The mainstream media is supposed to show some sign of unbiased reporting during Presidential elections. The idealistic view of the media’s role during election season is to inform readers, viewers, watchers and onlookers with the most information possible about the candidates vying for the votes during the primaries. However, during this election season the media has been anything but impartial.

Wikileaks promised additional e-mails that could affect voters’ perception heading into the November 8th showdown. Vessel News posted up an e-mail from one of the Wikileaks documents that was dated July 1st, 2015 that did a round-up of news stories about Hillary Clinton.

The entire e-mail was forward looking about puff pieces that had yet to run. This included a piece from Lisa Lerer from the Associated Press (AP) doing a story about women’s and family issues that Hillary Clinton would be focusing on throughout her campaign, as well as Jodi Enda from CNN doing a long-form story about Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary. They also had several stories in the pipeline from Politico.

This may not seem like much, but if you contrast the e-mail with the one from May 13th, 2015, you would see that the campaign basically was just doing a round-up of news that was posted in relation to Clinton’s campaign, or news that had already been published. The July 1st e-mail was about content set to be published way down the line.

Now it’s not uncommon for campaign managers to work with press for statements, sound bites and clips to use in stories, but having access to articles set to run well ahead of time – all of which are designed to be strikingly positive and help the momentum of Clinton’s campaign – seems more like coordinated promotion than neutral reporting.

In fact, a Huffington Post contributor, Frank Islam, wrote to the Hillary Clinton campaign chair pledging full support to Clinton on April 15th, 2015, writing…

“I am committed to make sure she is elected as the next President of United States. I am reaching out to my friends to raise money for her campaign. Please let me know if I can be of any service to you.”

Frank lets Hillary’s chair, John Podesta, know that they have various promotional pieces running on the Huffington Post in favor of Clinton, linking to the various pieces in the e-mail.

Technically, Frank is no stranger to supporting Clinton, making it known in an NDTV segment back on May 12th, 2016.

Frank’s work for the Huffington Post consists of various economic topics and plenty of Trump bashing, as evident on his author’s profile page, where articles like “The Mind of a Trump Supporter” pop up along with “Donald Trump” Baby, Bully and Buffoon?”, amongst many others.

Previously, Huffington Post actually fired a writer for mentioning Hillary’s health. David Seaman was restricted from accessing his account at the Post after linking to a video that questioned Hillary’s health after various odd episodes of the Presidential candidate appeared throughout various media clips.

The leaked e-mails also further revealed that the Democratic National Comittee had thoroughly plotted to usurp any electoral ground that Bernie Sanders, a former Democratic hopeful, tried to gain in an attempt to secure the nomination from the Committee.

In a brazenly nonchalant e-mail Mark Siegel writes to Tamera Luzzatoo, the Pew Charitable Trusts managing director, about how to undermine and subvert Sanders from ever securing the DNC nomination, with Siegel writing on March 20th, 2016 …

“So here’s my idea. Bernie and his people have been bitching about super delegates and the huge percentage that have come out for Hillary. Since the original idea was to bring our elected officials to the convention ex-officio”

 

“[…] why not throw Bernie a bone and reduce the super delegates in the future to the original draft of members of the House and Senate, governors and big city mayors, eliminating the DNC members who are not State chairs or vice-Chairs.”

 

“So if we “give” Bernie this in the Convention’s rules committee, his people will think they’ve “won” something from the Party Establishment. And it functionally doesn’t make any difference anyway. They win. We don’t lose. Everyone is happy. “

Siegel’s plan was forwarded to the rest of the DNC, who as we all know, proceeded to rig the Democratic National Convention to ensure that Sanders would never win.