Barack Obama’s premeditated Russian collusion conspiracy to undermine Donald Trump and permanently damage his presidency in 2016-17 is the most egregious political scandal in American history. Obama and his cabal would not have brazenly employed the tactics used by many despots in the past century without the belief that a feckless Republican party would abandon Trump and the knowledge that the legacy media would be eagerly complicit in their skullduggery.
Since 1989 and the election of George H. W. Bush, the vast majority of Republicans elected to public office have chosen to worship the twin gods of civility and compromise rather than forcefully support their policy positions or defend those of their colleagues targeted by the Democrat machine for political extinction.
In conjunction with their willing accomplices in the legacy media, Democrats quickly ascertained that any outrageous accusation on their part (e.g., Republicans are determined to starve children) would lead to the Republican leadership surrendering to any opposition to their declared policies. Further, rather than support their colleagues who were oftentimes the victims of specious and malicious accusations, the spineless elites in the Republican party repeatedly sacrificed their members on the altar of civility and faux integrity.
Image created using ChatGPT
It was this backdrop that further emboldened Obama and his cabal to pull the trigger on the Russian collusion conspiracy, as they were confident that the Republican party hierarchy in 2016-17 would unquestioningly accept whatever Obama’s intelligence agencies claimed about Russian collusion and essentially abandon Trump to fight the battle on his own, abetting their efforts to destroy his presidency. Their confidence was well placed as Donald Trump was essentially hung out to dry by Republican Congressional leadership and many in the party hierarchy.
However, the primary enabler and de facto co-conspirator was a slavish legacy media that would willingly and unquestioningly regurgitate whatever was supposedly “leaked” to them.
The legacy media, since the days of Franklin Roosevelt, have been decidedly circumspect in their coverage of Democrat party failures and scandals, while their coverage of Republican failures and scandals was far more exploitive and expansive. Nonetheless, going into the 21st century, the primary legacy outlets avoided being blatantly political in their reporting, just as the public at large, tended to be wary of politicians’ machinations.
That reluctance was completely thrown out the window in 2008 as the legacy media landscape was undergoing dramatic changes and the first president “of color,” Barack Obama, with whom the so-called mainstream journalists were childishly infatuated, was elected. It was a short-term strategy with long-term consequences for the media.
In 1984, the total daily circulation for weekday newspapers in the United States was 63.3 million, with total annual advertising revenue exceeding $61.3 billion (inflation-adjusted to 2020). By 2008, total daily circulation had fallen 40% to 36.2 million, and annual advertising revenue had declined 42% to $36.1 billion (inflation adjusted to 2020). This trend has continued, as by 2020, daily circulation fell to 24.2 million and revenue collapsed to $9.6 billion.
The situation within the network broadcast media was equally dismal. In 1984, the three evening news shows on CBS, ABC, and NBC totaled a 34.6 rating. By 2008, that had fallen by 54% to 16.3 and has continued to erode. This has a dramatic impact on advertising revenue, as ad costs are determined based on ratings.
Beginning around 1999, the only area of revenue growth for newspapers and other media outlets was in digital advertising, which is dependent on the number of viewers accessing their respective websites. In 2011, digital advertising accounted for 17% of all newspaper revenues; by 2022, it was 48%.
Trump’s dramatic entrance onto the political stage in 2015 was a godsend for the legacy media as he, by the force of his personality and celebrity history, not only dominated media coverage but further polarized an increasingly factionalized electorate. The legacy media, due to its infatuation with Obama and the significant size of the activist left adamantly opposed to Trump, chose to evolve into the anti-Trump media.
By November 2016, the media in the United States were split between anti-Trump and pro-Trump venues. During the previous eight years, the legacy media were almost exclusively pro-Obama because of ideology. After the 2016 election cycle, the legacy media became almost exclusively anti-Trump because of revenue.
As its traditional income sources evaporated, the legacy media increasingly turned to digital traffic for advertising and subscription income. However, the typical consumer of news on the internet is predisposed toward preordained political beliefs and chooses to visit those sites that validate that viewpoint. Additionally, those who identify as liberal or very liberal are more active on the internet than their conservative counterparts. Ninety-one percent of New York Times readers self-identify as Democrats and liberals, a number that is essentially unchanged among virtually all legacy media outlets.
Consequently, the vast majority of legacy media outlets chose to abandon all pretense of objectivity and write off nearly sixty percent of the electorate by producing and promoting sensationalism and publishing stories for a specific audience (anti-Trump Democrats and Liberals) regardless of the overall veracity in reporting.
Virtually all legacy media outlets are now embroiled in a Catch-22 of their own making. They are wholly dependent on their digital footprint to survive and, therefore, must continue to pander to their fickle and demanding audience to remain afloat.
There are over 240 million adults in the United States. Twenty-six percent (62.5 million) identify as liberal or very liberal and would, in all likelihood, be viscerally opposed to Donald Trump. In a typical month, the leading newspaper website, the New York Times, averages 11.2 million daily visits in the United States, or 4.6% of the adult population.
That size audience generates significant advertising and subscription income. In 2023, the New York Times generated $318 million in digital advertising revenue and $1.09 billion in digital subscriptions, which accounted for nearly 60% of total company revenue.
But to maintain that level of engagement and revenue requires a constant drumbeat of increasingly sensationalist anti-Trump reporting. In other words, the outlet’s decision to collude with Obama and the Democrats on a near-endless list of so-called Trump scandals and lawfare from 2016 to 2024 was driven not by ideology but avarice.
With the knowledge that the legacy media had to do his bidding, the stage was set for Obama and his traitorous cabal to accuse Donald Trump of colluding with the Russians to win the 2016 election. The unfathomable hutzpah in deliberately creating false intelligence reports, suborning perjury and other unlawful acts, and utilizing the agencies of government to undermine the will of the people, shred the Constitution, and destroy a presidency could only have happened if the perpetrators were confident they (and Obama) would succeed.
As it turned out, Obama and the legacy media totally underestimated the tenacious resolve of Donald Trump and his supporters and are in the process of reaping the whirlwind as Obama’s place in American history and the legacy media are imploding.