'Praetorian Guard' liberal media circle the wagons
Three wise monkeys in suits businessmen journalists

'Praetorian Guard' liberal media circle the wagons

Posted March 04, 2017 12:00 AM by Chris Pandolfo Three wise monkeys in suits businessmen journalists
Edel Puntonet | Shutterstock
    • Font Size
    • A
    • A
    • A


Early Saturday morning, President Donald Trump issued a series of alarming tweets.

The sitting president of the United States accused his predecessor of wiretapping his campaign during the election. A serious allegation, offered without direct evidence.

But Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin and others have offered substantial reasons to be concerned that the Obama administration may have obtained a FISA court warrant to surveil members of the Trump campaign.

Speaking on the radio Thursday evening, Levin drew attention to what he referred to as a “silent coup” against Trump.  

"The question is: Was Obama surveilling top Trump campaign officials during the election?" Levin said.

There is no need to repeat Levin’s argument here. You can listen to him make the case himself. And he has helpfully provided the evidence that supports and shows the necessity of an official investigation. 

Posted by Mark Levin on Saturday, March 4, 2017


Members of the media should review this evidence and investigate the matter as well. In fact, they have a responsibility to do so. Instead, however, too many journalists are arrogantly dismissing Mark Levin and the questions he’s raised.

There are others. You don’t have to look very hard on social media to find journalists automatically dismissing the “right-wing talk radio host” outright.

That is foolish and irresponsible.

Mark Levin has served as chief of staff for President Reagan’s Attorney General Ed Meese; he has a keen legal mind. And, most importantly, he has provided evidence that shows how his analysis is perfectly within the realm of possibility. That evidence demands an investigation. 

Consider how President Trump’s short-lived national security adviser, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, was forced to resign after phone calls he had with a Russian ambassador prior to taking office were leaked to the press. How were those phone calls recorded? Is it out of bounds to wonder if they were obtained during surveillance operations? Consider The New York Times reporting that “four current and former American officials” said phone records and intercepted calls showed members of Donald Trump’s campaign had “repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials.” Who leaked that information, and where did it come from? These are questions that need to be asked.

Ignoring evidence suggesting foul play orchestrated by the Obama administration is an action one would expect from partisan Democrats. The DNC wishes to show that Russian interference helped lead to the defeat of Hillary Clinton, and not her radical progressive agenda or failings as a candidate.

But, again: Media should be expected to take these claims seriously. To investigate. Should journalists act like partisan Democrats? Dismissing potentially earthshattering evidence outright just because they loathe Trump?

The stakes are too high for journalists to behave this way. Mark Levin understands the implications of what the Obama administration appears to have done.

“The gravity of this is unparalleled. It appears that during the course of a presidential election, the Obama administration used both intelligence and law enforcement agencies to investigate the Republican nominee's campaign and certain surrogates,” Levin told Conservative Review.

Unelected members of executive-branch intelligence and law-enforcement agencies may have been used by President Obama to surveil the presidential campaign of a member of the opposition party. And now, those same unelected officials may be leaking information they obtained during that surveillance to undermine the governance of the elected president of the United States.

From where does a just government obtain its power? Look to the Declaration of Independence: “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

If the president, elected by the people, is indeed being undermined by unelected bureaucrats, then we no longer have government by consent of the governed; that is government by consent of government. Put aside personal animosity for Donald Trump, or loving admiration for Barack Obama. Should any president have the power to sabotage the work of the next presidential administration?

That prospect should frighten every American, Republican or Democrat. Conservative or liberal. It should certainly alarm members of the media — the supposed “government watchdogs.” In fact, there is a duty for journalists to use the freedom of the press to preserve the freedoms of every American — chiefly, the natural right to be governed by consent.

By refusing to even acknowledge that Mark Levin is asking a legitimate question — one that merits further investigation — by dismissing him and labeling his argument as “misinformation,” the press is abdicating that duty. That is shameful.

Chris Pandolfo is a staff writer and type-shouter for Conservative Review. He holds a B.A. in Politics and Economics from Hillsdale College. His interests are Conservative Political Philosophy, the American Founding, and Progressive Rock. Follow him on Twitter for doom-saying and great album recommendations @ChrisCPandolfo.