The New York Post has finally done what all other big media publications won’t do, and that’s name the Democrat-protected whistleblower. It’s about time someone had the gonads to do it.

But before we get to that, here’s how the Post’s own editorial board began their article, writing about the scandalous media and the truth from the IG report that now exposes them:

In the middle of Russia fever, the liberal press took a hectoring tone to any outlet that showed a glimmer of doubt. How dare any journalist not believe that President Trump is an agent of Vladimir Putin! Who would question the upstanding virtues of the FBI? Of course, we now know that the conspiracy theories were wrong. There was no Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. And, moreover, the inspector general report proves that the FBI trampled over civil liberties and common sense in pursuit of the case. While idle conversation during a meeting with George Papadopoulos and an Australian official may have sparked the inquiry, Crossfire Hurricane, it was only because of outlandish gossip in a Democrat-funded opposition report, the Steele dossier, that the FBI was able to land a surveillance warrant for Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Even as the agency found that Steele’s sources did not back up the dossier, that facts did not back up the dossier, they continued the red scare. When it came out that Page was an informant for the CIA, an FBI lawyer lied about it. Every suspicion of FBI agents was leaked to the press and printed without skepticism. Few questioned their methods. It is only now that the New York Times begrudgingly publishes an “analysis” that, oops, maybe this was “A Disturbing Peek at U.S. Surveillance.”







The New York Post sees the same hectoring tone from the media with the phony impeachment hearings and the protection of Adam Schiff, who they openly call “a liar”:

Forgive us, then, for the sense of déjà vu when it comes to the impeachment hearings. This time, the press is near united in arguing that you shall not question the narrative of how this whole thing got started. Don’t you dare name the whistleblower. Don’t ask how Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) might have helped him write his complaint. Or even that Schiff is lying when he says he doesn’t know who the whistleblower is. Or why Schiff is subpoenaing the phone records of his colleagues. This is the same Schiff, by the way, who in 2018 said that the Department of Justice’s warrants for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISAs, met “the rigor, transparency and evidentiary basis needed.” Schiff had the same information as Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who found the exact opposite. So we know Schiff is a liar. Two years from now, will we find out the real story? It may not change either side’s view of impeachment, but isn’t that what the press does — try to find the truth? The whistleblower is most likely CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella.

“…isn’t that what the press does — try to find the truth?” Boom. That’s exactly what the press is supposed to do and none of them are doing it. Thank you NY Post Editorial Board for pointing out the absurdity of the media’s one-sided view of all things impeachment.

They continue…

Journalist Paul Sperry reported his name in late October, saying that sources inside the closed-door impeachment hearings identified him. Ciaramella has put out no statement denying these reports. Whistleblower lawyers refuse to confirm or deny Ciaramella is their man. His identity is apparently the worst-kept secret of the Washington press corps. In a sign of how farcical this has become, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said his name as part of a series of names during a live hearing Wednesday night aired on television. He never called him the whistleblower, just said he was someone Republicans thought should testify, yet Democrats angrily denounced the “outing.” If you don’t know the man’s name, how do you know the man’s name?

If you want to finish reading the Post’s editorial on this, you can do so here. I don’t want to quote their remaining five paragraphs but it is definitely one of the best things I’ve read in the Big Media in a long time. To quote Mark Levin, “Kudos to the New York Post!”