icon bookmark-bicon bookmarkicon cameraicon checkicon chevron downicon chevron lefticon chevron righticon chevron upicon closeicon v-compressicon downloadicon editicon v-expandicon fbicon fileicon filtericon flag ruicon full chevron downicon full chevron lefticon full chevron righticon full chevron upicon gpicon insicon mailicon moveicon-musicicon mutedicon nomutedicon okicon v-pauseicon v-playicon searchicon shareicon sign inicon sign upicon stepbackicon stepforicon swipe downicon tagicon tagsicon tgicon trashicon twicon vkicon yticon wticon fm
27 Feb, 2020 01:53

MSM’s insatiable anti-Sanders venom forces them to dig through archives & smear veteran American reporter (because Russia!)

MSM’s insatiable anti-Sanders venom forces them to dig through archives & smear veteran American reporter (because Russia!)

Mainstream outlets are so determined to derail Bernie Sanders’ campaign, they’ve dug up a 2016 interview of his wife with RT's late host Ed Schultz – shot before the “collusion” was a thing – to smear both as Russian stooges.

A clip of the Democratic presidential hopeful’s wife Jane Sanders complaining on RT America about the unfairness of closed primaries – in which only registered Democrats can vote for the party’s nominee – was trending on Wednesday morning, boosted by smug blue-checks crowing some variation on “I told you so.”

But the clip dates from the 2016 primaries, before the Russiagate hoax made speaking to Russian media the 2020 equivalent of “palling around with terrorists.” This was the era of Barack Obama’s “Russian reset,” when he smirkingly told election rival Mitt Romney that “the 1980s are calling to ask for their foreign policy back” after the billionaire Republican declared Russia the US’ top geopolitical threat.

Worse, the anchor interviewing Sanders, veteran newsman Ed Schultz, died in 2018 – and, more tellingly, claimed he had been railroaded out of MSNBC for daring to support Sanders. That didn’t stop the flood of recriminations against both Sanders and his wife, however. Even tweeters who knew the year were seemingly of the belief that she should have known the Russians would be accused of meddling in the elections later that year – this was a “red flag,” full stop.

The myth of the nonpartisan news(wo)man has been thoroughly busted by the four years of “Orange Man Bad” emanating from all mainstream networks, but promoting Sanders is still seen as beyond the pale. Doing the opposite is fine – MSNBC’s Chris Matthews has clutched his pearls until his knuckles were white implying a Sanders presidency would see executions of journalists, and was even forced to apologize for comparing his victory in Nevada to the Nazis overrunning France. Other pundits have done their part to make it clear to viewers that a vote for Sanders is a vote for Satan (who, if it wasn’t clear, is a dirty commie).

There were some voices of reason asking Democratic Party operatives to let Schultz rest in peace, pointing out he had only joined RT America because MSNBC wouldn’t allow him to cover Sanders, and debunking other smears.

The hysteria of the anti-Sanders narrative is rising in step with the democratic socialist’s own rise in the polls. Sanders won the popular vote in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada, the only three states to vote thus far, and he is currently polling ahead of former vice president Joe Biden by an 11-point margin in South Carolina, which holds its primary on Saturday. Biden, apparently panicking, released an ad earlier this week claiming Sanders had sought to primary former president Barack Obama and had to be all but physically restrained by then-Senate majority leader Harry Reid, but that transparent bid to scupper Sanders’ black support (Biden, despite his association with old-school segregationists, enjoys strong support among black voters) flopped when Reid denied the incident. Now, other candidates – and their backers – are freaking out.

Billionaire Michael Bloomberg has devoted all of his resources to March’s “Super Tuesday” primary, in which 14 states will cast their votes for the Democratic nominee, pouring over half a billion dollars into pushing his name down voters' throats (more than the rest of the candidates, including Trump, combined). Tuesday’s debate charged upwards of $3,000 in some cases for a seat, ensuring a favorable audience. But his spending has been seen as less egregious than campaigning on a democratic socialist platform – or *shudder* going on “Russian TV.”

Interestingly, other Democrats who’ve appeared on RT America don’t get the “Russian collaborator” treatment. Adam Schiff spoke to the outlet about unconstitutional NSA surveillance back in 2013, before he became the #Resistance hero he is today, yet no one has thought to accuse him of working for Putin.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!