Elder P POV| In an amazing act of hubris, House Committee on Oversight and Reform chair Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) wrote to former Fox News reporter Diana Falzone demanding that she turn over any documents relating to Trump’s alleged extramarital affairs.
Cummings and his fellow Dems enjoyed two-and-a-half years of non-stop, 24/7, mainstream Marxist media reporting of the lies they manufactured about Donald Trump that were intended to help them stage a coup d’etat against the president.
Now Cummings wants to know why Fox News refused to participate in denigrating Donald Trump when the network decided to not publish a story prior to the 2016 election about an alleged affair between porn star Stormy Daniels and Donald Trump a decade earlier.
Apparently Cummings was relying on an article in the New Yorker alleging that Fox News executive Ken LaCorte killed the story in order to protect Trump.
In a op-ed he wrote for Mediaite, LaCorte vehemently denied the New Yorker story. LaCorte said that he was unable to find corroborating evidence before squashing it. It should be noted that Fox was not alone in declining to run the story.
Cummings is walking a fine line. He’s suggesting that if LaCorte purposely suppressed the Stormy Daniels story in order to help Trump, Fox News may have violated campaign finance rules.
This should be a can of worms he doesn’t want to open. We’ve previously reported on the tens of millions of dollars worth of help Facebook provided to Obama.
Then there’s the untold hundreds of millions (billions?) of dollars in support the mainstream media gave in positive press to Hillary Clinton and their willingness to suppress damaging stories – Uranium One, Skolkovo, as well as the State Department’s pedophile scandal.
The Marxist media also refused to report on Peter Schweitzer’s explosive expose, Clinton Cash, that chronicled how she leveraged her position as Secretary of State to build a net worth greater than $100 million.
All the while the same Marxist media regaled us with nothing but negative stories about Donald Trump.
However, the far more significant issue Cummings is brushing up against is his attempt to exercise government oversight and control over the editorial content of the press.
LaCorte explained the dangerous path Cummings had embarked on in his op-ed:
Falzone’s lawyer announced that she would comply with the committee. I won’t.
If House Oversight can launch an investigation based on the ridiculous notion that publishing, or even more bizarrely not publishing, a story can be construed as an in-kind campaign contribution, then no journalist in America is safe from government intimidation. It’s a vast overreach of power, and I won’t have any part of it.
To be clear, I fully support Fox News lifting Falzone’s non-disclosure agreement so that she can make her case publicly, without leaks or lawyers. But neither editorial decisions nor joke writing should be a subject of government approval.
Ever since Donald Trump became the Republican presidential candidate we have witnessed Democrats total disregard for the institutions and constitutional protections that once served to protect our individual liberties.
Should this practice turn into a beachhead and then continue and expand, it would amount to an all out take over of the press by the government. If this is the starting point for the degradation of individual liberty and freedom of the press, I fear to even ponder where it will end up …