There they go again.
Following what is becoming commonplace violence from anti-Trump protesters in San Jose, the left-wing media machine is once again blaming the Republican nominee for the opposition’s childish behavior.
On Sunday’s Meet the Press, unapologetic Clinton crusader Andrea Mitchell fallaciously faulted Trump for the barrage of eggs hurled at one of his supporters:
That awful awful egging of the Trump supporter in San Jose is, I think, you can’t separate it from the egging on, no pun intended, in North Carolina and elsewhere, that he did at his rallies.
Talk about victim blaming! This sort of blatant disregard for actual responsibility is a sure sign the liberal media establishment is growing desperate, and for good reason.
For it was just months ago that Mitchell’s media colleagues gleefully pointed to a handful of incidents from Trump supporters in an effort to paint them as a particularly vicious breed of redneck. That narrative, however, has now been hijacked by the appalling antics of anti-Trump militants who make even the most passionate Trump supporters look like Gandhi — the peaceniks are on the warpath!
And Mitchell is simply jumping on a blame-shifting bandwagon that began almost as soon as the media were forced to take Trump seriously; anti-Trump violence in Chicago this past March showed early on the black cloud of bias that will almost certainly hover above Trump’s combover right up to Election Day.
Despite documented evidence of violence from both Trump’s supporters and protesters at the cancelled Chicago rally, a study by the Media Research Center found that 94 percent of news stories from the Big 3 networks blamed The Donald.
But perhaps none offered up as ludicrous an analysis as MSNBC’s reliably insane Chris Matthews, who accused Trump of inciting riots based solely on the locations of his speeches, ostensibly hotbeds of opposition:
How do we assess to which Trump is igniting these kinds of things by the locations he’s selecting… I mean, this happened in Chicago, when they went to an urban school with a large minority population, a large campus population of minorities. Trump chose to have a rally there. He eventually had to shut it down. Is that intentional?”
Hmmm. I was under the impression that traversing the country in an attempt to woo skeptical voters was just sort of what Presidential candidates did. In fact, I could have sworn it has been a hallmark of Presidential campaigns since, well, the earliest Presidential campaigns. But not anymore; when it’s Mr. Trump’s turn, and the opposition’s last name starts with “C” and ends with “linton,” his mere attempting to spread his message is suddenly tantamount to inciting a riot, even when the rioters are reacting in opposition to his rhetoric.
Take the anti-Trump protests in Albuquerque a couple of weeks ago which saw tolerant social justice warriors assault a Trump supporter confined to a wheelchair and fling rocks at police horses for instance. Like clockwork, several prominent members of America’s lunatic left-wing media establishment shamelessly attempted to pin the carnage on the candidate himself.
“Where Trump goes, unrest follows,” declared NBC’s Katy Tur before going on to play an irrelevant race card with the astounding revelation that “Trump [takes] rural whiter communities, while Clinton dominates the larger more diverse cities.” Might as well implicate an entire race while she’s at it.
And Jamil Smith, speaking on MSNBC, stopped just short of martyring the violent mob. These potential felons were simply “expressing their humanity,” said Smith, adding that they largely “accomplished their goal.” Mr. Smith sure does have a funny definition of “humanity” when it includes assaulting the handicapped.
Welcome to Presidential politics Mr. Trump, an Alice-In-Wonderland fantasy world in which, unless you are the media darling du jour, which generally requires a “D” next to your name on the ballot, you are damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
This double standard is nothing new, of course, but the blaming of Trump for anti-Trump violence transcends the usual, expected bias — it’s nothing less than good, old-fashioned deception.
Were the mainstream media to possess a mere ounce of decency they would rightly place blame where it is due.
But with Hillary up against the ropes in the wake of the recent State Department review into her email practices and countless questions surrounding her family’s foundation, I’m not holding my breath.
After all liberals, including those in the media, have gotten away with this sort of senseless blame-shifting for years, and perhaps no one does it better than the current Commander-in-Chief, who has yet to stop a buck in nearly eight years in office. The media’s misrepresentation of who does what at Trump’s rallies is simply business as usual.
Think about it: From the semantics surrounding Bowe Bergdahl’s desertion to the Associated Press’s striking of the term “illegal immigrant” from its stylebook to excuses made for Hollywood heavyweights such as Woody Allen and Roman Polanski, absolving people of responsibility for their own actions has long been a hallmark of leftist philosophy. And the media have gladly played along lo these many years.
How easily did Hillary dismiss her husband’s infidelity as a “vast right-wing conspiracy?” And how sad that only two years ago, six years after George W. Bush left office, the phrase “it’s Bush’s fault“ was still being used to cover for Obama? I’m not convinced any of these people can actually spell “responsibility,” let alone point it out of a lineup.
And Trump is proof. For unlike Clinton’s salacious affairs, or the economies of the Bush and Obama administrations, the truth, at least when it comes to violence at Trump rallies, is right there in countless circulating videos and easily searchable news stories, not wrapped up in tabloid rumors or the nuances of macroeconomics. There is simply no debate as to who is at fault here. Anyone can literally watch the violence unfold with just a few keystrokes; sadly, however, it seems that that sort of in-depth, investigative journalism is now beyond the capabilities of America’s most powerful media outlets.
A deficiency which, ironically, only works to Trump’s advantage. For the more these protesters resort to violence, and the more the likes of Mitchell and Matthews attempt to cover for them, the more people in the middle will reluctantly side with Trump.
And the media will have no one to blame but themselves.