Marching Orders: White House Letter Tells Media To “Ramp Up Their Scrutiny” In Response to Impeachment Inquiry

I have previously written how the level of advocacy and bias has created a danger of a de facto state media in the United States. It is possible to have such a system by consent rather than coercion. Given that long concern, a letter drafted by the Biden White House Legal Counsel’s Office was striking in a call for major media to “ramp up their scrutiny” of House Republicans “for opening an impeachment inquiry based on lies.”

The message is curious and concerning, particularly in the aggressive role being played by the White House Counsel’s office under Stuart Frank Delery.

First, as I have previously noted, the White House is now actively involved in pushing narratives and denying factual allegations linked to the Biden corruption scandal. That could create Nixonian-type allegations of the abuse of office in the use of federal employees to counter impeachment efforts.

Second, the letter was drafted by Ian Sams, a spokesperson for the White House Counsel’s Office. So White House lawyers are now enlisting the media in a counter media campaign against impeachment? The letter removes any pretense of separation between the Biden personal legal team and the White House Counsel’s office. Sams has been the most aggressive White House official in actively swatting down allegations of corruption as well as the President’s documents investigation.

Third, the letter calls for the media to actively support the White House account. The draft of the letter is a call for what I have previously criticized as “advocacy journalism” where reporters frame stories to advance their own viewpoints or values.

Sams wrote “[c]overing impeachment as a process story – Republicans say X, but the White House says Y – is a disservice to the American public who relies on the independent press to hold those in power accountable.” In other words, media should (and it has for years) decline to give equal attention to allegations against the Bidens and instead tell the public what the truth is.

It is a call for media to tailor the coverage to push the position of the White House against this effort to ramp up the investigation into corruption. It is an approach that is already embraced by many in the media. That was evident in the meltdown of Washington Post columnist Philip Bump recently when he was confronted by countervailing evidence in the Biden scandals.  Before storming out, Bump chastised the interviewer for not just taking his work as the “putative expert” and said that he had enough “because you don’t listen to the press. I’m sitting here and I’m telling you, you’re wrong about these things, and you don’t listen, and you continue to insist upon things that are, you know, parsing of language.”

That appears the approach pushed by Sams, who specifically references Facebook and Fox as enemies of the truth: “in the modern media environment, where every day liars and hucksters peddle disinformation and lies everywhere from Facebook to Fox, process stories that fail to unpack the illegitimacy of the claims on which House Republicans are basing all their actions only serve to generate confusion, put false premises in people’s feeds, and obscure the truth.”

The letter has an uncomfortable feeling of marching orders to the media.  This is a media that followed the lead of Biden associates in spreading the false story that the Hunter laptop was Russian disinformation.

This is the media that refused to acknowledge the authenticity of the laptop until only recently — long after the presidential election.

This was the media that only recently admitted that President Biden has been lying about denials related to his son’s influence peddling.

Yet, the White House is now calling for the media to again form the wagons around the President and attack the impeachment effort as it did the laptop and the corruption investigation.

Once again, what is most disturbing is that the White House shows no reluctance or concern in making such an open pitch to the press. There is a sense of license in using the media as an extension of the White House press push. The fact that this is a representative of the White House counsel’s office is particularly chilling. This is not the press office but the counsel for the President calling on media to form a unified front against the Republicans and the impeachment inquiry.

The letter is an alarming erosion of separation of the White House Counsel’s office from the Biden defense team. It also confirms an active and aggressive role of White House officials in swatting down allegations against the President. While the staff obviously is not expected to be neutral on impeachment, there is a careful line that past White House counsels have walked between fulfilling their duties to the office as opposed to the officeholder.

269 thoughts on “Marching Orders: White House Letter Tells Media To “Ramp Up Their Scrutiny” In Response to Impeachment Inquiry”

  1. The more worrisome issue is if you combine the DNC’s press Corp, with the plethora of democrat vote influencing organizations, and various Covid accommodations for voting like California’s 100% mail ballots to last known address, (50% of which end up unaccounted for), has the possibility of a honest and generally accepted ballot result finally one more institution to bite the dust?
    The news organizations are old news. The mechanics of dishonest voting is the real crime against democracy.

  2. Would you be the one journalist who will actually investigate the role of the Penn Biden Center for global excellence at Pennsylvania University and how the Penn University employee Joe Biden could announce to the world that he was going to mandate his employer’s vaccine technology after receiving $900,000 from Pennsylvania University in “pay”?
    Could you be the one journalist who’s willing to investigate the hundreds of millions in foreign donations to the president elect’s employer? Could you be the only journalist willing to investigate what if anything was received by the Penn Biden Center since Biden became president?
    Inquiring minds of the vaccine injured want answers and no journalist is willing to find them

  3. “. . . letter was drafted by Ian Sams . . .”

