Let’s Compare Media’s Lies About The Durham Report With What The Report Actually Said
As with every major revelation proving them to be the treacherous, anti-democratic demons they are, the corporate media have instantly gone to work sweeping away the shocking conclusions of Special Counsel John Durham’s report on the FBI’s conduct as it related to its 2016 investigation of Donald Trump and Russia.
Years of work went into this thing, and the media believe all of its heinous discoveries can be set aside with a few news briefs belittling them as minor, unimpressive matters of mistake and “shortcomings.”
That’s not what Durham found. What he found was explicit bias within the world’s most powerful law enforcement agency against a democratically chosen presidential nominee.
The report, released Monday, is more than 300 pages, many of which recount information pieced together by Republicans in Congress and right-leaning journalists. But everything you need to know is in Durham’s summary, which, as tactfully as possible, describes the FBI’s 2016 investigation into Trump as not only without a foundation, but driven by political bias, dishonesty, and an appalling degree of personal animus.
The media won’t relay those facts from the report honestly because, of course, the media were complicit in the absolute con from the start. They hated Trump more than top officials at the FBI did and were more than happy to fan the flames that terrified the nation for years and irreparably crippled Trump’s entire term.
With that in mind, this is how big media described Durham’s findings versus what Durham actually said.
New York Times: “Mr. Durham’s 306-page report revealed little substantial new information about the inquiry, known as Crossfire Hurricane, and it failed to produce the kinds of blockbuster revelations accusing the bureau of politically motivated misconduct that former President Donald J. Trump and his allies suggested Mr. Durham would uncover.”
That suggests there
Continue Reading at The Federalist.