It’s undeniable the mainstream media was in the bag for Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election, despite her recent assertions reporters were against her.

Journalists are now openly admitting they provided favorable coverage for the losing candidate.

New York Times reporter Amy Chozick, who is now cashing in on her coverage of Clinton with a new book, told ABC’s “This Week” today that she “tried to write very sympathetic biographical features” that would inevitably boost Hillary’s prospects.

Chozick lamented that it was difficult to get pro-Hillary stories to break through.

“In fairness, we covered all of her policies and I tried to write very sympathetic biographical features.

“The perfect example is I wrote this sympathetic biographical feature about her moving to Arkansas and this feminist mentor trying to talk her out of it. I spent a year on the story — the campaign didn’t want it. It was a great story for her,” Chozick says.

The reporter lamented the story was completed hours before James Comey’s letter announcing the reopening of an investigation into Hillary’s emails.

“It didn’t even make the paper,” she says.

Did Chozik admit she was sharing her reporting with the Clinton campaign?

The Daily Beast reported Friday on Chozick’s book:

On the night of the election, Chozick describes a dejected Clinton when she was told by campaign staffers that it was over.

“Of all the Brooklyn aides, Jen Palmieri had the most pleasant bedside manner,” Chozick writes. “That made her the designated deliverer of bad news to Hillary. But not this time. She told Robby there was no way she was going to tell Hillary she couldn’t win. That’s when Robby, drained and deflated, watching the results with his team in a room down the hall from Hillary’s suite, labored into the hallway of the Peninsula to break the news. Hillary didn’t seem all that surprised. ‘I knew it. I knew this would happen to me….’ Hillary said, now within a couple of inches of his face. ‘They were never going to let me be president.’”