The Washington Post is no friend to President Donald Trump, in fact they’re not even attempting to pretend they’re playing fair when it comes to covering the President.

Less than one year after the 2016 presidential election, The Washington Post published an article that unashamedly revealed the disgusting bias of the mainstream media, showing actual examples of how the media coverage of Trump in his first 100 days in office was 91% negative. 

Washington Post – The mainstream-media critics over at the Media Research Center have been evaluating “evaluative” statements about President Trump on the three main nightly newscasts — ABC’s “World News Tonight,” “CBS Evening News” and “NBC Nightly News.” Over the summer — June, July and August — 91 percent of such statements have been negative, as opposed to 9 percent positive, the organization has determined. “Analyzing the networks’ spin makes it clear that the goal of all of this heavy coverage is not to promote the President, but to punish him,” write Rich Noyes and Mike Ciandella in a posting on NewsBusters, the very prolific blog of the MRC.

For the sake of comparison, Harvard University’s Shorenstein Center earlier this year found that negative Trump coverage swamped positive Trump coverage over his first 100 days in office. See the chart below, but beware: Those red and green bars don’t include a significant portion of the coverage that Shorenstein categorized as “neutral.”

Was the Washington Post sincere when they published this revealing article about the extreme media bias by the Washington Post and others who cover “news” about President Trump? Perhaps they were simply playing to their base, who has become accustomed the the hateful, anti-Trump rhetoric coming from what used to be considered respected sources of news… 

Today’s opinion piece in the Washington Post, by Gary Abernathy takes a sharp turn from the biased, anti-Trump publication, and explains how the raid of Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen could actually backfire on Mueller and the Democrats, as they appear to have crossed the line while grasping for straws to keep the case (any case) against Trump alive.

Washington Post – Unlike many who often defend President Trump, I don’t always see political motivations behind special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation. But the raid on the home and office of Trump’s longtime personal attorney brought flashbacks of a local incident with numerous parallels.

In 2011, Drew Hastings was elected mayor of Hillsboro. With no political experience, he was best known until then as a developer and an entertainer. Some of his social media posts have been condemned as insensitive at best, racist at worst. He uses salty language that has been called inappropriate for a public official. He was investigated for crimes in a probe he called a “witch hunt,” and his critics say he uses his office to enrich himself. His stated goal is to disrupt an entrenched political system.

Sound familiar?

Hastings’s name might ring a bell. He spent most of his adult life living in Los Angeles and working as a stand-up comedian with some national success, including a Comedy Central special, two appearances on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno” and regular guest spots on the nationally syndicated “Bob & Tom Show.”

In his opinion piece, Abernathy explains how Hastings became disillusioned with liberal L.A. and decided to pursue a career in politics. Shortly after he was elected as mayor of Hillsboro, CA, Hastings began to face controversy for agreeing to a contract with a local fire district and disbanding the local 156-year old fire department.

After upsetting a number of other apple carts in his new hometown, he was reelected in 2015. But shortly after, he faced a criminal investigationbased on evidence gathered by his own police department, with which he had feuded since taking office. The probe — soon led by a special prosecutor from the state auditor’s office — resulted in four felony indictments and became a national story.

“I’m only guilty of trying to represent our citizens without the consent of an established political structure,” Hastings told the Associated Press, in Trump-like fashion.

The Hastings investigation started out looking into legitimate questions about a $500 refund he had received from the city in connection with suspicions of forgery, as well as a “theft in office” allegation over the use of city dumpsters. Citizens following all this didn’t know what to think. Law enforcement had the benefit of the doubt — until a late-night raid on an apparently unrelated matter tipped public opinion in Hastings’s favor.

In February 2016, law enforcement officials armed with a warrant conducted a 10 p.m. raid on Hastings’s Hillsboro home, where his visiting father-in-law was ordered out of the house into the freezing night. The purpose of the raid, according to the search warrant, was to look for evidence of residency — one of the eventual charges against him was election falsification for not living where he said he lived — with investigators meticulously documenting the underwear of Hastings’s wife, their young child’s toys, and even the serial number of their commode. When the raid was reported, it was met with general outrage.