trump winning the election on Tuesday night. Appearing visibly concerned, she said:

“Donald Trump, I questioned what he would do about Syria and his understanding of military policy and civilian/military divide, I don’t know that he really has a plan for what he’s going to do there.”

Raddatz then said that Hillary Clinton’s running mate, Tim Kaine, once said he wouldn’t trust his son in the military during a Trump administration. (The Wrap)

Cynthia Littletown reports for Variety that “The disbelief was clear in the voices of many anchors as they began to articulate that Trump’s thoroughly unconventional campaign could defy all odds and virtually every protocol in American politics.” Those nonplussed anchors and the media’s paid “expert” analysts include:

  • CBS News’ Charlie Rose, who was almost whispering as he asked a panel of CBS political analysts if they had “any idea” that Trump would be as strong as he was when the coverage started just two hours before.
  • CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley who, as Trump’s strength in unexpected states like Michigan and Pennsylvania became clear, gravely intoned that “If there is anything we can say conclusively about tonight it is ‘uncertainty.”
  • Fox News’ Megyn Kelly, who got into a row with Trump earlier in the campaign, said of Hillary Clinton: “This was not what they expected. They thought she was going to run away with it” — which really meant “This was not what I expected. I thought she was going to run away with it.”
  • Charles Krauthammer, the neo-conservative (translation: war monger) Fox News commentator who helped Hillary’s campaign by appearing in her TV ads trashing Trump, said that a Trump victory would amount to “an ideological and electoral revolution that we haven’t seen since Reagan.”
  • CBS News’ Peggy Noonan was also at a loss, saying, “It is epic. It is surprising. It’s a kind of uprising, a kind of revolt.”

It’s actually kind of funny that the media whores believed their own rigged polls of an inevitable Hillary victory.

As Trump began adding states to his win column, the analysis shifted from the dynamics in battleground state to a desperate attempt to explain how so many (rigged) polls could have been so far off the mark.

Grasping at straws, CBS “Face the Nation” anchor John Dickerson even sank to the tired old liberal trope that conservatives are stupid, uneducated, racist rednecks. He attributed Trump’s support to the “education gap” among the large numbers of white men and women without college degrees who succeeded in counteracting Hillary’s support from educated young multicultural voters alienated by Trump’s “divisive rhetoric”.

But as Littletown points out, exit polling data actually showed Hillary doing worse than Obama in 2012 among black men and Hispanic women while Trump had better-than-expected pull with blue-collar voters in Rust Belt states.

Across the pond, another supposedly “objective” journalist BBC host Andrew Neil came under fire, accused by furious UK viewers of “obvious” bias for Hillary Clinton. They demanded that the BBC “not be a vehicle for its presenters to voice their own political views”.

Fox News’ Brit Hume correctly concluded that “The vaunted power of the media is not what it might once have been.”

And the reason for that?

It’s the MSM’s own fault. By abandoning the journalistic standard of objectivity, these denizens of the Old Media provided the rope to hang themselves.

You Might Like

Our Founding Fathers instituted freedom of the press as a fundamental right in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, for a reason — a free press is to act as a check and balance on the power of government by providing The People with information they need to make wise and informed electoral choices. As Thomas Jefferson warned in his 1787 letter to Edward Carrington:

“Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. Do not be too severe upon their errors, but reclaim them by enlightening them. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, Judges, and Governors, shall all become wolves.”

After this election, trust in the MSM should and will sink even lower — from an already abysmal 6% to near zero, deservedly.

See also:


Dr. Eowyn’s post first appeared at Fellowship of the Minds