The liberal media united in a pathetic display of self-righteousness this week, rallying around The Washington Post after the newspaper had their press credentials revoked by the Donald Trump campaign. Trump banned WaPo after the paper ran a story with the headline: Donald Trump Suggests President Obama was Involved with Orlando Shooting.
Victims of a similar ban, the Huffington Post tweeted: “Welcome to the club,” which is hilarious for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the apparent belief that their online tabloid is on par with a national newspaper.
Trump’s campaign released a statement explaining the decision. “The Washington Post unfortunately covers Mr. Trump very inaccurately,” read the statement. “We no longer feel compelled to work with a publication which has put its need for ‘clicks’ above journalistic integrity.”
The statement accused WaPo owner and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos of using the newspaper to protect his retail empire “so that they don’t have to pay taxes and don’t get sued for monopolistic tendencies that have led to the destruction of department stores and the retail industry.”
Reacting to the ban, Washington Post editor Marty Baron said:
Donald Trump’s decision to revoke The Washington Post’s press credentials is nothing less than a repudiation of the role of a free and independent press. When coverage doesn’t correspond to what the candidate wants it to be, then a news organization is banished. The Post will continue to cover Donald Trump as it has all along – honorably, honestly, accurately, energetically, and unflinchingly. We’re proud of our coverage, and we’re going to keep at it.
Rule of thumb: when someone uses that many extraneous adverbs, raise your suspicion levels. Unflinchingly? Really?
Baron’s statement is absurd. If Trump banished every news organization that published stories that didn’t “correspond” to his preferences, there wouldn’t be anyone left. Does Baron really think that Trump approves of every nonsense article coming out of the New York Times?
The Washington Post story concerned comments Trump made on Fox News earlier in the day, where he mused on President Obama’s motivations.
“Look, we’re led by a man that either is not tough, not smart, or he’s got something else in mind,” he said. “And the something else in mind – you know, people can’t believe it. People cannot believe that President Obama is acting the way he acts and can’t even mention the words ‘radical Islamic terrorism.’ There’s something going on. It’s inconceivable. There’s something going on.”
Does that read to you like Trump is suggesting that Obama is a terrorist? That he might have had a hand in planning the Orlando attack? Come on, no one is that stupid.
At most, Trump is hinting at something that intelligent patriots have suspected for years – that Obama’s sympathies for Islam go beyond typical left-wing contrarianism. And since this theory is supported by the man’s personal background, his extraordinary refusal to call Islamic terrorism what it is, and his otherwise-inexplicable Iran nuclear deal, it barely qualifies as controversial.
But whether those suspicions are justified or not, it hardly matters anymore. Whether Obama is a closet Muslim or a closet Marxist or an incompetent boob, the effect has been the same. People have been killed, countries have been thrown into disarray, and Islamic radicals have been allowed to build the most powerful terrorist organization in history.
And newspapers like The Washington Post have energetically and unflinchingly refused to tell the truth about it.