After using both Google and Politico’s own search engine, it appears as though the online publication I like to call The Left-Wing MSM Disguised as New Media, has found the story of a government whistle-blower’s testimony regarding systemic racial discrimination at the Obama Department of Justice of less interest than, say, Sarah Palin’s wardrobe – which Politico obsessed over in ways only Andrew Sullivan could appreciate. As a matter of fact, nowhere on the Politico website was I able to even find the name of the DOJ whistleblower – J. Christian Adams.
Levi Johnston popped up quite a few times, however.
Because search engines are imperfect and I spend most of my waking hours in Hollywoodland, I’m uncomfortable stating outright that Politico has declared a complete news blackout on the DOJ discrimination story. But I am comfortable stating that a good faith search would lead any reasonable person to come to that conclusion. Regardless, what is quite obvious is that Politico doesn’t consider the DOJ story anywhere near as important as a private citizen’s tax records and their standing as a licensed plumber.
Well, at least until Friday when intrepid Politico reporter Ben Smith broke this 1200-plus word bombshell. Pay special attention to the headline:
A conservative dismisses right-wing Black Panther ‘fantasies’
A scholar whom President George W. Bush appointed as vice chairwoman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Abigail Thernstrom has a reputation as a tough conservative critic of affirmative action and politically correct positions on race.
But when it comes to the investigation that the Republican-dominated commission is now conducting into the Justice Department‘s handling of an alleged incident of voter intimidation involving the New Black Panther Party — a controversy that has consumed conservative media in recent months — Thernstrom has made a dramatic break from her usual allies.
Even more outrageous is the fact that nowhere does the name J. Christian Adams appear anywhere in that article. An election lawyer who served in the Voting Rights Section at the U.S. Department of Justice and who has testified about ongoing systemic discrimination there doesn’t – at least according to my search – exist at Politico. However, a single conservative who believes a story that Politico hasn’t covered is a non-issue, warrants 1200-plus words.
For those of you who might not be aware, Politico isn’t the Huffington Post or Daily Kos, or at least they don’t advertise themselves as such. Nope, just like the left-wing propaganda machine we call the MSM, Politico puts on the journalist disguise to report on the national political events of the day. And yet, in the case of testimony charging the DOJ with systemic and ongoing discrimination, these supposed journalists only find the story worth covering when – follow me here – a single solitary conservative comes out against the same story they don’t… think… is… worth… covering.
And not only did this story about a story Politico didn’t find worth covering rate a big write up, it enjoyed a front page splash you would think they’d reserve for breaking news about Sarah Palin’s tanning bed:
This isn’t bias on Politico’s part. This is propaganda through the willful sin of omission. There are two reasons Politico and their fellow left-wing media propagandists have refused to cover the DOJ story: they know that it has the potential to unravel into something explosively damaging to Their One and they haven’t found anything to discredit whistleblower Adams with. Had they — or had any member of the MSM — you can bet there would’ve been a flood of coverage meant to destroy Adams’s credibility (and him personally) which would serve the dual purpose of sending a warning to anyone else considering blowing a whistle that could damage the White House
As a matter of fact, once you understand that this is how the left-wing media operates, the only conclusion you can come to is that Mr. Adams is in fact a credible whistleblower. Were he not, had he even a single tax lien against him, we would surely know about it by now.
Unable to gather the info necessary to destroy this witness (though you can bet they’re still trying) , instead we get a big lead Politico front page story about a single, solitary conservative much ado-ing over a story Politico appears to have ignored.
It would be comical if it weren’t so corrupt.
I am happy to report, however, that the Washington Post ombudsmen agrees with those of us who believe on-the-record testimony charging the DOJ with systemic discrimination deserves a little more coverage and attention. Snippets from Sunday:
Thursday’s Post reported about a growing controversy over the Justice Department’s decision to scale down a voter-intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party. The story succinctly summarized the issues but left many readers with a question: What took you so long? …The Post didn’t cover it. Indeed, until Thursday’s story, The Post had written no news stories about the controversy this year. In 2009, there were passing references to it in only three stories. …
National Editor Kevin Merida, who termed the controversy “significant,” said he wished The Post had written about it sooner. The delay was a result of limited staffing and a heavy volume of other news on the Justice Department beat, he said.
Better late than never. There’s plenty left to explore.
Significant. Plenty left to explore.
Well, no kidding.
Try not to get excited and expect WaPo to get all Woodward and Bernstein over this.
Unfortunately, as we’ve seen for a number of years now, the job of the Washington Post Ombudsmen is to sound ridiculously reasonable, fair, and wise while the publication itself blithely continues to march on down the road selling its journalistic soul to Palace Guard for the Left.
To be clear, I’m not saying the discrimination charges made against the DOJ are true. But when a government whistleblower testifies to such things, it’s a story. And then the next story is what’s discovered during the search for the truth. Duh. But that kind of news-breaking requires a genuinely curious and skeptical media eager to hold power accountable even when Democrats are in power.
Good luck with that.
And please do me one favor and stop being surprised by all of this. If you’re surprised, you’re part of the problem. If the MSM confuses you, if you can’t figure out why they’re so blatantly biased and eager to tarnish their journalistic legacies with such outrageous lies and one-sidedness, try a simple little experiment with me for just one week. I promise that if you start viewing the MSM as just another branch of the Democrat Party everything they do will suddenly make perfect sense.
Trust me, all the confusion over how they operate will come to an end.
This exercise will also end any confusion you might have over the Democrats’ push to bailout the near-bankrupt MSM with your tax dollars.
Comment count on this article reflects comments made on Breitbart.com and Facebook. Visit Breitbart's Facebook Page.