[ad_1]
Whenever the national media promotes a new victim in the name of # Resistance, you must suspect that you are lying to yourself.
The latest is Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. President Trump said in a recent interview that he was unaware that Meghan had spoken negatively about him during the 2016 campaign.
A British tabloid reporter Sun interviewed Trump on Sunday before his trip to the UK: "Are you sorry not to see her? Because she was not so nice during the campaign, I do not know if you saw that. "
Trump, informed that Meghan, a native of Los Angeles, would be on maternity leave, replied: "I did not know it. No, I hope she's fine. I did not know.
The reporter urged Trump to say, "She said she would move to Canada if you were elected. It turned out that she moved to Britain. "
"It will be good," said Trump. "A lot of people are settling here, so what can I say? No, I did not know she was mean. "
This has been reduced to: Trump calls the princess "nasty"!
Trump had actually added in the interview that "it's good" that the UK now has a princess of American descent and that she "will be very good".
The term "wicked" was used by Trump to replace the journalist's initial description that "was not so nice."
But you would not know the real story by taking a look at the news coverage. Washington Post blogger Eugene Scott said Trump's "attacks" on Meghan were "familiar and unsurprising" because his use of the word "nasty" reinforced the belief that Trump "is sexist and misogynistic". "bad guy" to describe Donny Deutsch, David Gregory, Lindsey Graham and Mitt Romney, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Charles Krauthammer, to name a few men.)
You see, whether you have just claimed a claim, deserved or not, and assert, like Scott, that she is "rooted" in a belief – any belief! – it becomes true!
Charles Blow, always good laugh, acknowledged Sunday in his New York Times column that the question posed by the journalist Sun was a "staged" for Trump. But Blow knew in his heart that it was a "montage" that "both parties wanted".
Blow taught: "A better journalist, if he or she wanted Trump to intervene [Meghan’s 2016] would simply read Meghan's answer and ask for the president's answer. "These are journalism lessons learned by Blow, who proudly missed a face-to-face meeting with Trump in 2017.
And outside of journalism, it's a stupidity that is not limited to Blow.
ABC Analyst Matthew Dowd tweeted that Trump "used the nasty word … with reference to her."
Correspondent of CBS News Bill Rehkopf tweeted, "He called her" nasty. ""
Washington Post columnist Karen Tumulty tweeted: "He actually calls it" nasty "in this audio. That's the exact word that he uses. "
Ben White Politico tweeted: "It's literally exactly what he says. "I did not know she was mean."
Well yes. It's "literally exactly" what Trump said the same way this morning, "literally exactly" said, "I'm going to kill you." It turns out I did not mean to say that I I literally killed my publisher. I just wanted to say that I did not agree with his decision to withdraw my use of the word "pacifiers" from an article about Michael Avenatti.
The media do this kind of thing freely when they need a new victim to fight against Trump. They will lie about the fact that Trump calls immigrants "animals" (he was explicitly referring to MS-13 gang members). Trump will qualify European allies as enemies (it's Jeff Glor from CBS who used this word). And they will lie about it by making fun of a disabled journalist.
Meghan is not a victim and she has not been attacked. She is a critic of the White House and, like everyone else, the media helps her to play dead when she receives an answer.
[ad_2]
Source link