Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Meghan Markle isn't Trump's victim and the media are lying
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Mulatto Gold Digger
Jun 9, 2019, 7:01:56 PM6/9/19
to
Whenever the national media put forth a new victim to rally
behind in the name of the #Resistance, you should suspect you’re
being lied to.
The latest is Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. President Trump said in
a recent interview that he was unaware Meghan had spoken
negatively about him during the 2016 campaign.
A journalist for the British Sun tabloid asked Trump on Sunday
ahead of his trip to the U.K., “Are you sorry not to see her?
Because she wasn’t so nice during the campaign, I don’t know if
you saw that.”
Trump, informed Meghan, originally of Los Angeles, would be on
maternity leave, replied, “I didn’t know that. No, I hope she’s
OK. I did not know that.”
The journalist goaded Trump, telling him, “She said she’d move
to Canada if you got elected; turned out she moved to Britain.”
“That will be good,” Trump said. “A lot of people moving here,
so what can I say? No, I didn’t know that she was nasty.”
This was boiled down to: Trump calls princess 'nasty'!
Trump had actually added in the interview that “it’s nice” that
the United Kingdom now has a princess of American descent and
that “she’ll be very good.”
The term “nasty” was used by Trump as a stand-in for the
reporter’s original characterization of “wasn’t so nice.”
But you wouldn't know the real story by glancing 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.” (For the record, here's Trump using
the word "nasty" to describe Donny Deutsch, David Gregory,
Lindsey Graham and Mitt Romney, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and
Charles Krauthammer, to name a few men.)
See, if you just put forth a claim, whether merited or not, and
assert, like Scott, that it’s “rooted” in some belief — any
belief! — it becomes true!
Charles Blow, always good for a laugh, acknowledged Sunday in
his New York Times column that the question by the Sun
journalist was a “set up” for Trump. But Blow knew in his heart
that it was a "set up" that "both parties wanted.”
Blow lectured that, “A better journalist, if he or she wanted to
have Trump weigh in on [Meghan’s 2016] comments, would simply
read Meghan’s response and ask for the president’s response."
These are lessons in journalism coming from Blow, who proudly
skipped a face-to-face meeting with Trump in 2017.
And outside of journalism, it’s stupidity not limited to Blow.
ABC analyst Matthew Dowd tweeted that Trump “used the word nasty
… in reference to her.”
CBS News correspondent Bill Rehkopf tweeted, “He called her
‘nasty.’”
Washington Post columnist Karen Tumulty tweeted, “He actually
calls her ‘nasty’ in this audio. That is the exact word he uses.”
Ben White of Politico tweeted, “This is literally exactly what
he says. ‘I didn’t know that she was nasty.’”
Well, yes. This is “literally exactly” what Trump said the same
way this morning I “literally exactly” said “I’ll kill you.” It
turns out I didn’t mean I’d literally kill my editor. I only
meant that I didn’t agree with his decision to remove my use of
the word “teats” from a piece about Michael Avenatti.
The media do this type of thing freely whenever they need a new
victim to post up against Trump. They’ll lie about Trump calling
immigrants “animals” (he was explicitly referring to MS-13 gang
members). They’ll lie about Trump calling European allies “foes”
(It was CBS’s Jeff Glor who used the word). And they’ll lie
about him mocking a reporter who happens to be disabled.
Meghan isn’t a victim and she wasn’t attacked. She’s a critic of
the White House and just like all of them, the media are helping
her play dead when she gets a response.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/meghan-markle-isnt-
trumps-victim-and-the-media-are-lying
behind in the name of the #Resistance, you should suspect you’re
being lied to.
The latest is Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. President Trump said in
a recent interview that he was unaware Meghan had spoken
negatively about him during the 2016 campaign.
A journalist for the British Sun tabloid asked Trump on Sunday
ahead of his trip to the U.K., “Are you sorry not to see her?
Because she wasn’t so nice during the campaign, I don’t know if
you saw that.”
Trump, informed Meghan, originally of Los Angeles, would be on
maternity leave, replied, “I didn’t know that. No, I hope she’s
OK. I did not know that.”
The journalist goaded Trump, telling him, “She said she’d move
to Canada if you got elected; turned out she moved to Britain.”
“That will be good,” Trump said. “A lot of people moving here,
so what can I say? No, I didn’t know that she was nasty.”
This was boiled down to: Trump calls princess 'nasty'!
Trump had actually added in the interview that “it’s nice” that
the United Kingdom now has a princess of American descent and
that “she’ll be very good.”
The term “nasty” was used by Trump as a stand-in for the
reporter’s original characterization of “wasn’t so nice.”
But you wouldn't know the real story by glancing 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.” (For the record, here's Trump using
the word "nasty" to describe Donny Deutsch, David Gregory,
Lindsey Graham and Mitt Romney, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and
Charles Krauthammer, to name a few men.)
See, if you just put forth a claim, whether merited or not, and
assert, like Scott, that it’s “rooted” in some belief — any
belief! — it becomes true!
Charles Blow, always good for a laugh, acknowledged Sunday in
his New York Times column that the question by the Sun
journalist was a “set up” for Trump. But Blow knew in his heart
that it was a "set up" that "both parties wanted.”
Blow lectured that, “A better journalist, if he or she wanted to
have Trump weigh in on [Meghan’s 2016] comments, would simply
read Meghan’s response and ask for the president’s response."
These are lessons in journalism coming from Blow, who proudly
skipped a face-to-face meeting with Trump in 2017.
And outside of journalism, it’s stupidity not limited to Blow.
ABC analyst Matthew Dowd tweeted that Trump “used the word nasty
… in reference to her.”
CBS News correspondent Bill Rehkopf tweeted, “He called her
‘nasty.’”
Washington Post columnist Karen Tumulty tweeted, “He actually
calls her ‘nasty’ in this audio. That is the exact word he uses.”
Ben White of Politico tweeted, “This is literally exactly what
he says. ‘I didn’t know that she was nasty.’”
Well, yes. This is “literally exactly” what Trump said the same
way this morning I “literally exactly” said “I’ll kill you.” It
turns out I didn’t mean I’d literally kill my editor. I only
meant that I didn’t agree with his decision to remove my use of
the word “teats” from a piece about Michael Avenatti.
The media do this type of thing freely whenever they need a new
victim to post up against Trump. They’ll lie about Trump calling
immigrants “animals” (he was explicitly referring to MS-13 gang
members). They’ll lie about Trump calling European allies “foes”
(It was CBS’s Jeff Glor who used the word). And they’ll lie
about him mocking a reporter who happens to be disabled.
Meghan isn’t a victim and she wasn’t attacked. She’s a critic of
the White House and just like all of them, the media are helping
her play dead when she gets a response.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/meghan-markle-isnt-
trumps-victim-and-the-media-are-lying
0 new messages