October 13 2016
One News Now
featuring Gayle Trotter
The latest Wikileaks email release exposes how America’s largest papers are “using positions of power to influence voters” to get Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton elected as president – spurred by her underhanded ties embedded deep within the news media.
After this recent discovery, it is maintained that major mainstream media outlets have a lot of explaining to do, as it has been divulged that reporters, editors and contributors are doing much more than just advocating for the former first lady – they are reportedly colluding with her presidential campaign to get her into the White House.
“Emails show Univision Chairman Haim Saban urging the Clinton campaign to hit Donald Trump harder over immigration, the New York Times giving the campaign veto power over which interview quotes could be used in a profile of the candidate, the Boston Globe trying to time a Clinton opinion piece to do the most good in New Hampshire and CNBC’s John Harwood urging Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta to watch out for then-GOP candidate Dr. Ben Carson,” WND reports. “The documents also show Democratic National Committee official and CNN contributor Donna Brazile tipping off the Clinton campaign to a potentially difficult CNN town-hall question on capital punishment during the Democratic Party primary season. Brazile adamantly denies doing that.”
Aiding and abetting Clinton
Leftist media bias – as witnessed in the volatile second presidential debate on Sunday when Trump called out CNN’s Anderson Cooper and ABC’s Martha Raddatz for siding with Clinton to wage a three-on-one attack against him – is now believed to be the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the press’s maneuvering to get its candidate elected.
“Mainstream media outlets are often accused of siding with Democratic Party candidates and policies, but evidence of active collaboration takes the concern to a new level,” WND’s Greg Corombos asserts.
Independent Women’s Forum Senior Fellow Gayle Trotter says the latest email discovery just goes to prove that some of the nation’s most turned-to sources for news are actually propaganda machines when it comes to politics and elections.
“It’s the smoking gun,” Trotter told WND and Radio America. “These revelations from the Wikileaks information show at the highest echelons of the New York Times, the Boston Globe, there is an effort to collude or give an assist to Hillary Clinton, which shows that these institutions are not unbiased. They are using their positions of power to influence the voters.”
The conservative political analyst points to Clinton’s battle against Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.) as the most substantial revelation revealing just how deep Democratic Party officials and the media are in when it comes to their covert operations to ensure victory for the former secretary of state.
“This goes beyond the partisan nature of Democrats versus Republicans,” stressed Trotter, who also regularly appears on Fox News’ Media Buzz as a panelist. “These stories show there’s even collusion among the candidate choices on the Democratic side.”
Promoting, not reporting
According to Trotter, the newest email evidence goes to prove that the American public’s longtime insistence that the media favors Democrats is true.
“Definitely take everything with a grain of salt,” she advised. “Any of this breathless reporting of any of the candidates and what they say and what they do – they should understand there is a real effort behind the scenes to influence people’s votes.”
She goes on to point out that objective reporting on politics with many news outlets is now a thing of the past.
“Regardless of what you think about the different candidates or which policies you favor, I think all voters should be aware they are not getting straight news,” Trotter expressed. “They are getting news with an agenda.”
Even though the progressive moderators – Cooper and Raddatz – at the last debates were blatantly attacking Trump considerably more than Clinton, Trotter maintains that the biased pro-Democrat display does not provide proof that collusion was actually taking place.
“It wouldn’t necessarily show there was an active effort to assist a certain candidate,” the political expert impressed. “You could just think, ‘Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz have their biases. It comes out in the way they do their jobs, but it’s maybe subconscious for them. They’re not actively doing it.'”
In comparison, Trotter indicates that the New York Times’ pact to spike Clintons’ quote – where she shows her anxiousness about the LGBT rights movement making headway considerably quicker than the feminist and civil rights movements – goes to show beyond a shadow of a doubt that conservatives’ suspicion about the media’s Leftist spin is a reality.
“You can see through these emails that it’s not just subconscious bias, but it’s an active effort on the behalf of these favored candidates by the media elite,” she inserted.
It is further argued that Leftist media personalities should confess their favoritism and promise to commit to objective reporting rather than deny their progressive slant – just as Brazile did in her recent attempt to call such allegations false.
Trotter goes on to advise Americans to contact reporters or editors – who display blatant media bias – via tweets or emails and tell them that such subjective reporting is not tolerated in the news industry. She also encourages concerned citizens to press for higher standards and accountability across all media outlets.
“This should be unacceptable from a profession whose job it is to inform the democratic public, so that we can exercise our most cherished freedom to vote,” Trotter concluded.