The host of CNN’s ironically named Reliable Sources misrepresented the content of a recent opinion article by Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown, claiming, incorrectly, that it states Republican senators told the Ohio lawmaker in private they voted to acquit President Trump out of fear.
Reliable sources, indeed.
Brown was introduced Sunday on CNN to discuss his recent New York Times op-ed, “In Private, Republicans Admit They Acquitted Trump Out of Fear.” The show’s anchor, Brian Stelter, wanted very much to talk about what the headline alleges, as well as his own chief obsession, Fox News, which he claims kept GOP senators in line during Trump’s impeachment trial.
To the first point, Stelter said, “[Brown] wrote an op-ed for the New York Times recently, describing what he says his colleagues across the aisle were saying in private. … So, you’re saying that, in private, some of your colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle did admit to feeling fear, and that’s what motivated their decision to acquit?”
The problem here is this: Brown’s op-ed does not actually say what the headline alleges. You would know that from reading the damn thing. In Brown’s defense, he almost certainly did not write the headline. As anyone who works in the news business will tell you, headlines are seldom written by the article’s author. As for the body of the op-ed itself, it does not actually say anywhere that Republican senators “admit they acquitted Trump out of fear.”
But, rather than set the record straight and say clearly what his op-ed states, Brown opted instead to modify, only slightly, Stelter’s misrepresentation of the article, allowing for the perpetuation of the idea that the Democratic senator has an inside line on what Republican lawmakers are supposedly admitting in private about last week’s impeachment vote.
Brown responded: “No politician will ever say they’re fearful. … I saw it in their eyes. I saw it in their excuses. I hear what they say about the president’s countless numbers of lies. I hear what they say about the president, his demeanor, his character.”
The senator added, “That same fear that I saw in my colleagues in the last month … reminded me of the fear I saw when I voted against the Iraq War as a member of the House almost 20 years ago.”
What a weasel. Brown must know that his op-ed has misled a great many readers, including, apparently, his CNN host. Yet, here the senator is on cable television, doing exactly nothing to dispel the bogus narrative.
And, really, the way Brown’s New York Times op-ed reads, it sure sounds like these alleged conversations took place in one form or another.
First, there is the op-ed’s headline. Second, there is this passage:
So watching the mental contortions they perform to justify their votes is painful to behold: They claim that calling witnesses would have meant a never-ending trial. They tell us they’ve made up their minds, so why would we need new evidence? They say to convict this president now would lead to the impeachment of every future president — as if every president will try to sell our national security to the highest bidder.
I have asked some of them, “If the Senate votes to acquit, what will you do to keep this president from getting worse?” Their responses have been shrugs and sheepish looks.
That said, there is one line buried deep, deep in the op-ed, in the second-to-last paragraph, which reads:
After all of that, it is not until the end of the op-ed that the reader learns that there is nothing to support the headline’s claim that GOP senators “admit” they voted “out of fear.” Yet, you would think otherwise, based on the news cycle that Brown’s article sparked.
“GOP Senators Privately Admit Trump Is Unfit For Office, Sherrod Brown Says,” reported HuffPo.
The Week reported, “Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown reveals Republican senators privately admit Trump is ‘reckless and unfit.’”
“Democratic Senator Claims Republicans Privately Admit Trump Lies, Acquitted Him out of Fear,” reported the Independent Journal Review.
Compare these headlines to Brown’s weaselly response on Sunday (“I saw it in their eyes”?). It seems increasingly clear the Democratic senator is intentionally misleading people, now. Call it a hunch.
If you can believe it, there was no follow-up question or push for clarification from Stelter, despite the fact that Brown gently contradicted his misreading of the op-ed. Instead, Stelter blew right past the senator’s response so that he could ask the Democratic lawmaker about, you guessed it, Fox News.
“Hm,” said the CNN anchor, “people used to say that if Watergate happened and Nixon had Fox that he would have stayed in office. Do you think that is what we all just experienced?”
How? What? Why? You just misrepresented a widely shared, heavily covered, and misleading New York Times op-ed, for which the author offered a mealy-mouthed corrective, and your only reaction is to ask him a hypothetical about Nixon and Fox News?
Again, this is not the behavior of a serious news organization. This is the behavior of an activist group with press credentials.
