Editor’s Pick: Federalist Uses Journo’s Abortion Book to Ask GOP a Key Question

Screenshot via MS NOW/Snapstream

Published Friday in The Federalist, Juniper Research Group CEO Chris Jacobs used the example of a supposedly neutral Politico reporter’s rabid pro-abortion book to call out conservatives for continuing to, in the year of our Lord 2026, “talk to these types of reporters” who “despise them, their voters, and the principles they stand for.”

Jacobs started with a simple question: “Would you trust a so-called journalist whose goal is to ‘facilitate social justice’? Me neither. So why do so many conservatives still engage with these people?”

The Politico reporter in question was Alice Miranda Ollstein, whose book Side Effects: How Abortion Bans Impact Everyone’s Health comes off like it was conceived (but not aborted) inside a Planned Parenthood or the offices of Emily’s List. Jacobs noted that Politico even promoted it with an excerpt.

This wasn’t in Jacobs’s piece, but Ollstein — whom Jacobs noted “previously worked for The Atlantic, La Opinion, and Talking Points Memo” — had a glowing segment with MS NOW host Jacob Soboroff during the October 4 episode of his show, Connect:

After mocking Ollstein’s publisher, Jacobs then made the hard pivot:

First, why does Politico employ a purportedly objective “reporter” who affiliates with a social justice publisher? Would Politico allow me to serve as a “journalist” while writing conservative books such as The Case Against Single Payer in my spare time, as Ollstein did?...Unfortunately — but unsurprisingly — Politico did not respond to multiple requests for comment about whether it believes it has “a social justice mission.”

(....)

Second, why do people who call themselves conservatives talk to these types of reporters — let alone these types of media outlets? That problem pervades the conservative ecosystem. This week brought a prime example when Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., granted an exclusive interview to Politico. Why was that? Were places like Newsmax and Fox News unavailable[?]

Jacobs diagnosed the reason as rather simple: deep insecurities (while making the caveat for “live media” versus print where “reporters...can easily omit or edit quotes”):

Inside-the-Beltway conservatives become so enamored with publicity, so eager for attention, so willing to show off their knowledge and access, and so easily flattered that they continue to engage with corporate media that despise them, their voters, and the principles they stand for.

(....)

[T]oo many Republicans in Washington become too fixated on the approval of the D.C. swamp to realize this truism. Most politicians run for office because they want to be liked, so it’s probably not in their nature to tell reporters to pound sand.

To read Jacobs’s full piece, click here or the link at the top of this post.