Why Don't Journalists Call Out Bad Talking Points?

Washington Post: The Truth About Russia, Trump and the 2016 Election 

Vivek Ramaswamy slips it into his talking points as if it were fact.  The Democrats lied about Russian collusion in the 2016 election, therefore it justifies the lies Trump has told since then.  He slipped that statement into his comments on Meet the Press Sunday morning, and Chuck Todd didn't bat an eye, offered no question about it and let it slide.  That's expected with much of the main stream media. 

But this morning, on a talk show in Chicago, during a discussion about whether these indictments and charges against Trump are politically motivated, Santita Jackson had a guest on her program who stated flatly that Trump, as a former President, shouldn't be charged with crimes under the administration of his successor, but that the people ought to determine whether he is guilty of insurrection by the manner in which they cast their ballots.  I get it, with Jackson's program, she goes out of her way to be fair, and to represent various viewpoints, but this guest also mentioned the fact that Democrats pulled a similar "stunt" in 2016, getting the CIA, according to this guest, involved in trying to "overturn" Trump's election.  

It was nothing of the sort.  Except for the fact that the DOJ came under Trump's control and therefore would not pursue the conclusive evidence of Russian interference and Trump campaign collusion that Robert Mueller found in his investigation.  Primary evidence came from the FBI, but it is clear that this had nothing to do with any effort to prevent Trump from being inaugurated.  Those are all right wing talking points that we haven't heard until now, with Trump's back to the wall and the very real evidence of his attempts to overturn the results of a legitimate election.  

I give Jackson's other panelists this morning credit for pushing back, though no one actually corrected the statement that it was just a Democratic political ploy, and that there was plenty of evidence that it happened.  Mueller, in fact, left the door wide open for an indictment, practically writing it himself.  There's no evidence whatsoever of any strategy on the part of either President Obama or his DOJ to use this to stop the peaceful transfer of power. That's become a right wing talking point since the Trump indictments, an example of right wing "whataboutism."  

The problem they have with their "Democrats did it too," rhetoric, including what now involves the President and his son in their business dealings in Ukraine, is that the facts don't point to anything illegal, or, for that matter, "seditious."  More than two years have gone by, with scrutiny of Hunter Biden's business details under a microscope, and some unpaid taxes is all that can be found.  They love to point to phone calls and meetings, but pointing to them is one thing, their contents is quite something else.  Trump's phone calls and meetings involve openly seditious, conspiratorial statements and directions.  There's nothing at all implicating the President.  

And good journalists can cover this without letting the false narrative go unchallenged.