Why Legacy Media Are Freaking Out Over Baghdadi “It takes effort to try to spin the unalloyed good news of the Trump administration’s success [against ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi] as a net negative, but corporate media were up for the challenge,” Mollie Hemingway writes for The Federalist. There are 3 big reasons that publishers such as The Washington Post quickly tried to change the story, according to Hemingway: Positive News Coverage Hurts Media Efforts To Destroy Trump   ISIS Founder’s Death Complicates Media’s Syria Narrative   Trump Foreign Policy Successes Undermine Media Impeachment Drive “It’s understandable some in the media want to destroy their political opponent, but they could do a better job of hiding their anger at achievements that are undoubtedly good for America and make the country safer.” Click here to read more. With Washington’s compulsive habit of leaking, President Trump made the right call in keeping the mission against Baghdadi a closely held secret, Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) writes for Fox News. “Previous attempts to get al-Baghdadi have been foiled by leaks. In 2017, Gen. Tony Thomas explained how a leak to the New York Times foiled good intelligence that could have led to al-Baghdadi’s kill or capture.” “The S&P 500 closed at a record high Monday for the first time since July”—likely lifted by optimism about President Trump’s initial stage one trade deal with China, Melissa Quinn reports for the Washington Examiner. “This is a big win for jobs, 401-K’s, and, frankly, EVERYONE! Our Country is doing great,” President Trump tweeted. It’s been a long week—already—for Jeff Bezos and The Washington Post. After being heavily criticized for showing sympathy toward ISIS terrorist leader al-Baghdadi, now "a federal judge in Kentucky has reopened the $250 million defamation case filed [against The Washington Post] by a Covington Catholic student," Valerie Richardson reports for The Washington Times.