White House Pressuring Top News Execs to Bash Impeachment Inquiry
ANALYSIS – In yet another egregious case of “what if Trump had done this?” and “Biden doesn’t care,” the White House is blatantly pressuring major news media executives to toe the Democrat line on the Biden impeachment process.
Just as House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) said Tuesday that he’s directing House committees to open an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden over his family’s shady overseas business dealings, the White House sent a letter to major news outlets telling them how to cover it.
Essentially insisting that they should bash it.
CNN reported that Ian Sams, spokesperson for the ‘impeachment war room’ in the White House Counsel’s Office sent the offending letter to the heads of news organizations such as The New York Times, Fox News, the Associated Press, CBS News and others.
“It’s time for the media to ramp up its scrutiny of House Republicans for opening an impeachment inquiry based on lies,” Sams wrote.
The letter, which said an impeachment inquiry with no supporting evidence should “set off alarm bells for news organizations,” is only the most recent example of how shameless Democrats are about abusing their power and manipulating the media.
McCarthy on Tuesday said the House Oversight Committee’s investigation found a “culture of corruption” around the Biden family dating back years, especially to Joe Biden’s time as Vice President under Barack Obama.
“These are allegations of abuse of power, obstruction and corruption, and they warrant further investigation by the House of Representatives,” McCarthy said. “That’s why today I am directing our House committee to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.”
CNN, apparently already following the White House lead, ‘reported’ on the outrageous letter:
In its letter Wednesday, the White House asked news organizations to be more clear-eyed in their coverage of the impeachment inquiry, and not to fall prey to the traps of false equivalency in reporting.
“Covering impeachment as a process story – Republicans say X, but the White House says Y – is a disservice to the American public who relies on the independent press to hold those in power accountable,” Sams wrote.
“And in the modern media environment, where every day liars and hucksters peddle disinformation and lies everywhere from Facebook to Fox, process stories that fail to unpack the illegitimacy of the claims on which House Republicans are basing all their actions only serve to generate confusion, put false premises in people’s feeds, and obscure the truth,” Sams added.
McCarthy launched the impeachment inquiry Tuesday without a formal House vote in a bid to appease Republicans on his far-right, including those who have threatened to oust the California Republican from his speakership if he does not move swiftly enough on such an investigation.
The discredited left-leaning cable network then repeated the false, boilerplate talking point that: “The Republican House-led investigations into Biden have yet to provide any direct evidence that the president financially benefited from Hunter Biden’s career overseas.”
In doing so, it ignored the mountain of evidence pointing to the likelihood that Joe Biden did benefit financially, and avoided the fact that this is the reason an inquiry is needed to demand the documents that may prove it.
As Newsmax properly reported:
“This is not OK,” journalist Matthew Keys tweeted. “The White House should not be encouraging, influencing or interfering in the editorial strategies of America’s newsrooms, including CNN and the New York Times.”
“Now, any time the media DOES try to hold Republican lawmakers to account, those lawmakers can simply counter by questioning whether it’s actual journalism or something encouraged by the Biden administration,” Keys wrote.
“All this demonstrates is that the Biden administration has lost confidence in the news media – which I guess mirrors public sentiment over the last few years, too.”
“The problem is they’re trying to influence coverage. The government should never do that. It is inappropriate,” Keys wrote.
Of course it is inappropriate. Highly inappropriate. And if Trump’s team had done this during either of his TWO partisan impeachments, all hell would be breaking loose. But Team Biden just doesn’t care.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Fix The NSC: A Warning & Roadmap For Trump’s Second Term
A Call to Action: Reforming the National Security Council
Joshua Steinman, the former senior director for cyber on President Trump’s National Security Council (NSC), has issued a stark warning to the incoming president that demands immediate attention. Steinman, who loyally served from Trump’s first day in office to his last, cautions that mistakes in NSC staffing could spell disaster for the administration’s second term, leading to either ineffectiveness or outright betrayal. His insights form a compelling argument for a complete overhaul of the NSC as the cornerstone of Trump’s efforts to govern effectively.
The NSC, as Steinman explains, is not merely a bureaucratic appendage. It is the quarterback of the White House—the entity tasked with ensuring that the president’s directives are executed seamlessly across the vast machinery of the federal government. “If the president is the owner of the football team, the NSC is the quarterback,” he asserts, underscoring the centrality of this institution in driving the administration’s policy agenda. And yet, Steinman’s concerns suggest that the team surrounding this quarterback may not be up to the task.
Reflecting on Trump’s first term, Steinman identifies a critical error: the decision to retain approximately 50% of the NSC staff from the Obama administration. This hesitation to implement a sweeping purge, according to Steinman, allowed disloyal actors to undermine Trump’s policies. Some of these holdovers allegedly continued to operate under Obama-era guidance until explicitly instructed otherwise. Steinman’s message is clear: “Removing people like this isn’t personal; it’s just prudent.”
The stakes are high. Steinman contrasts Trump’s initial approach with the swift and decisive action taken by President Biden, who executed a comprehensive purge of Trump-aligned NSC staff upon taking office. This move ensured that Biden’s team could implement his agenda without interference from ideological adversaries. Critics labeled Biden’s actions a “purge” and raised concerns about the politicization of traditionally non-partisan roles, but his administration’s determination to align its personnel with its policies proved effective in consolidating its power.
Steinman’s critique does not stop at holdovers. He raises alarms about new hires, questioning their loyalty and expertise. Among those rumored to join Trump’s team is Adam Howard, GOP Staff Director for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), who is set to take the critical role of senior director for intelligence programs. Steinman questions whether Howard’s background equips him to confront potential interference from the intelligence community—a task vital to ensuring Trump’s agenda is not derailed.
The urgency of Steinman’s warning lies in the fundamental truth that personnel is policy. For Trump’s administration to succeed, the NSC must be staffed with individuals who are not only loyal to his vision but also possess the subject-matter expertise to navigate the complexities of their roles. Steinman’s concerns about Anne Neuberger, the Biden-appointed NSC cybersecurity director, exemplify this need. Her alignment with policies on artificial intelligence and tech censorship could undermine Trump’s objectives, should she remain in place.
Trump’s response to these challenges is beginning to take shape. Key appointments to his NSC include:
While these appointments reflect a renewed emphasis on loyalty and alignment, Steinman’s cautionary tale lingers. The success of Trump’s second term hinges on avoiding the missteps of the first. The NSC’s ability to serve as an effective quarterback depends entirely on the quality of its staff. As Steinman aptly puts it, “The Intel Senior Director position is one of the most CRITICAL posts in U.S. Government.”
The broader implications of Steinman’s warning extend beyond Trump’s presidency. The debate over Biden’s NSC purge highlighted the tension between ensuring policy alignment and maintaining non-partisan governance. Critics, including the Heritage Foundation, argued that Biden’s actions undermined the apolitical nature of advisory roles, while supporters contended that loyalty is essential for effective governance. Trump’s administration must navigate this delicate balance, prioritizing mission alignment without descending into the partisanship that critics decry.
As Trump prepares to assume office once more, the lessons of his first term and Biden’s purge are clear: the NSC must be reimagined, restructured, and resolutely loyal to the President’s agenda. Failure to act decisively could jeopardize the very goals Trump has championed—from ending unnecessary conflicts to revitalizing the economy. Steinman’s call to action is both a warning and a roadmap: “Fix the NSC, fix the presidency.”
Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.