Washington Post STANDS BY its reporting as calls grow for Pulitzer to be swiped after Durham report

A left-wing Trump-bashing newspaper has refused to return the 2018 Pulitzer Prize over the now-debunked theory that the ex-president conspired with Russia.

The Washington Post and the New York Times won the most celebrated award in American journalism for their “deeply rooted, relentlessly reported coverage.”

But the DC-based outlet, which is funded by Democratic-donating Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos, insists it won’t relinquish its National Reporting honor.

“The Post is sticking to its reporting,” a Washington Post spokeswoman said.

She cited a 2022 review from the Pulitzer board stating that no element of those stories was “discredited by facts that emerged after the awards were presented.”

The calls follow an investigation by special counsel John Durham that went wrong the FBI’s investigation into Trump-Russia conspiracy allegations.

“Neither U.S. law enforcement nor the intelligence community appears to have any actual evidence of conspiracy in their possession at the start of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation,” the report said.

But Erik Wemple, the Washington Post’s media critic, has repeatedly criticized liberal outlets that ran stories based on a dossier on ex-British spy Christopher Steele.

The journalist’s columns encountered the “flashes” of Steele’s allegations that there was a long-running conspiracy between Trump and the Kremlin.

Wemple’s main targets were leftist news networks CNN and MSNBC, which breathlessly reported false allegations of Trump’s lewd behavior at a Moscow hotel.

Many of the Post’s stories centered on Trump campaign staffers, including ex-national security adviser Michael Flynn, reaching out to Russian officials.

The New York Times did not respond to this paper’s question as to whether this paper was keeping track of the so-called “Russiagate” reporting.

DailyMail.com understands that many of those outlets that broke those exclusives worked closely together on the story.

“If Americans saw how this sausage is made, they would be shocked,” said a source familiar with the media’s coverage of the conspiracy allegations.

It comes as Republican lawmakers are demanding both papers return the awards for what they’ve called a “witch hunt.”

Arch Trump loyalist Lindsey Graham, a congressman representing South Carolina, told Fox News that both publications should return their gongs.

“I think the Pulitzer Prize that was given to the Washington Post and the New York Times should be taken back,” he told the US news network.

“The whole episode was politically motivated nonsense. You shouldn’t get a Pulitzer Prize for that,” the 67-year-old added.

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas criticized the self-proclaimed papers “for breathlessly spreading these ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’ lies.”

The Durham investigation follows a scathing report from the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), which targeted The Times for its coverage of the Trump-Russia saga.

The CJR, the in-house publication of America’s most prestigious journalism school, has spent 18 months sifting through media coverage of Trump’s alleged ties to Russia.

The report contained criticism of the media as a whole, but author Jeff Gerth especially reserved contempt for The Times.

The investigative journalist introduced his findings by stating that he believed the newspaper had damaged its credibility outside its “own bubble.”

Noted journalist Bob Woodward told him that the coverage of the Russian investigation was “not handled well.”

In its coverage, The Times claimed that Christopher Steele had “a credible track record.”

In March 2017, The Post ran the headline, “FBI Wants to Pay Author of Trump File: Settlement Fell Apart, But Shows Agency Found His Investigation Credible.”

Yet the report never quoted anyone as saying the dossier was credible.

It was later that year that The Times published his Papadopoulos piece—the last story in its Pulitzer entry—with the headline, “Unlikely Source Triggers Russian Interference Investigation.”

This claimed that it was in fact the Trump adviser, not the dossier that fueled the FBI investigation.

Papadopoulos has never been charged or accused of colluding with Russia, but served 12 days in prison for lying to the FBI.

But in November 2021, the Washington Post would retract large portions of two articles published in 2017 and 2019 that were based on the Steele dossier.

Sally Buzbee, the Washington Post’s executive editor, said the newspaper was unable to maintain the accuracy of their reporting on source Sergei Millian – former president of the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce – given Durham’s indictment that month submitted.

The Times has not published retractions, but Jeff Gerth, himself a former reporter for the paper, said it was one of several news organizations “quickly highlighting the lack of first-hand evidence” for many of Steele’s “substantial allegations.”

In his closing remarks, the CJR reporter slammed the NYT for ignoring a publicly available document that showed the FBI didn’t think there was much evidence of conspiracy between Trump and Russia.

He also cited the newspaper’s repeated failure to solicit comment from the person it accused of misconduct in its articles — a fundamental tenet of rigorous reporting — and its consistent reliance on vague, anonymous sources.

.