CNN continued to pivot right during its coverage of Trump-appointed special counsel John Durham’s report on the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe. Many in right-wing media were ecstatic about this coverage, amplifying it across multiple social media platforms and using it as evidence to support their unsubstantiated argument that the probe was a “witch hunt.”
For four years, right-wing media hyped Durham’s investigation of the FBI’s investigation into former President Donald Trump and his relationship with Russia. But when the Durham report was released on May 15, it became clear that the findings fell markedly short of right-wing media’s expectations: It did not produce bombshell revelations nor a litany of crimes. Instead, the report noted that the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation relied on “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence” and argued that the investigation was politically biased. But much of the report was not new and was already made public by the Department of Justice in 2019.
University of Michigan law professor Barb McQuade explained that the findings of the Durham report were simple: The FBI should have opened a preliminary, not a full, investigation. And as Just Security’s Ryan Goodman noted, the initial investigation “would have surely moved to a full investigation.”
CNN’s framing of the Durham report was exceptionally misleading, ignored expert opinion, and aligned with Trump talking points. Instead of explaining that Durham found that a preliminary investigation was warranted, CNN journalists emphatically (and incorrectly) claimed that the “FBI should never have launched its investigation into connections between Trump's campaign and Russia.” CNN.com also parroted this false talking point.
Host Jake Tapper was potentially the worst offender of CNN’s inaccurate coverage. On the May 15 edition of his show, Tapper claimed that “to a degree, it [the report] does exonerate Donald Trump.” But this isn’t true; the report does not “exonerate” Trump (similar to how Muller’s report didn’t exonerate Trump). As MSNBC’s Steve Benen wrote, “By any fair measure, this is the most inconsequential special counsel investigation in the modern history of American law enforcement.”