Let’s look at a case study in Justice Department and news media bias: the treatment of President Trump compared with the treatment of Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein.
The media’s glee over news that a group of anti-Trump bureaucrats took it upon themselves to investigate President Trump as a traitor when he fired their friend Jim Comey in May 2017 has only served to clarify the establishment and media hostility toward the President.
With no evidence – save some absurd and unsubstantiated opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democrats – Obama-era FBI officials decided to covertly investigate the newly-elected president for treason. This inquisition was apparently in addition to the counterintelligence investigation over supposed (and undefined) collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia.
Consider the FBI’s multi-layered attack on Trump compared to its treatment of Senator Feinstein after officials discovered that her driver and San Francisco office director of 20 years had been spying for the Chinese government.
In 2013, when Feinstein led the Senate Intelligence Committee, FBI officials politely approached her to inform her that her staffer had been covertly sharing information with the San Francisco Chinese consulate – which Feinstein helped open when she was mayor – for roughly a decade. Feinstein was briefed. She apparently allowed the man to retire. No charges of espionage or acting as an unregistered foreign agent were ever brought against him. He wasn’t placed in solitary confinement or threatened with prosecution unless he cooperated with special investigators. Presumably, American taxpayers were required to pay for the Chinese spy’s retirement (for which the Chinese government was undoubtedly grateful).
Indeed, there was no investigation into Feinstein colluding with China at all – despite that she is widely-regarded as a “China dove” in the Senate and that her husband has made millions in Chinese business dealings while she has served as a top Democrat in intelligence, energy, and foreign affairs.
Additionally, the event wasn’t reported by any media for five years (which meant the FBI didn’t feel the need to leak it). Even when this security breach was reported, it was only mentioned in passing by Politico Magazine in a story about broad Chinese-espionage in Silicon Valley. Once the story broke, the San Francisco Chronicle picked it up as a local story, but it was ignored by the rest of the establishment media.
Now, Feinstein has said, and many in media have parroted, that this staffer was of no importance, didn’t know anything, and posed no threat to our national security.
As a former congressional leader, I can tell you that is complete baloney. The drivers in congressional offices have near complete access to their members’ schedules. They know who you are meeting with, when you are meeting them, and sometimes a notion of what the meeting is about.
They hear every conversation you have while you are being driven about from place to place – both on the phone and with staffers riding with you. They have access to anything you leave in the car for safe-keeping – think briefcases, notes, laptops, iPads, cell phones, etc. Furthermore, as a member of your team, they have access to the rest of your staff. The amount of intelligence a spy embedded in a congressional office could ascertain from simply attending a staff happy hour is astounding.
Even if this staff member had no access to classified information, the political and policy intelligence to which he had access may have put our country at a huge disadvantage in negotiating with or competing with China.
These two cases clearly show the bias held by both the media and the Washington establishment. When well-entrenched Democrats find themselves enmeshed in espionage by our greatest competitor, they are briefed and the problem is ignored.
When the vaguest of allegations is made against a Republican – or any real change agent in Washington – the establishment and media go to war against them.