Why should the only recourse be, for a willfully damaging news story based upon lies and innuendos from anonymous sources, to force them to rebut it on their own networks?
How does one reach the audience of the affected with sinister lies, meant to keep their viewers from knowing the TRUTH?
Do you force them to cover previously ignored stories? NO!
You charge them with willful intent to deceive the People of the USA and then you prove it in a public trial.
I could live with that if the issue was only about damaging stories. What about even more damaging non-stories? (Stories they refused to run and because they refused to run them, it caused damage.)
The media does more damage by refusing to cover a story than they do by pushing fake stories. How likely would the public have been to reelect Obama if they only knew of the information we were seeing on the conservative websites?
Obama more or less singlehandedly created ISIS, and he is more responsible than anyone else for it's atrocities. Who in the network media pointed out Obama's involvement in creating ISIS?
Nobody did. How much blood shed and treasure did this cost? It was immense.
President Trump is merely snapping his fingers to bring everyone's attention to the matter.
This is plain to see for some of us, but many of us want to focus on a tree instead of the larger forest.