    If I were a journalist, I’d tell Sams and his mini-tyrants:

    Go (unprintable) yourself.

    1. Is it not in fact an egregious Hatch Act violation? It does appear to be promoting a political view, for political benefit, from a government post, on government property, released under government authority with the actual White House seal?

  4. Regarding the comment on Hitler and how the students are saving us from the next Hitler. These students need to realize that they are acting like Hitler’s goons. Hitler was given a platform because he had Stormtroopers disrupt every opposition speeches and rallies. These students are essentially modern day Stormtroopers trying to suppress any other opinions.

  5. So no one gets all butt hurt again, I put it out there for ANY lefty to answer.

    Who did Hunter and Zlovchevsky call from Dubai in December 2015 and why?

    1. Let me help the poor feckless libtard journos out…In December 2015, Mykola Zlochevsky, the owner of Burisma, and Vadym Pozharski, an executive of Burisma, placed constant pressure on Hunter Biden to get help from D.C. regarding the Ukrainian prosecutor, Viktor Shokin. Shokin was investigating Burisma for corruption. Hunter Biden, along with Zlochevsky and Pozharski, “called D.C.” to discuss the matter. Biden, Zlochevsky, and Pozharski stepped away to make the call. This raises concerns that Hunter Biden was in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

      1. Thats partially correct.

        By the way, this was Devon Archers testimony to Congress. Remember, where he “destroyed the narrative about Joe Bidens involvement”, according to the left and the media.

        The only narrative it destroys is that Burisma wasnt the reason Shokin got fired.

        Archer also said that it was JOE that was called that day. His lawyer then asked for a “time-out” and reminded Archer that he was implicating himself in the crime of Bribery of the VPOTUS. He then asked to change his testimony for the record and was allowed to do so.
        Now everyone wants to pretend he didnt say it.

        Archer was on the board of Burisma, and Hunter’s business partner. He knows damn well who was called that day.

        And so do i, we, and everyone in denial about this.

        1. Coward #1 won’t answer the question… thats the only thing I have predicted and you stepped right up to prove me right!!


      2. It should be simple for the FBI or other law enforcement agency to establish that V P Biden was on the receiving end of that call, if they want to. If it is established, then Biden was guilty of bribery when he forced Shokin out of office a few weeks later. Nothing else remains to be proved. Unfortunately, the Statutue of Limitations on bringing a criminal action is probably 5 years, so Joe would be protected from prosecution; but not protected from removal from office. The facts regarding Biden’s actions should have been investigated when Trump asked the Ukranian government for information on Hunter’s influence peddling, an action for which the Demos impeached him.

        1. Trump didn´t ask the Ukrainian government for information on Hunter´s influence peddling. He told Zelensky he just wanted him to announce that he was going to start an investigation. Big difference.

      3. Wow! that is so completely wrong. Shokin WASN’T investigating Burisma. He was in their pockets. They owned him. That entire story has been debunked long ago. The policy on Ukraine was Obama’s. NOT Bidens. He acted under the instructions of Obama. The International Monetary Fund, and the EU, and the US all wanted Shokin gone. He was corrupt and is the main reason Ukraine was not included as a member state of the EU or NATO. But hey, don’t let the facts get in the way of your ideology.

  6. This is an example of the life and career of the person who is occupying the office of the Presidency. He was a fraud in the early days and there is no evidence that he has changed. Now, he is a fraud and diminished. He should be immediately removed from office for inability to perform the tasks of the Presidency. How bizarre that he is being protected and we are to pretend his is competent and trustworthy. He is hurting the lives of everyday people not only here but in all the world.

    Here he is plagiarizing RFK, JFK and Neil Kinnock.

    1. “Just one question Tom? Earth to Tom? Big mouth Tom? Idiot Tom? Grownups Tom? Stop already Tom!!!!!!”

      Lmao yea, u dont like those questions either, do you? About the response i would expect, but no less cowardly than the silence from your comrades.

      1. Oh wait, perhaps i misread your issue. Maybe you’re butthurt that i didnt invite you to the party. Please, if you’d like to take a shot at the question, go right ahead.

        1. On second thought, this has to be that grass cutting dude…this is just the type of incoherent gibberish he resorts to when cornered.

Leave a Reply