Two days before the 2016 presidential election, FBI James Comey has announced in a letter to 16 Congressional members that his agency has found nothing illegal regarding Hillary Clinton in the 650,000 emails found on Anthony Wiener’s laptop. The news comes at a time when Clinton stays four percent above Trump, and the odds in her favor are rising in polls and betting. The FBI’s review of these emails has been completed, according to Comey’s letter.
Clinton’s email has always been a big deal because the media uses the topic to make money by pushing the idea that she’s “untrustworthy,” again addressed this morning on Meet the Press. The fact that Trump’s unfavorable rating is far higher than that of Clinton is rarely raised. Instead the supposedly “liberal” media has spent whatever time they don’t concentrate on Trump to brainwash the public about Hillary hatred.
In April 2015, Clinton had a 50-percent favorability rating. Within four months of announcing her candidacy, the majority switched to unfavorable. One reason for the shirt is misogyny: many people in the country think that a woman should not be president shown by her favorability rating of 25 percent among white men.
Both NBC and PBS, supposedly “liberal,” presented pre-debate programs talking about how both candidates go “low” while complaining about how Clinton boringly concentrates on the specifics of policy and fails to have some sort of “message” such as the false one from Trump. Clinton behaves like a serious candidate and Trump acts like a realty show huckster, but the media constantly equates them.
While Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump received positive coverage, the media tore down Clinton—an average of 10 negative stories to one positive one, worse when one considers the email stories. The fascination of Clinton’s emails on the profit-focused media also serious errors such as the FBI conducting a criminal investigation into Clinton. That myth returned with Comey’s announcement last week; even a serious journalist from the Washington Post falsely claimed that Comey had “re-opened” the email case. NBC failed to look at its own reporting when professing to lack understanding in her popularity drop.
A favorite media ploy is to avoid showing people who love and admire Hillary Clinton. Its message is that the only reason to vote for Clinton is that the alternative is worse. Yet millions of voters admire her hard work and her intellect. They realize that a good president does need to be charming like George W. Bush or funny like Barack Obama or even perfect candidate like—I don’t know any. These people know Clinton’s past—the woman who fought for the rights of migrant farmworkers, the lawyer who worked with the Children’s Defense Fund and forced the state of Alabama to allow disabled students to attend school, the First Lady who created a plan to make health care accessible for all people in the country, a plan destroyed by Republicans because they were afraid that Democrats might get credit for it.
Clinton was elected twice to the U.S. Senate, and her colleagues respected her and got along with her. Her favorability was 60 percent when she was Secretary of State.
People see Clinton as flawed because she always has dreams and vision, she considered herself as her husband’s equal when she scuttled her plans to move to his home state, she was never a traditional First Lady when she reformed the state’s public education system and tried to expand healthcare. Some people hate Clinton for her ambition, yet prize that characteristic in her opponent. Writers call her a liar when she has the highest truth-telling rating of any presidential candidate for decades and of almost all other politicians. Opponents know that the only way she can be defeated is to be guilty of something—anything. When they can’t find the guilt, they make up offenses or just use terms in a general way with no backing.
Clinton used a private server because the State Department IT system was out of date, possibly hacked which it was. No one broke into Clinton’s system although opponents claimed they did, using the excuse that any server used that much had to have been hacked. She committed no crime, but she apologized—again and again. Trump’s campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, is fond of accusing Clinton for breaking up her Blackberry with a hammer, but that’s State Department policy. She was following the guidelines.
In her article in Atlantic, Chimamanda Adichie wrote:
“Hillary Clinton is a knowledgeable, well-prepared, reasonable, experienced, even-tempered, hardworking candidate, while her opponent is a stubbornly uninformed demagogue who has been proven again and again to be a liar on matters big and small. There is no objective basis on which to equate Hillary Clinton to her opponent.”
People complain that Clinton is too cautious, yet the media always turns against any spontaneity. Journalists take her words out of context and turn them against her before they accuse her of being insincere because she appears stiff. In one interview, Clinton has talked about how she learned how to control her emotions when she was a young women because her career was primarily male. She had to work hard to not look “weak” because she wouldn’t show the strength to accomplish what men do, but then she’s accused of being hard and unemotional.
Since Trump went down the escalator and announced his candidacy, the media has graded Trump on a low curve and raised the bar high for Clinton. CNN’s Dana Bash was blunt about the way the media favors Trump:
“The stakes are much higher in this debate and all the debates for Hillary Clinton because the expectations are higher for her because she’s a seasoned politician. She’s a seasoned debater. You know, yes we saw Donald Trump in the primaries debate for the first time, but he is a first-time politician. So um, for lots of reasons. Maybe it’s not fair, but that’s the way it is. The onus is on her.”
In essence, having an amateur as the president of the United States is just fine with the media. After the second town hall following the first presidential candidate, any “bar” for Trump totally disappeared. He “won” the debate because he wasn’t the total buffoon from the first debate.
During just one week in September, Clinton gave speeches about her mental health plan, foreign policy, and U.S. exceptionalism. The media focused on Trump’s immigration flip-flopping. This week was the pattern for all the media coverage as it gave Trump billions of dollars of free air time, mostly positive or neutral until the media panicked in late summer, and bashed Clinton.
Last summer, the conservative Washington Post finally realized how bad Donald Trump is and endorsed Clinton for president. These are excerpts from the editorial board’s endorsement:
“There is no equivalence between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton—as even responsible Republicans should be able to recognize. Ms. Clinton is a knowledgeable politician who has been vetted many times over. She understands and respects the U.S. Constitution. She knows policy. She can cite accomplishments in the public interest, such as pressing through an important children’s health insurance program during her husband’s administration. As a senator, she was respected by colleagues on both sides of the aisle. She completed four years as secretary of state to generally positive reviews. She began her presidential campaign by rolling out a series of serious policy papers.
“Mr. Trump, by contrast, has waged a campaign based on bigotry, ignorance and resentment. He has no experience as a public servant, and his private record of bankruptcies and exploitation should be disqualifying. He regularly circulates falsehoods. He has no discernible interest in or knowledge of policy…. He called one sitting senator a loser and threatened another while proving that he lacks even a passing familiarity with the Constitution. He praised one of the most vile dictators of the 20th century….
“Even if Mr. Trump flipped his agenda — not a problem for a man with almost no fixed beliefs — he would still be the candidate who mocked a disabled reporter, proposed banning Muslims from entering the United States, attacked a judge based on his ethnicity, celebrated violence at his rallies, demeaned women and promised to round up and deport 11 million undocumented immigrants . He would still be the candidate who vaulted to political prominence with race-based attacks on the incumbent president and launched his campaign by calling Mexicans rapists.”
For the first time in its history, Foreign Policy broke tradition and endorsed Clinton:
“She is an extraordinarily gifted woman who would make an excellent president. She would come to office with more foreign-policy experience than any president since George H. W. Bush…. Moreover, since her earliest days as a lawyer and advocate, she has been known and respected for her brilliant mind, her studiousness, her mastery of her brief. She is known to engender great loyalty among her staff. She is a listener, an empowerer, someone who has a reputation for wanting to be told the truth. I have met with her many times and have cultivated this view over years of writing about her and the administrations in which she has served. I can honestly say that she may be the most impressive candidate for president and one of the most impressive public figures I have ever met. If she were running against the best of the Republican Party, she would deserve to win.”
The media should have figured that out a year ago instead of making money by taking cheap shots at one of the best presidential candidates in history. Hopefully, it’s not too late for them to salvage the nation.