CNN’s Headline About Trump’s Pick For The Next Director Of National Intelligence Is Why No One Takes Them Seriously.

Mockarena, Co-Founder

Seriously CNN?  SERIOUSLY?

This is on their politics page.  Not an op-ed, not an editorial – it’s political news according to one of the worst examples of journalism EVER – CNN.

So as you’ve probably heard, Dan Coats resigned, and his last day will be in mid-August.  Trump has selected John Ratcliffe (R-TX) to replace him.  You may remember John Ratcliffe from such things as this delicious moment from the Mueller hearing:

It was epic.

Ratcliffe was appointed by the Bush administration as the Chief of Anti-Terrorism and National Security for the Eastern District of Texas in the DOJ.  He served as mayor of Heath, Texas for two terms. He was appointed US Atty by former AG Michael Mukasey. He was a law partner alongside former AG John Ashcroft, and he’s been in the House of Representatives since January of 2015. He has served on the Intelligence, Homeland Security, Judiciary and Ethics Committees. But how does CNN choose to characterize his qualifications?  Like this:

President Donald Trump’s nomination of John Ratcliffe to replace Dan Coats as the next Director of National Intelligence would launch a lawmaker with less than five years national experience under his belt to the pinnacle of US espionage in one of the most powerful and sensitive jobs in government.

Again, this isn’t an op-ed, y’all.  This is what CNN considers journalism.  It’s also patently clear from their headline just what they think of our country’s intelligence community.  “Spymasters?”  Seriously?  “Staunch Loyalist?”  OMG.

You know what an Actual Journalist would have written for a headline for this news story? “Trump selects Rep. John Ratcliffe to replace Dan Coats as National Intelligence Director.”  

Just the facts, ma’am.  That’s all we need here.

Next, CNN’s “reporters” explain how tense the confirmation hearings for Ratcliffe will be, saying, “It also sets the stage for what is likely to be a bruising and partisan confirmation battle with critics arguing he earned the nomination as a reward for loyalty to Trump and not because he has relevant experience for the role.”< Ahhh - so that's where that "staunch loyalist" headline came from?  "Critics" - says CNN. Just wait - next they'll accuse John Ratcliffe of being "hand-picked" by Trump.  As if any cabinet appointee in the history of ever hasn't been hand-picked by the president. CNN's reporters went on to write:

The congressman initially wanted the job of attorney general, but after Trump selected William Barr to replace Jeff Sessions, the window on that opportunity effectively closed. Trump was so impressed by Ratcliffe’s performance during the Mueller hearing — deeming him a “warrior” — that he decided he wanted him for the Coats job.

Curious – they make no citation and provide no source of this information.  But I guess – why start now, amirite?  That would be something Actual Journalists would do, and this is CNN, so…..< But wait!  Maybe they're just making that assumption because Chuck Schumer says so!

“It’s clear that Rep. Ratcliffe was selected because he exhibited blind loyalty to President Trump with his demagogic questioning of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller,” Schumer said. “If Senate Republicans elevate such a partisan player to a position that requires intelligence expertise and non-partisanship, it would be a big mistake.”

Insert eleventy skillion rolling eyes here.

CNN is a joke.

Listen to "Mock and Daisy's Common Sense Cast" on Spreaker. A lot of common sense, no bull sense. Get Mock and Daisy’s UNIQUE take on the world, from the dinner table to the swamp on the new Mock and Daisy Common Sense Cast. Listen on Apple Podcasts, iHeart or your favorite podcast app!