Not long ago, the laughable Los Angeles Times temporarily transferred young reporter Chris (I Hate Trump) Megerian from Sacramento to Washington. His lone assignment: Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russia’s role in last year’s election campaign.
Since landing, Mr. Megerian has been drowning.
Ostensibly, he was to play investigative reporter.
Instead, he just has been playing. As a hard-left partisan, he is a boy who wants grownups to notice him.
Mountains of evidence of FBI bias against then-candidate Donald Trump have been reported and verified. This has had a poisonous, potentially fatal, effect on the Mueller probe.
Loyal to his bosses, Mr. Megerian alternately has mocked and at crucial times ignored evidence damning to the meandering probe.
In yesterday’s embarrassing front-page “story,” Mr. Megerian resorted to his playpen personality. His editors must have been drinking or sexually harassing because his story should have been flagged.
In his opening sentence, he gives his opinion instead of his findings:
“Republicans increasingly are trying to stack up reasons for the American public to doubt whatever (Mr. Mueller) concludes.”
Over the next 33 paragraphs, reputation-chasing Mr. Megerian sets out to validate his mocking skepticism. He succeeds. Playing this nasty me-first journalistic game is why his newspaper’s reputation regularly is shredded these days.
He feels compelled to steadily tattoo readers with his leftist views that instantly melt into a prolonged juvenile screed.
He unlooses a banshee howl in paragraph 11, which explains why CNN, the apology network, is his favorite news source:
“Republican criticism of the Mueller inquiry mounted steadily in recent weeks, a mix of accusations and innuendo that fires up conservative commentators on media outlets like Fox News, then ricochets around Washington and through the halls of Congress.”
Persistent as a hound dog chasing a car, Mr. Megerian accents his bias in the next paragraph.
Vaguely he writes that unnamed sources say Republican evidence of flagrant FBI anti-Trump bias is “a tactic meant to confuse the public.”
Oh.
He found a liberal professor at Princeton (where 97 percent of the faculty is left-wing) to say “the goal (of Republican discovery of FBI anti-Trump bias) is to create such a cloud of distrust that many people can’t see straight anymore.”
Sour Grapes Megerian waits until the 23rd paragraph to gently introduce ethically challenged Pete Strzok, the foulmouthed, wife-cheating, since-relieved No. 2 FBI agent who sent I Despise Trump texts secretly to his girlfriend. Sour Grapes wrote dismissively: “He sent what could be considered anti-Trump messages to a colleague.”
Oh.
Sour Grapes turns his last five paragraphs over to a left-wing educator from Duquesne University. Helpfully, the educator assures Sour Grapes his mockery is astute and that Republicans are bigots.
And that is today’s news from the sour grapes anti-Trump world of wannabees.