Journalists Are Working Overtime to Crush Kamala's for Honest Answers to Questions
Trump, on the other hand, pulls out of interviews because he doesn't want his lies 'fact-checked' and they all give him a pass.
Unless I am mistaken, Donald Trump didn’t do an interview on 60 Minutes last week. The excuses ranged from Trump’s feelings being hurt in 2020 by a 60-minute interview to, most outrageously, not wanting to have his questions fact-checked. Re-read what I wrote: He wanted to lie with abandon and not permit the news team at 60 Minutes to verify whether his words were truth or fiction.
In the world of Trump, we know that 95 percent of what comes out of his mouth is a stinking, rotten, pre-meditated lie. He always knows that he will lie and that there is no reason to tell the truth. His constituency doesn’t require the truth, and the right-wing media machine will always back up his fantasies by carrying them forward and giving them continued life. The headlines in most major newspapers should read, “Trump Pulls Out of 60 Minutes Interview Because He Prefers to Lie Than Tell the Truth!” Treat Trump the way the fascist press treats VP Harris.
Instead, the media is bashing Harris for doing the interview and giving life to yet another fantasy invented by Trump regarding how the interview was edited. I searched Google to see how potential voters received Harris’s interview. I found the imagined controversy about how Trump thinks 60 Minutes covered up Harris’s bad answers by editing them out.
I know I have been asking these questions for years, and I kind of know the answer — putting anything Trump on the front page is guaranteed earning — but aren’t editors reading what their competitors are doing these days? In the old days, before most journalists became click-whores, an editor would spend the first hour or so of his day going through the headlines of his competition, trying to determine if they were onto anything big or maybe to avoid too many similar stories of no real import.
Nowadays, the most crucial thing should be the abject and criminal incompetence of Donald Trump, and not whether Trump thinks CBS conspired with Harris to hide what Trump calls were “simply terrible answers proving her lack of readiness to be president.” Journalists should be beating on the still living and breathing horse of Project 25 and not why the race is still tied at this late stage in the game; they should be reminding everyone in America that Donald Trump is petrified of fact-checkers because he is an amoral, sadistic liar whose sole allegiance is to himself and everyone else be damned.
But the fourth estate is bankrupt, and except for the occasional hard-hitting article, most of what we see is just the frantic fanning of the smoke by journalists and editors. Squinting, we look closely, and it seems that we are indeed witnessing the responsibilities expected of them in a healthy democracy. However, as we pull closer, the shapes and figures forming remain amorphous and indescribable, aligning more with a pliable middle ground that seldom stakes a claim one way or another. With this eternal Charlie-Brownish approach, Trump is never wholly the demon, and Harris (or Biden) is never fully the answer. Instead, they try to be something for everyone to lock up as many readers and clicks as possible before the competition gets them.
It is irresponsible journalism at this stage in the game not to be bashing Trump 24/7. Most importantly, there is nothing journalists and editors have to do to bash him effectively other than print the words that come out of this rancid mouth. There is no reason to cast doubt on Kamala Harris. If elected, she will be an outstanding president, and if just a mediocre one, on her worst day, she will be better than Trump on his absolute best day.
Kamala is my hero, and she has the potential to become our savior if we stick with her and if — IF — we all start to give her the same amount of leeway we give Trump.