Clinton Rules and Trump Wins

Yesterday, I wrote online that I think Trump will win because our MSM play by The Clinton Rules.

My buddy and bandmate, Mike, disagreed.  Below is my response.

I sure hope you’re right, and I’m wrong, Mike.

I didn’t say that Trump hasn’t received “overwhelmingly negative” press.  (And what is it they say about “all press” anyway?)

I said that The Clinton Rules dictate that she is held to a different standard than other public figures, and all things being equal, it will cost her the election.

Over the last 20 plus years, there have been too many examples of this to name, but just for one recent case:

Did you notice the difference in how Matt Lauer (sadly, a totem for our upper-end mainstream media) treated Trump as opposed to Clinton at the Commander in Chief forum?

           

After burning at least a third of the interview asking Clinton questions about her emails (for which she’s been found to have broken no law), he directly suggests that her behavior may be “disqualifying.”

Contrast that with Lauer’s treatment of Trump supposedly being against the Iraq war. 

How many follow up questions did he ask? 

Zero.  Zilch.  Nada. 

He passed, sitting like a potted plant, politely deferring to power.

Did he challenge Trump on that Birther nonsense he was spewing a few years back (incidentally, using that same mainstream media to sew seeds of doubt about the legitimacy of President Obama)?

Yeah, right. 

Did he ask if either of those two things were “disqualifying?”  Of course not.

Again, how many questions did he ask Clinton re: email? (And seriously, was he really going to get some crucial NEW information that congress, the FBI, and the inspector general DIDN’T get from her on national TV?)

Michael, please!  Clinton Rules stipulate that she must be held to a different standard than other candidates!

Even Rutenberg gets in on the fun in his article…

Notice how he nicely mentions all the “’gates’ affixed” to Clinton while conveniently forgetting to say how phony all those “scandals” were. 

Why would he do that on the front page of the Paper of Record? 

Could it be because they promoted that nonsense on those very front pages 20 years ago?

Gene Lyons wrote all about it in, Fools for Scandal:  How the Media Invented Whitewater way back in 1996!

Joe Conason and he wrote The Hunting of the President: The Ten-Year campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton in 2000.  It was even turned into a movie!

Again, these books discussed our mainstream media, not right-wing talk radio.

Today, Nicholas Kristof suggests one reason Clinton Rules still apply is because, “We all fall into” the trap of media narratives, as he graciously includes journalists along with us plebs.

Could it be we citizens have fallen into these traps because we see these narratives and storylines in our mainstream media over and over and over again?

Facts and context be damned in our national discourse, there's a story to tell!

Vox had a piece I posted the other day discussing the potential conflicts of interest with Colin Powell’s foundation, America’s Promise while he was SOT. 

The takeway was that we don’t know if there were conflicts of interest precisely because of the trap of media narratives and the Clinton Rules.  To wit:  in our mainstream press narrative, Colin Powell is cast as a good guy, so his charity hasn’t received the scrutiny that the Clinton Foundation has.  

I could go on, but alas, gone are the days/nights that I could spend hours upon hours thoroughly researching adequate rebuttals, at least for the time being…

But needless to say, Mike, I still fervently hope you are right about Trump.