I know media failure. I’ve seen media failure. Uncritically swallowing false WMD claims, that was failure. Giving candidate Trump free air time, that was failure. This was not.

Yes, the coverage produced a few ill-considered chyrons and headlines. Most coverage does.

And yes, too, the constant cable news drumbeat of turning points that didn’t turn and breaking points that didn’t break grew numbing.

But let’s get real. Would anyone really argue that in a situation where: a) American intelligence reports a hostile foreign power interfered in a U.S. election to benefit one candidate; b) that candidate publicly implores the hostile power for help; c) his campaign is found to have met with agents of that power; d) the candidate dictates a lie to explain away the meeting; e) the FBI is concerned enough to open a counterintelligence probe, news media should not investigate as aggressively as possible?