Media mask slips off, reveals militant activists
The establishment media has revealed themselves as the rabid activists they really are this week, using two horrific shootings to turn their slow march into a full charge.
They have put one half of the country in their sights, defaming them as white supremacists, racists or worse.
On Monday, MSNBC anchor Nicolle Wallace claimed that “President Trump was talking about ‘exterminating Latinos.’ ” Not until the next day did she tweet that she “misspoke.”
Wajahat Ali, a CNN contributor and a writer for The New York Times, tweeted, “#MassacreMoscowMitch is trending. I still have faith in America.”
“Moscow Mitch” refers to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who that night had protesters march on his Louisville home, one of whom declared that she hoped somebody “just stabs the (expletive) in the heart, please.”
Tuesday, on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” the level of vitriol and incendiary language tossed around was remarkable. Washington Post associate editor Eugene Robinson declared, “It’s Donald Trump, it’s Mitch McConnell, it’s Republicans in the Senate and the House who just frankly have blood on their hands. They have blood on their hands today and they’ll have more blood on their hands the next time this happens.”
Host Joe Scarborough doubled down, adding, “And you can add to that list of course the blood of Jews going to their synagogue on a Saturday night,” and, “children, first graders, going to school.”
Robinson chimed in, “The blood of festivalgoers at a country music concert in Las Vegas. I mean, you know?”
Monday, on the same show, host Mika Brzezinski posited that President Trump was pleased with the bloody massacres. “Isn’t it OK to deduce that at this point this is what he wants?” she asked. “He is inciting hatred, inciting violence, inciting racism. If he doesn’t unequivocally call it off and say, this is wrong and we stand together against this and we are doing this, this and this to help fight hate crimes — I mean, this is a president who seems to want these things to happen. How else can this be explained?”
On ABC, the culpability of President Trump was also front and center. Speaking about the president’s rhetoric on illegal immigration, Jonathan Karl asked, “Isn’t this kind of rhetoric, especially in light of what we’ve just seen, isn’t it just dangerous?”
Even after the president’s thoughtful and emotional remarks condemning racism and violence, the media spun them upside-down. CNN reporter Nia-Malika Henderson suggested, “If you’re a white supremacist, you find the president’s words possibly inspirational, possibly comforting.”
The New York Times was bullied by a leftist Twitter mob into changing their print headline on the president’s remarks from “Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism” in their first edition to “Assailing Hate But Not Guns” later in the day. Apparently the loudest voices on the internet are given the editorial power to determine how the Gray Lady interprets the statements of President Trump. Naturally, they then take the very words they demanded he say in bad faith.
If those in the newsrooms can’t find it in themselves to stand up to baseless hysteria and refrain from incendiary speculation about the motives of the president and half the country, they ought to find a new line of work. The American people in these divisive times deserve a clearheaded media that can report on current events calmly and without bias.