Media narratives are all the rage these days, with readers getting more than just facts — they also get journalists’ opinions on the larger scheme of things. And when it comes to Preet Bharara’s exit from the Manhattan US Attorney’s Office, all the media narratives are pretty much the same.

To wit, Bharara was an independent and crusading prosecutor who was fired by President Trump for one of two reasons: Trump wanted to protect himself from possible prosecution or was guilty of gross incompetence. Either way, Bharara was the hero and Trump the villain.

The only wrench in the nursery rhyme is that other facts point to other possible conclusions. Let’s review a few of the inconvenient ones, starting in late November.

Reporting that Bharara met with then-President-elect Trump and agreed to stay on his job, the New York Times gave readers an extra nugget. While most news accounts said that Sen. Chuck Schumer urged Trump to keep Bharara, the Times, citing an anonymous source, added a detail: “Mr. Trump also asked Mr. Schumer how best to reach Mr. Bharara, and the senator provided Mr. Trump with Mr. Bharara’s direct line.”

Well, then, since the Senate minority leader had a direct line to the federal prosecutor in his home district, it is reasonable to assume that Schumer used that line on occasion. Did they discuss cases? Politics?

Neither would be surprising. Bharara had worked for Schumer in the Senate, and Schumer had recommended that President Barack Obama elevate his young staffer to US attorney, which Obama did in 2009.

And now, thanks again to Schumer’s recommendation to Trump, Bharara would get to keep his lofty perch despite the tradition of each new president replacing federal prosecutors with his own appointees.

CNN even reported that Trump offered to keep Bharara on as a personal favor to Schumer, hoping it would help break the partisan ice in Washington.

In any event, it’s certain that Bharara owed his last two jobs to Schumer, the ultimate political animal, and yet we are to believe that Bharara was so offended by even the mere hint of politics that he refused Trump’s order to resign, and demanded to be fired.

Count me as disappointed that Trump did not keep Bharara at the Southern District long enough to finish the extended probe of Mayor Bill de Blasio, the trial of people close to Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the Anthony Weiner child pornography investigation.

But Bharara’s political grandstanding on the way out the door is doubly disappointing. In an instant, he went from white knight to a member of the Democrats’ anti-Trump resistance movement.

He revealed his sudden change of heart when he tweeted that “now I know what the Moreland Commission must have felt like,” an obvious reference to Cuomo prematurely closing a public-corruption panel he had appointed. Bharara had fumed at Cuomo and seized the panel’s files, which he used as a starting point to convict Albany’s top two legislative leaders. By mentioning the Moreland panel now, Bharara seemed to be hinting that he, too, had been fired because he was getting too close to a sacred cow.

Of course, that would also mean Trump had fired 45 other prosecutors the same day just to protect that sacred cow.

Bharara also let it be known, first through anonymous leaks, that Trump had called him the day before the firing. But the immaculate prosecutor, believing the call was inappropriate under federal rules, refused to take the call and talked to the Justice Department instead.

But wait — if it was inappropriate for Bharara to talk to Trump in March, why was it appropriate for him to meet with the president-elect in Trump Tower in November about keeping the job? On the surface, there’s no material difference, especially because Bharara concedes he doesn’t know why Trump called him last week, though he doubts the White House version that the president was calling to thank him for his service.

I have saluted Bharara as a one-man wrecking crew against political corruption, but I’m left with the feeling that he developed a case of Comey-itis. Like FBI Director Jim Comey, Bharara acted as if he was too big to fire.

By refusing to follow the traditional practice of submitting his resignation when the president requested it — that’s what it means to serve “at the pleasure of the president” — he challenged Trump’s constitutional authority. He was out of bounds.

What was his end game? Was the Manhattan outpost of the Justice Department going rogue and would no longer be accountable to anyone except Preet Bharara? Or was he auditioning for his next gig?

Because of his defiance, speculation is swirling that Bharara will soon enter politics. I’d say he already has.

Deport foes in left field

The Associated Press recently distributed a story about training sessions to help illegal immigrants avoid deportation. The sessions are being held across the country and are offered by liberal advocacy groups such as Make the Road in New York, which are spreading fears of mass deportation under President Trump.

Among the advocates’ advice: Don’t open the door even a peek if immigration officials come knocking. Tell them your name and nothing else. Don’t sign anything and never show any fake documents, lest you get into serious trouble.

Yet nowhere in the story is there any indication that the advocacy groups know whether the immigrants they are training to avoid the law are also guilty of serious crimes, including violent ones. Without knowing or wanting to know, the groups could be helping to shield dangerous felons.

That’s reckless and irresponsible. Not all illegal immigrants are equal, and reasonable vetting of those getting the training is in order.

To argue otherwise is to admit that Trump Derangement Syndrome is causing the left to go completely nuts.



Ivanka’s smooth saleing

After anti-Trumpers threatened boycotts, Nordstrom and other retailers dropped Ivanka Trump’s fashion line. In response, supporters of the president waged a campaign to buy Ivanka’s products online and at other outlets.

The results are in and so is the winner — February sales soared by 346 percent, the company reports, with some categories doing better than ever.

My humble suggestion is that Trump show her appreciation by naming a new perfume after her father’s most loyal backers: Deplorable. It would sell like hotcakes and carry the sweet smell of revenge.