Attorney General William Barr did not give the press and Democratic lawmakers what they wanted when he announced the special counsel had failed to find evidence of Trump-Russia collusion to steal the 2016 election. And so now they’re moving to discredit him.

On Wednesday, with a confusing and oddly worded response during a congressional hearing, the attorney general provided them with the opening they were looking for to further the claim that he is an unreliable narrator.

CNN’s "The Lead" Wednesday evening included a segment titled, “AG Barr drops 'spying' bombshell in hearing, provides no evidence.”

The “no evidence” inclusion is a bit cute, considering its selective use by the cable news network.

Over at MSNBC, frequent “collusion” expert and former CIA Director John Brennan, who claimed the special counsel investigation would absolutely uncover evidence showing Trump coordinated with the Kremlin, claimed Wednesday that Barr “acted more like a personal lawyer for Donald Trump today rather than the attorney general.”

MSNBC also gave former Watergate assistant special prosecutor Nick Akerman a platform to claim, without evidence, that Barr leaked details of the Mueller report to the president.

At CNN, legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin claimed that “Fox News is in charge of the Justice Department.”

Barr testified Wednesday that the Trump campaign may have been the target of unlawful surveillance by the U.S. government, further undermining the narrative that the then-GOP nominee was exclusively engaged in dirty tricks during the 2016 election.

“I think spying did occur," the attorney general told the Senate Appropriations Committee on Wednesday. "But the question is whether it was adequately predicated. And I'm not suggesting it was not adequately predicated. But I need to explore that."

Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, pushed Barr to clarify, saying, “Because I think the word 'spying' could cause everybody in the cable news ecosystem to freak out, and I think it’s necessary for you to be precise with your language here.”

Barr said, “I’m not sure of all the connotations of that word that you’re referring to, but, you know, unauthorized surveillance. I want to make sure there was no unauthorized surveillance. Is that more appropriate in your mind?”

The attorney general also offered at the end of the hearing, “I just want to make it clear, thinking back on all the different colloquies here, that I am not saying that improper surveillance occurred. I am saying I am concerned about it and looking into it, that’s all.”

I'll grant the attorney general's responses here are confusing, but the reaction from the commentariat has also been over the top. Democratic lawmakers and members of the news media are obviously seizing on Barr’s imprecision as a means to make a caricature of him as a slavish Trump devotee.

Former director of national intelligence and frequent CNN guest James Clapper, who lied to Congress in 2013 about mass surveillance, said it is "stunning and scary" that Barr would suggest the U.S. intelligence community spied on the Trump campaign. The Washington Post’s Aaron Blake, meanwhile, cited Clapper as an authority on the matter to accuse Barr of “aligning with Trump's talking points.” Blake’s report makes no mention of the fact that Clapper rather famously lied about the National Security Agency’s mass surveillance programs.

The funniest thing in all of this is that the U.S. government did spy on the Trump campaign. Whether it was lawful is yet to be determined. That’s the point Barr was trying to make.

But hey, never miss an opportunity to discredit someone who hurts the narrative.