If it were not for double standards, the American news media would have no standards at all.

Members of the press were aghast this weekend following an impeachment hearing stunt by Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York. But in 2017, the same people had been positively thrilled when Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts pulled essentially the same stunt on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

A Washington Post report, for example, called Stefanik’s impeachment moment a "manufactured ... gender-centric stunt,” and a “rather [transparent]” one at that.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff, who refused to allow the Republican congresswoman to take more speaking time than was agreed to, “was acting firmly within the rules,” the newspaper explained with a note of indignation, adding that Stefanik had “to know that.”

“It’s pretty apparent this was a stunt," the report reads, adding that the congresswoman is guilty of trying “to use the moment for political hay.”

Poor Stefanik. If only she batted for the correct team, she would be enjoying friendly news coverage right now for her attempt last week to violate ground rules set by the ranking members of the House Intelligence Committee. Instead, the New York congresswoman is being written off by the press as a loud-mouthed partisan hack.

Compare this to 2017, when Sen. Mitch McConnell held Warren to the Senate's well-established rules regarding personal attacks on colleagues. Warren was even offered a warning and an explanation of the rules before her speech was ended abruptly. The press was neither indignant nor cynical about her motivations. Quite the contrary — they rallied to her defense, promoting her as a martyr for the “Riot Grrrl” power movement or whatever.

“‘Nevertheless, she persisted’ becomes new battle cry after McConnell silences Elizabeth Warren,” read the headline to a particularly glowing Washington Post article. The report added, “Women in particular bristled at the sentiment — essentially, to sit down and stop talking — and noted it was hardly unfamiliar to them.”

The New York Times published a headline at the time that read, "'Nevertheless, She Persisted’: How Senate’s Silencing of Warren Became a Meme.”

The story’s opening paragraph read: “Some called it a gift to women’s rights, and the episode angered many who diagnosed it as a plot to muzzle a vocal senator, Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts.”

But when it comes to Stefanik, the Times has nothing much to say at all of Schiff shutting her down. The paper's multiple reports on the impeachment hearing make no mention of the incident. The New York Times did, however, publish an Associated Press report, titled “GOP Woman Gets Outsized Role at Impeachment Hearing,” claiming Republicans made sure to give Stefanik a major role in the hearing because the GOP lacks “a deep bench of rising female members of Congress.” The Associated Press report also states of her moment with Schiff:

Though she was breaking committee rules with her interruptions, the outburst gave Republicans a nationally televised opening to accuse Trump nemesis and committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., of treating a woman lawmaker unfairly [emphasis added].”

The New York Times also published a Reuters report, titled “Republican Elise Stefanik Tangles With Schiff to Defend Trump During Hearings," that speaks of the congresswoman in terms that no one would dream of applying to a Democratic member of Congress [emphases added]:

Stefanik seized the spotlight in this week's hearings when she repeatedly interrupted the panel's chairman, Democratic Representative Adam Schiff, to raise points of order and accuse him of mishandling the hearing including by following previously published rules for the impeachment process.



Stefanik also has literally been one of the loudest voices in the hearing, leaning closely into her microphone each time she speaks, so her voice echoed throughout the room.

Won’t someone please put a muzzle on that woman?

CNN now derides Stefanik’s stunt as “clearly against the rules," adding further that the congresswoman, “who clearly has an eye on a future leadership role in the party,” is guilty of putting "on a bit of a show."

Contrast this with CNN's coverage of Warren in 2017 — it was more of the same type of news coverage for the Massachusetts senator’s supposed show of courage: “Silencing Elizabeth Warren backfires on Senate GOP.” The article that accompanies that CNN headline read: “Weeks after the women's marches around the country turned out droves of anti-Trump protesters, Warren – silenced by male senators for attempting to read a letter from a civil rights icon – had given those women a new rallying point.”

CNN even memorialized the moment in meme-format, sharing the now famous #Resistance quote on social media with its more than 43 million Twitter followers.

Neither CNN nor the New York Times nor the Washington Post spent any great amount of time or effort highlighting the fact that McConnell was clearly acting within his rights and that Warren had clearly violated Senate rules. These newsrooms certainly did not dare suggest that Warren’s stunt was indeed a stunt. Rather, the news coverage at the time focused almost entirely on one detail: That a man had "silenced" a woman.

In October 2016, CNN’s Chris Cillizza declared with his usual amount of undeserved self-confidence, “Let me say for the billionth time: Reporters don't root for a side. Period.”

Yes, Chris, they do. Period.