CNN published a story filled with blatant lies. Of course, that’s nothing new.
But at least this time, they’re being called out for gross misrepresentations.
The headline reads: GOP concedes Trump may have withheld aid for probes but says it’s not impeachable.
As of the writing of this article, the piece is still active on their site, without correction. Yet, CNN’s claims lack substance. They aren’t backed by verified quotes, known facts, or any research-worthy information. In other words, it’s not even journalism. It’s simply an opinion piece slapped with a CNN label on it to make it appear like news.
Unfortunately, it is CNN’s senior congressional correspondent, Manu Raju, who published the erroneous article. If we analyze each paragraph, it’s easy to see why CNN’s fallen from grace over the course of the Trump administration.
They’re no longer the most trusted name in the news.
Honestly, I’d say CNN is barely a step above satire.
Take for starters the first paragraph:
A growing number of GOP senators are now acknowledging that President Donald Trump may have leveraged US military aid to Ukraine in exchange for an announcement of investigations that could help him politically — but they contend that even that conduct does not warrant removal from office or hearing from additional witnesses.
The link simply takes you to another CNN article that, as Breitbart points out, is just their version of events.
Breitbart explains:
It is true that many Republicans contend — in agreement with liberal Democrat scholar Alan Dershowitz, who testified in President Donald Trump’s defense on Monday evening — that the allegations against the president, even if true, are not impeachable under the Constitution’s standard for presidential impeachment.
But there is not one Republican senator — even among those few who are said to be considering a vote to subpoena more witnesses — who has publicly accepted or “conceded” the claim that Trump may have withheld aid in exchange for investigations. Trump himself has vigorously denied it, as have many of the Democrats’ witnesses and the Ukrainian government itself, the supposed target of Trump’s alleged “scheme.”
Certainly the “GOP” — meaning the party as a whole — has not “conceded” those claims, as Raju suggests.
And in fact, most recently, it appears that Mitch McConnell has the votes he needed.
As The Hill tells it:
It was clear to Senate Republicans on Wednesday after a morning meeting between Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) that the question of having additional witnesses is settled, and the Senate will vote Friday to wrap up the impeachment trial of President Trump.
The Bolton Book
Ironically, most Democrats now act as though John Bolton is the key to the kingdom. But the leftist hypocrisy shines bright, as Trump tweeted video that directly discredits Adam Schiff and other Democrats by simply replaying their own words.
Schiff clearly teeter-tots between “Bolton can’t be trusted,” and “we can’t get to the truth without Bolton.” Typical leftist lunacy.
Thus, it’s no surprise when CNN uses Bolton’s book to support their claims.
Breitbart contends:
Raju goes on to claim that “Republicans are arguing” that the claims “are likely true” in the wake of a New York Times report Sunday about a book by former National Security Advisor John Bolton.
The Times — which does not quote the book directly — claims that Bolton has written that “President Trump told his national security adviser in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens.”
The terms “investigations” and “Democrats” are not defined; later in the article, the Times suggests the “investigation” is about 2016 election interference and the “Democrats” are Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. The Times also says that the president “preferred” a withholding of aid. But it does not say whether he did so. Nothing is clear.
Crooked Quotes
Unfortunately, Raju relies on twisted quotes to make his case.
The following are some of the quotes he cites:
“I don’t think anything he says changes the facts,” South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the majority whip, told CNN. “I think people kind of know what the fact pattern is. … There’s already that evidence on the record.”
All that quote establishes is that Thune believes Bolton’s evidence matches what Democrats have provided, which many Republicans say is largely hearsay and presumption.
Sen. Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican, added: “I think he sounds like a lot of the other witnesses, frankly. I don’t know that he’s got a lot new to add to it.”
Raju suggests Cramer believes Bolton’s reported claims corroborate Democrats’ witnesses instead of simply repeating those claims; he reports that Cramer’s comments “are a departure from the arguments made by House Republicans.”
Asked if anything in the Bolton revelations amounted to impeachable conduct, Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, a member of the GOP leadership, said: “I wouldn’t think so — for the reasons that were described yesterday on the floor.”
Raju presents Blunt’s comment as if the Bolton “revelations” — unseen and unproven — are to be taken as factual, both by the media and Sen. Blunt himself.
“Mr. Bolton probably has some things that would be helpful for us and we’ll figure out how we might be able to learn that,” Sen. Lisa Murkowksi, an Alaska Republican and key swing vote, said Tuesday.
Not even Murkowski — who is said to be leaning toward voting to call Bolton as a witness — states that she believes the Times report to be true, only that she wants to hear more.
Why the Lies?
Raju twists the truth so much that he might as well change careers. He should think about ditching journalism and running for office instead. As a democrat, of course.
There are several other quotes — all of which fit a similar pattern of arguing that what the president is alleged to have done is not impeachable, not that the Senators believe him to have actually done what is alleged.
Raju therefore creates what seems to be a false impression that Republicans have been brought around to the Democrats’ case, but are relying solely on a constitutional argument to keep Trump from being removed.
As this day unfolds, it becomes increasingly clear that Raju simply ran with a headline that would draw attention. And CNN completely ignored the truth. Meanwhile, I think we can all agree that Breitbart’s senior editor, Harvard educated author Joel Pollak, is a far more reliable source of what’s happening in DC.
