Hillary Fundraises Off... Wait For It... Being Victim of MEDIA BIAS!

Now that's chutzpah.

"Most voters aren't like us. Most people are picking up on politics when it finds them on Facebook, on the radio in the car, or when they flip through a magazine in line at the grocery store. Their information is filtered through the press. And right now, a lot of journalists are failing to hold Trump accountable and grading him on a curve, while forcing Hillary to meet an entirely different standard."

So goes the Hillary Clinton campaign's most recent plea for cash -- which will be used by the Hillary campaign to "hold Trump’s feet to the fire."

Yes. You read that correctly. Hillary Clinton is fundraising off her plight as an alleged victim of media bias. 

Fox News' Howard Kurtz writes that the Clinton campaign's latest fundraising letter "comes in the wake of that commander-in-chief forum moderated by Matt Lauer ... and it quotes a piece by liberal Jonathan Chait in New York Magazine about Lauer’s 'pathetic' interview."

Kurtz notes that the letter contains a line from Chait in which he characterizes Trump as "an ignorant, bigoted, pathologically dishonest authoritarian." The gist of the letter is: The mainstream media won't hold Donald Trump accountable for his crimes and Hillary Clinton is a victim of media bias, so please give her cash, so she can ensure more negative Trump coverage. 

Only in the alternate world of presidential campaign politics can something so absurd be transformed into a fundraising appeal. 

In his article, Kurtz writes that he does see instances of media bias against Hillary Clinton, "even though Trump gets unfairly pounded on a far more regular basis," adding:

At the same time, her utter lack of transparency — disputing conspiracy theories about some grave illness while failing to disclose her diagnosis of pneumonia — continues to hurt her. 

"But for liberal journalists to complain about excessive coverage of the email and foundation controversies sounds more like cheerleading for the Democratic nominee than grave concern for journalistic excess," he concludes.

Cheerleading? More like pure gall.

The truth is, Hillary Clinton's role in the Benghazi siege, her handling of classified information while serving as Secretary of State, the overlaps in her State Department dealings with high-level donors to the Clinton Foundation, and inconsistencies in her claims about her health are all perfectly legitimate questions -- and ones that any real journalist would hook his or her entire career on in order to investigate.

The irony of it all is that if mainstream media simply did their job -- and if Clinton herself stopped lying and simply acted human for once (instead of drawing even more suspicion on herself) -- much of the negative attention would be negated.