"Completely wrong." "It did not happen." "There was no spying. "No one was spying on the President." "No one spied on the Trump campaign." "There was no spying." "By the way, there was no spying — of course." "There was no spying on the Trump campaign." "Just a conspiracy theory."
This is how the mainstream media reported on 2019 claims that President Trump had been spied on. The media's frenzied rejection of the accusations — both that spy games were afoot or that Hillary Clinton's campaign had a role in them — leaves exactly zero room to save face now that the latest bombshell from the Durham investigation seems to suggests that the Clinton campaign contracted a tech firm to infiltrate Trump's servers as part of their work to tie Trump to Russia.
As our friends over the Media Research Center highlight in this damning video, denying there was any spying was not a rarely mentioned "fact" from the mainstream media. It was prolific. Guests, panels, hosts, and other journalists ruled the idea out without any explanation or proof to back up their denials of what Trump said had happened. But they all told us they "knew" that nothing of the sort took place.
Media in 2019: There was no spying on Trump.
— NewsBusters (@newsbusters) February 15, 2022
Media now: Zzzzzzzzz pic.twitter.com/waSMwlcVLT
Well, as Vespa reported over the weekend when the latest Durham investigation revelations came to light, the Clinton campaign's lawyers apparently paid a tech firm to get into Trump servers to develop more "proof" of an improper relationship between Trump and Putin. And that narrative of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia is another area in which many of the same journalists who denied claims of spying as conspiracies were more than happy to indulge Democrat-constructed theories that continue to get debunked.
And as Katie pointed out earlier today, these supposedly serious journalists won Pulitzers and trade awards for their "coverage" of the Trump-Russia-Collusion-Delusion but have now fallen silent about the latest update to the story they endlessly peddled. They shouted questions at President Trump asking him whether he was or ever had been a Russian asset. They opined in their monologues that Trump's election was Putin's greatest achievement. NBC's Savannah Guthrie asked former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice if Russia "actually elected Donald Trump."
Even after Robert Mueller released the report at the conclusion of his investigation, effectively exonerating President Trump, CNN's Chris Cuomo insisted he would "never" apologize for his biased and wrong coverage. The liberal ladies of The View maintained Trump's presidency was illegitimate. An "expert" on MSNBC declared "the Russians have clearly won." There are scores of examples compiled by MRC that illustrate the journalistic malpractice, but the lesson remains the same: once the media picks its narrative with the help of Democrat operatives, they never let it go. Even when they are contradicted or disproven by facts and reality, they just can't quit. Instead of admitting they botched the job, they just attack their readers as being too simple-minded to understand.