On the Fox Business Network (FBN) early Thursday evening, Media Research Center Director of Media Analysis Tim Graham emphasized that, aside from the leaked Clinton campaign e-mails coming from Wikileaks, they nonetheless proved “that the news media is operating hand in glove with the Clintons and that reporters” from outlets like The New York Times “are coming to the Clinton's press aides and going, you can veto our stories.”
Fill-in Risk and Reward host Elizabeth McDonald began the segment by noting Clinton campaign complaints that Wikileaks is working with the Russians to help Donald Trump but naturally have not been concerned about how stories like Trump’s tax information and the Access Hollywood video was given to The New York Times and The Washington Post, respectively.
“Well, as you suggest, basically they don't care where the information comes from, if it's information they like. So The New York Times, when it gets tax information in an envelope with the post-it marked Trump Tower, they just say we don't know where this came from,” Graham responded.
A few moments later, Graham contrasted how The Times has reacted to the Trump accusers and taxes with what the recent Wikileaks document dumps have revealed in how they have been going about reporting the news:
Yes, they found that the documents were authentic but don't care about the source, so to talk about Russia is just to try to throw everybody off and what we've noticed in these e-mails that's really important is that these e-mails show that the news media is operating hand in glove with the Clintons and that reporters are coming to the Clinton's press aides and going, you can veto our stories, you can tell us what to do at the end of one of them at The New York Times, the Clinton aide actually says sorry I'm on an iPhone, I can't cut and paste the story the way I want it.
The transcript of Graham’s appearance on FBN’s Risk and Reward from October 13 can be found below.
FBN’s Risk and Reward
October 13, 2016
5:27 p.m. EasternELIZABETH MCDONALD: Hillary Clinton's campaign accusing the Russians of hacking e-mails and thus working with Donald Trump. My next guest is asking what about the media basically not taking a hard look about how information about Trump is being leaked? He basically is talking about how The New York Times published leaked tax information, and basically there were stories leaked about Trump's sexual harassment of about, now, we're hearing half a dozen accusers today. The Washington Post also leaked the Trump's hot mic tapes, another one about him earlier this year allegedly acting as his own publicist years ago. With me now, Media Research Center Director Tim Graham. So, can you draw a connection between the U.S. media and Russia here?
TIM GRAHAM: Well, as you suggest, basically they don't care where the information comes from, if it's information they like. So The New York Times, when it gets tax information in an envelope with the post-it marked Trump Tower, they just say we don't know where this came from, and we don't care and I think in this case —
MCDONALD: No, no, they did try to nail it down and did try to check the providence of it, and checked with his tax preparers as well, so The New York Times did make an effort. I hear what you're saying.
GRAHAM: They check the authenticity of the document.
MCDONALD: Yeah, I hear what you're saying. What we're not hearing, what's interesting, I'd love your thoughts on this, when the Hillary campaign talks about hacking Russia e-mails, have you heard them question anybody from the Clinton campaign, question the authenticity of any of the e-mails?
GRAHAM: I think they've try to vaguely generally suggest not everything in there is — that you can't — you know, you need to verify every individual one before you start talking about it and that's a way to slow the story down, so, yeah, what I was trying to say about the tax documents is, they just — you know, there was not a lot of fomentation in the rest of the press about where they got this. Yes, they found that the documents were authentic but don't care about the source, so to talk about Russia is just to try to throw everybody off and what we've noticed in these e-mails that's really important is that these e-mails show that the news media is operating hand in glove with the Clintons and that reporters are coming to the Clinton's press aides and going, you can veto our stories, you can tell us what to do at the end of one of them at The New York Times, the Clinton aide actually says sorry I'm on an iPhone, I can't cut and paste the story the way I want it.
MCDONALD: You know, I want to just ask you about the issue about where the material comes from? Because I do think you raise a valid point. For instance, you remember when the tobacco industry was basically roiled by claims from a whistle-blower how the tobacco company was doctoring tobacco? When you — and then the tobacco companies are the ones attacking the whistle-blower, that changed the story. Do you understand what I mean? So if find out who the source is of all the information, that would change the story, right, Tim?
GRAHAM: Right and I think one of the reasons the press loves of anonymous sourcing, you don't question where the stuff came from, but I think it's always fair for people to be able to wonder in any one of the stories where it came from. I think in this case, when you're looking at the Wikileaks e-mails, though, we understand what the documents are. They're e-mails to and from John Podesta, a top Clinton aide.
MCDONALD: Right.
GRAHAM: I think a lot of these other stories we've been talking about, we don't know who the leaker is and what the agenda is, but that should be part of the story. I think one of the things that —
MCDONALD: That's exactly the point, Tim. That's exactly the point. You nailed it right there. That’s such an important point and I don't think the Clinton campaign, we haven't seen them debunk the authenticity of the e-mails to date, and if you find that, will you come back us with that story if you get it?
GRAHAM: Sure.
MCDONALD: Thank you so much, terrific work. Tim, thanks again.
