Suffice it to say that much of our increasingly irrelevant media believes its new mission, after failing to defeat Donald Trump, is to take out as many of his Cabinet picks as possible.
But is it working?
Take the case of Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s Director of National Intelligence-designate.
She is former military, having served on the front lines in Iraq. She also served several terms in Congress.
She ran for president as a Democrat in 2020 — and even earned more delegates than Kamala Harris in that contest. But when her party left her by embracing wars and all-things-woke, Gabbard joined Team Trump on the campaign trail.
As if on cue, the attacks flowed in once Trump named her to his Cabinet.
USA Today: “Syria is now free from Assad. And this Trump nominee has some explaining to do”
The Bulwark: “The Curious Case of Tulsi Gabbard: Is She a Russian Asset or a Dupe?”
Washington Post: “Gabbard, Trump Intel pick who visited Assad, meets with senators after dictator’s fall”
What’s that you say? Gabbard, as a US congresswoman on the House Armed Services Committee, met with a foreign leader more than seven years ago?
You know who else met with Assad years ago? Nancy Pelosi. Is she a Russian asset or a dupe too?
The smears against Pete Hegseth and Kash Patel are also featured and shown to be political hit-jobs instead of honest reporting. The huge media bias FOR Harris and AGAINST Trump in the last election is also highlighted. Article author Joe Concha ends with mention how all the lies and bias are working out for the media:
Now they want to smear Trump’s Cabinet picks into rejection. If recent history tells us anything, they’ll fail on this front too.
Because after all the bias and all the lies, almost no one is listening anymore.
They cried "wolf" way too often.
Yup, way too many times............