File this one under “Not the Media’s Finest Hour” – and, at this point, it’s a thick file. Left-leaning news outlets are once again attempting to play down and/or deflect the blame for another attempted assassination targeting former president and 2024 presidential candidate Donald Trump. Once again, and rather tragically, we are reminded that some left-wing reporters and political pundits are willing to practically brush off an attempted murder because the target was a man whose political agenda they don’t like.
After the first attempt on Trump’s life at a July 13 rally in Butler, PA – which resulted in the former president being struck in the ear by a bullet – the evolving narrative from the left was both fascinating to follow and unsettling for its tone. It went something like this: Trump was not really shot at, but, if he was, he wasn’t hit by a bullet and, if he was, it may have been orchestrated. If it wasn’t, there’s no evidence that the assassination attempt was politically motivated – and if there is, well, Trump probably had it coming because of his “divisive” and “dangerous” rhetoric.
The Assassination of Media Integrity
This time around, the scenario was different, as was the outcome. Thus, the current narrative is not exactly the same, but it still plays like a broken record. Media sources were fairly quick to acknowledge that this was most definitely a real assassination attempt. Some establishment media outlets still tried initially to play down or trivialize that someone had attempted to kill the 2024 GOP presidential nominee. NBC, for example, reported that a man was in custody after the “Trump golf club incident.”
On this occasion, Sept. 15, the would-be shooter did not get off a round at Trump. He fled the scene after being spotted and fired upon by Secret Service agents. Thus, there could be no debates about whether Trump was struck – no silly reports that he was only hit by shrapnel and not by an actual bullet, as we saw after the previous assassination attempt.
Beyond that, the extreme voices in the media are back to their old tricks, echoing the July shooting. Ryan Routh, the alleged gunman who conducted this latest attempt, is on record as having donated money to ActBlue, a Democrat-associated fundraising operation. His social media posts make clear his disdain for Trump. So, while he claims to have voted for Trump in 2016, Routh has also described on social media how he quickly became disillusioned with the then-president – and there seems to be little doubt today where his political loyalties lie.
Still, Time magazine decided to identify this wannabe killer as “Ryan Routh — a 58-year-old with unclear political ideology … “ It is rather interesting to note that whenever someone on the political right is alleged to have committed a crime, the media’s background research is often incredibly efficient. Yet, it seemingly comes up short when somebody from the left is similarly accused.
This time around, the scenario was different, as was the outcome. Thus, the current narrative is not exactly the same, but it still plays like a broken record. Media sources were fairly quick to acknowledge that this was most definitely a real assassination attempt. Some establishment media outlets still tried initially to play down or trivialize that someone had attempted to kill the 2024 GOP presidential nominee. NBC, for example, reported that a man was in custody after the “Trump golf club incident.”
On this occasion, Sept. 15, the would-be shooter did not get off a round at Trump. He fled the scene after being spotted and fired upon by Secret Service agents. Thus, there could be no debates about whether Trump was struck – no silly reports that he was only hit by shrapnel and not by an actual bullet, as we saw after the previous assassination attempt.
Beyond that, the extreme voices in the media are back to their old tricks, echoing the July shooting. Ryan Routh, the alleged gunman who conducted this latest attempt, is on record as having donated money to ActBlue, a Democrat-associated fundraising operation. His social media posts make clear his disdain for Trump. So, while he claims to have voted for Trump in 2016, Routh has also described on social media how he quickly became disillusioned with the then-president – and there seems to be little doubt today where his political loyalties lie.
Still, Time magazine decided to identify this wannabe killer as “Ryan Routh — a 58-year-old with unclear political ideology … “ It is rather interesting to note that whenever someone on the political right is alleged to have committed a crime, the media’s background research is often incredibly efficient. Yet, it seemingly comes up short when somebody from the left is similarly accused.
Victim-Shaming at Its Worst
Which brings us to the “It’s his own fault anyway” argument. Anti-Trump media outlets are now in full deflection mode as they try to come up with ways to practically excuse a second attempted assassination, on the grounds that Trump’s rhetoric is to blame. Conservative – and what the left bizarrely describes as “alt-right” – media are bringing the receipts by reporting on the multiple examples of left-wing journalists and pundits alluding to Trump’s past comments and statements as an incitement to violence against him. “Today’s apparent assassination attempt comes amid increasingly fierce rhetoric on the campaign trail,” said NBC’s Lester Holt on Sept. 15. “Mr. Trump, his running mate J.D. Vance continue to make baseless claims about Haitian immigrants in Ohio.”
As if the situation in Springfield, OH, now overrun by illegal aliens – or anything Trump or Vance has said about it – has any bearing at all on this latest act of political violence.
This was just one of a multitude of examples of anti-Trump journalists attempting to make the case that Trump himself is making people want to kill him. Victim-blaming at its very worst – because the victim is politically undesirable to them.
Something else right-leaning media outlets are bringing attention to, however, is the many, many examples of Democrat politicians and left-leaning journalists, pundits, and celebrities calling, in no uncertain terms, for violence against Trump, his allies, and supporters. So unambiguous are some of their comments, in fact, that one can no longer seriously claim a link between the left’s extreme rhetoric and left-wing political violence is a matter of debate.
Case in point, Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) who, on Nov. 21, 2023, told MSNBC’s Jen Psaki, “It is just unquestionable at this point that that man [Trump] cannot see public office again. He is not only unfit, he is destructive to our democracy, and he has to be, he has to be eliminated.” Goldman pleaded the following day that it was “a poor choice of words.” Many would say that excuse is simply not good enough. Who uses the word “eliminated” on national television when talking about a political opponent? He could have said “eliminated from the presidential race,” “defeated,” “beaten,” or “prevented from taking office ever again.”
Cooler heads would claim that, of course, Goldman wasn’t calling for Trump’s assassination – but what about less cool heads? What about a mentally unstable individual who has already been convinced that Trump is an evil man and a threat to America? How would such a person interpret “eliminated” — which is a pretty clear and definitive term?
Goldman’s comment, however, is just one of so many examples that it would be impossible to catalog them all here – and several other media outlets have already done so. The number of times since 2016 that influential media types, celebrities, and even elected politicians have made comments that certainly seem to imply they are inciting violence against Trump are hard to count, at this point.
Again, it is worth observing that rational people do not take this kind of rhetoric too seriously. They are not going to act upon such comments, believing that they are being given some kind of tacit approval to carry out a political assassination. The point, however, is that left-wing talking heads are ever quick to suggest Trump’s statements incite violence, while not applying the same standard of interpretation to incendiary comments – often far more incendiary – made by people on their side of the political divide.
When two attempts in as many months are made on the life of a former and possibly future president, the media have an obligation to report the facts responsibly and objectively – and keep that reporting quite separate from any opinion or editorializing in which they may want to indulge. It is an obligation a disturbing number of journalists appear to have deliberately abandoned.....
Graham Noble, Chief Political Correspondent & Satirist at LibertyNation.com. This article was first published HERE
2 comments:
Great piece highlighting tthe media bias. We just want fair factual non biased reporting. We will never get that here in nz when 80+% of the media and journos have left or far left ideologies. I'm guessing it's the same in other countries.
"He is not only unfit, he is destructive to our democracy, and he has to be, he has to be eliminated.”
That could be what is known by the left as a 'dog whistle' a dog whistle for the left because it had to be quite audible for them to get. Woof woof!
Post a Comment