Ever since Donald Trump’s election, The Washington Post has ham-fistedly rebranded itself with the unsubtle slogan “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”
In addition to being weirdly alliterative and bordering on tautological, the new branding is also profoundly hypocritical; it insinuates that the democratic decision voters made last November has brought about “darkness,” which they seek to undermine for the sake of … democracy.
There’s been plenty of hypocrisy around the WaPo these past few months, none more so than when they breathlessly reported earlier this week that Trump had shared intelligence with the Russians. However, this is a bit different from how they used to cover the Obama administration’s leaks — including a June 2016 article they’re probably hoping dies in darkness.
First, the Trump article. Published Monday, it alleged the president “revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting last week, according to current and former U.S. officials, who said Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State.”
It wasn’t until the seventh paragraph of the febrile article that the WaPo conceded the president “has broad authority to declassify government secrets, making it unlikely that his disclosures broke the law.” And, according to Fox News, National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster called Trump’s actions “wholly appropriate.”
However, I’m sure The Washington Post made such a big deal about it because they’re diametrically opposed to sharing sensitive information with the Russians, right?
Well, let’s take a look at how they covered it under the Obama administration:
Oh, well, there is that.
“The Obama administration has offered to help Russia improve its targeting of terrorist groups in Syria if Moscow will stop bombing civilians and opposition fighters who have signed on to a cease-fire and use its influence to force Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to do the same,” read the article, which is generally positive in tone.
Now, I will generally concede that getting the Russians to stop bombing civilians would probably be a good thing. However, Trump has claimed he was trying to get the Russians to step up their efforts against the Islamic State group, another thing we can agree is good.
This is how The Washington Post felt about leaks to the Russians less than one year ago. What’s changed? The president, mostly.
I hope the folks over at WaPo don’t think we’re calling out their hypocrisy for partisan reasons. Consider it a public service. After all, democracy dies in darkness — right, guys?
Like us on Facebook – USA Liberty News
Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you agree The Washington Post’s bias is showing.
What are your thoughts on the WaPo’s hypocrisy? Scroll down to comment below!