Watching the stammering, straining, struggling dialogue on the news nets today in responding to having the full Robert Mueller investigation report is all the evidence needed that our contemporary media complex is incapable of objective news reporting. CNN, by way of example, has dispatched a full 9 person panel today to cover the release. That all nine were in chorus in looking into this for ANY proof of wrongdoing by President Trump is of little surprise.

MSNBC also trotted out its revolving door of experts, telling us the important details are those not found in the report. (A notable absence has been the fully discredited John Brennan).One guest provided the most audacious reinterpretation of events. In taking gaslighting to new depths legal expert Neal Katyal insists that only one person has ever used the term “collusion”.

“Only Trump uses that term”?!?! You heard him, trying to claim that for the past two and a half years only the President has used that term. That comes as a sure surprise, especially considering this is a rather easily researched claim. Matt Wolking wasted little time rebutting this statement — he only had to look into the Mueller report for context: “the term has frequently been invoked in public reporting about the investigation,” says Mueller’s document.

Over on CNN Wolf Blitzer, holding up a binder of the printed out report, declared to the cameras, “We’re going through this very, very thoroughly.” That statement is more revealing than he intended because if the report itself had the ironclad proof of collusion and/or obstruction of justice there would not be a need to filter through the hundreds of pages to look for something objectionable. Noteworthy too is that the networks had little-to-no voices of differing interpretations. All were delving deeply to find their own segments to find proof of…something.

Chuck Todd seems strained to keep facts straight in this maelstrom of data that has been dumped, and dampened expectations. He puts out an old claim that has been long proven been false, but a need to revert is somewhat understandable.

Uh, “hacked”, Chuck? No, that never took place. As for those cheering, Bill Barr this morning declared that Americans should be cheering that it has been proven that no cooperation with a foreign power to deride our election took place. The press, all the while, is cheering for some proof of nefarious behavior to emerge. Put those pom-poms away, Chaz – it’s unseemly.

The chyron left on the screen at CNN reads that Mueller was “unable to conclude that no criminal conduct occurred”.  This is to be interpreted that Mueller was unable to disprove a negative, so therefore maybe that glimmer of hope remains alive. Not being explained by this glut of experts is that after two years nothing conclusive was found. That despite the fact Mueller requested an expansion of the scope of his investigation nothing tangible is revealed. And no one is even mentioning that the original thrust to look into collusion is completely brushed aside.

Panelist Jeffrey Toobin found his personal diamond in the exoneration. He leaned entirely on one sentence — in the hundreds of pages following years of investigations, hundreds of warrants, and thousands of subpoenas there was one sentence that had him holding out hope. In it, Mueller simply declared that Congress still retained the ability to impeach to explore possible obstruction. This is hardly revelatory, given that is a constitutional authority, and that Democrats have been bleating about impeachment for years already.

Yet these hopes ignore the core truth: if obstruction is such a slam dunk then it would have been declared in the report. Mueller has simply left enough of a window open for it to be explored by a zealot-driven political hunt. As today’s coverage has shown the zealotry is all set to race forward with their narrative.