New Tell All Reveals CNN Ran Hit Piece On Sarah Sanders To Settle WH Score


There is a new tell-all book about Trump’s White House written by a young insider. He does not trash Trump from start to end like the others, but takes shots at the “Team of Vipers” he has around him.

Cliff Simms was a mid-level White House aide on the communications team. He spared no insult for Kellyanne Conway, naming her as one of the biggest leakers in the White House.

He rakes Trump’s team over the coals for their disloyalty to the President, while revealing some nice personal, human moments from Trump, the kind you don’t normally get from the media who paints him as a cartoon.

Trump has yet to comment on the book but many on his team have come out strongly against the author’s version of events.

Based on this explosive report from Breitbart, CNN and Jim Acosta will be next to denounce the book. From Breitbart:

 An excerpt from former West Wing official Cliff Sims’ new book — provided exclusively to Breitbart News ahead of the book’s public release on Monday — shows how CNN’s Jim Acosta peddled unsubstantiated misinformation from a disgruntled ex-Trump campaign aide about White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders as part of the network’s effort to push the Stormy Daniels scandal story.

“In March 2018, I got a text from my comms team colleague Steven Cheung,” Sims writes in Team of Vipers:

“We need to pay attention to CNN, because I think something bad might be about to happen,” he said. I joked that such a statement could apply to almost any moment. But in this particular instance, Cheung explained that one of our former campaign colleagues was mad at Sarah Sanders—he wasn’t entirely clear why—and was sending Cheung cryptic texts that he “had something coming for her on CNN.” Sure enough, an article popped up on CNN’s website shortly thereafter with the headline “Trump Upset with Sanders.”

The article was bylined by Acosta and another CNN reporter Veronica Stracqualursi and lists two others at the bottom of the piece — Kevin Liptak and Jeff Zeleny — as having contributed to the piece’s reporting. The piece is single-sourced to make the main accusation in the headline and story.

“Trump upset with Sanders over Stormy Daniels response,” the headline still reads on CNN.

The lead sentence in the story says that the president was “upset with” Sanders over how she handled a press briefing on Daniels, attributing that to a “source close to the White House.”

The quote from the “source close to the White House” appears later in the story: “POTUS is very unhappy. Sarah gave the Stormy Daniels storyline steroids yesterday.”

The accusation was not just posted online on CNN’s website but on television as well.

“Acosta then went out on TV and dramatically described the deteriorating relationship be­ tween the President and his once­-beloved Press Secretary,” Sims writes.

But, now, with Sims’ revelations in his book, it appears as though Acosta and the other CNN personnel involved in publishing this story were simply allowing themselves to settle a score for a disgruntled person who used to work for the campaign rather than accurately reporting the president’s views on Sanders’ handling of Stormy Daniels questions. 

This is an explosive charge to be sure but it also proves a point Trump has been saying about the media.

That their narrative is controlled by the access they are given and that access always comes form strings attached.

Anonymous sources may be impossible to avoid so the media should at least use multiple sources before they run hit pieces to settle internal scores.