We’ve been watching MSNBC so you don’t have to — and we’ve kept notes.
Predictably, the pundits on MSNBC have been dismissing the I.R.S. whistleblower’s claims accusing his organization of stalling the investigation into Hunter Biden… but they’ve historically treated their own team’s whistleblowers very differently.
MSNBC host Nicole Wallace looks like the worst offender. In 2019, she praised an informant for accusing former President Donald Trump of soliciting interference from Ukraine. Now, she’s scoffing at the testimony of the I.R.S. employee.
Wallace said in 2019, “This whistleblower, it is another human being. It is a terrifying prospect to go and try to sound an alarm about the most powerful person in the country.”
Now, when discussing the I.R.S. employee, she won’t even use the word. She called him a “so-called whistleblower.”
“I’m not going to call them whistleblowers,” Wallace said earlier this year. “The G.O.P. is marketing them as whistleblowers… reappropriating the term ‘whistleblower’ after doing everything they could to endanger the life of the actual whistleblower that led to Donald Trump’s first impeachment.”
If the term “whistleblower” refers to an employee who uses his or her job to learn about a scandal and then informs either a reporter or a supervisor, then the I.R.S. employee and the 2019 informant are both whistleblowers.
But Wallace wants to distinguish between a “so-called” whistleblower and an “actual” whistleblower.
Take a look —
SUPERCUT!
See if you can spot the difference in media coverage between the 2019 & 2023 whistleblowers pic.twitter.com/kx2wOPThTQ
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) July 27, 2023
The Horn editorial team