Six weeks ago progressives worked themselves into a tizzy over absurd conjecture that President Donald Trump was the next Adolf Hitler.
The Independent Daily compared Trump to Hitler. The Los Angeles Times interviewed a Hitler historian who pointed out the similarities between the two men before they came to power (of which there are none, as Hitler was a friendless loser and a failed painter while Trump is a popular billionaire whose name alone sells products).
The New York Daily News plastered Trump’s picture on its front page that announced in giant type: Trump is Hitler.
A month later the liberal libel wagon was broadcasting that Trump would soon be impeached and going to jail. The media maintain this even after an almost year-long investigation which found no evidence that Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin had conspired. Still the media maintain it is only a matter of time before a smoking gun is found proving that Trump is a Manchurian Candidate taking orders from Moscow.
Last week, two Democratic congressmen on the House Intelligence Committee, Washington Rep. Denny Heck and Texas Rep. Joaquin Castro, suggested that not only Trump, but some members of his cabinet would be going to jail for their traitorous actions in working with Russia to steal the election. Readers are supposed to believe that men and women who have been criticized for being rich would take a chance in throwing away their lives just so they could take a huge pay cut and work for the federal government.
“I will be surprised if people don’t end up going to jail,” Heck said on an MSNBC evening broadcast. That same day with regard to the investigation Castro said to CNN viewers. “I wouldn’t be surprised after all of this is said and done that some person ends up in jail.”
Over the next few days the airwaves were full of commentary regarding Trump’s inevitable impeachment and imprisonment. That in itself nullifies the Trump is Hitler argument. Adolf Hitler didn’t go to prison. Hitler sent people to prison.
The Trump-Putin relationship is based on the flimsiest of reasons.
In a September 2016 forum candidate Trump said Putin “has been a leader far more than our president [Obama] has been.” The BBC said because of that one comment the candidate had showered Putin with praise. From that evening forward Trump has been criticized by the mass media for his close “relationship” with Putin despite the fact that the two have never met.
Questions to Trump regarding Putin grew so tiresome that at a February press conference the president said:
It would be great if we could get along with Russia.
Tomorrow, you’ll say, ‘Donald Trump wants to get along with Russia, that’s terrible.’
It’s not terrible. It’s good. If we could get along with Russia, that’s a positive thing.
The Trump-Putin storyline may have died last Thursday when Trump ordered a cruise missile attack on a Syrian airbase that was used as the launching point for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s latest gas attack that killed 74 civilians, including 16 women and 23 children.
From isolationist to interventionist in 24 hours
Russia provides military hardware and intelligence to the Syrian government. Republican Senator John McCain claimed on CNN last Friday that the Syrian dictator has killed more than 400,000 of his own people since 2011. And while McCain, a perpetual hawk, was happy with America’s military strike, many in the liberal media, who earlier complained that Trump was an isolationist, now said ordering the attack was foolhardy on Trump’s part because the targeted airbase is used by Russian aircraft and houses scores of Russian maintenance crews.
On April 5 Newsweek said that Trumps attack was “risky” given analyst’s estimates of about 10,000 Russian military personnel in Syria.
On April 7 The New York Times, which had been hinting for months that the country should be worried about Trump’s cozy relationship with Putin, switched its criticism of the president 180 degrees in a story that carried this headline: Syria Strike Puts U.S. Relationship With Russia at Risk.
Trump can’t win for trying, just as past President Barack Obama could not lose for trying. It was Obama who issued the warning to Bashar al-Assad after his alleged first use of chemical weapons that killed nearly 1,000 people near Damascus in 2013. Obama said America was drawing a red line on the use of chemicals that Syria dare not cross. When that line was broken Obama pondered, contemplated and scrutinized his next step. In the end he did nothing. Syrian civilians continued to be slaughtered. But it didn’t matter. The press adored Obama.
Obama has been called everything from the greatest American president to the “chosen one.” He is the epitome of perfection right down to the skin.
In 2008, The Washington Post did a feature on Mr. Obama’s exceptionally healthy lifestyle. Any serious journalist would be embarrassed to have their name attached to the story, part of which read: “The sun glinted off chiseled pectorals sculpted during four weightlifting sessions each week, and a body toned by regular treadmill runs and basketball games.”
Conversely, there are daily attacks on Trump’s diet, his weight and the comb-over of his blond hair. The suggestion is that not only is the man ugly but so are his policies even if the facts argue otherwise.
You might think that Trump had finally done something that the media would applaud. Instead Trump has been vilified for the cruise missile attack.
In the 1970s, journalism students were instructed to make it impossible for readers to know the reporter’s politics and ambitions and to never make assumptions about others’ motivations.
Yet that is exactly what journalists are doing. We live in a time where the more audacious the correspondent is the more they get read and the more money they make and the more fame they collect. They do a disservice to the country because people are unable to make informed decisions. Instead, news entertainment reaffirms the prejudices of their audiences — MSNBC and CNN on the left and Fox News on the right.
And what is the truth? It is somewhere in that giant chasm in the middle at which we can only guess. Thus we Americans make uninformed decisions that affect our lives. Typically we make bad decisions, the kind evidenced last year with Trump and Hillary Clinton emerging as the only two choices for president.
We can guess at what kind of president that Clinton would have been, and we will never know the true potential of Trump as globalists appear determined to destroy his presidency.
No president since John F. Kennedy has been so hated by the American oligarchy as Trump. Even though Kennedy was a good president, he could not stand against the forces that set out to destroy him. That should be a warning for Donald Trump who, in less than three months, has been besieged by the left and others who conspire against him.
Yours in good times and bad,
— John Myers