One thing was always certain about President Trump's Oval Office address to the nation on the crisis at our border: The establishment media would savage him for it. They did not disappoint, of course, showing once again that increasingly centralized, corporate-controlled news outlets violently oppose any attempts to check the flood of illegal immigration into this country.
Fractured Facts, Weird Science
Leading off the parade of naked partisanship is the crack "fact-checking" team at Amazon multi-billionaire Jeff Bezos's Washington Post. Thoroughly drunk on Trump Derangement Syndrome, reporter Salvador Rizzo fails to comprehend that it is not good form to blatantly telegraph your bias right out of the gate when trying to accuse your subject of that very same crime. "The first misleading statement in President Trump's Oval Office address Tuesday night came in the first sentence," Rizzo condescendingly writes in his lead sentence, thus immediately eliminating from the reader's mind any notion that he might be able to perform his task objectively. Needless to say, there is no reason to proceed any further into the article. It is a monument of distortion that uses its previous fact-checks to back up its claims that the president is a liar.
They were quite hateful indeed.
Batting second we have Wired.com, a website ostensibly dedicated to reporting on how modern technology affects our lives. Owned by publishing goliath Conde Nast, Wired offered up a "scientific" exploration of why Trump's speech was unconvincing. It didn't take long for the ridiculous article to wander off into the social justice briar patch. Reporter Emily Dreyfuss includes an interview with Syracuse University researcher Whitney Phillips to buttress the view that Trump's speech "made casually xenophobic language an acceptable part of national discussion." Terms like "fear-mongering" and "de-humanizing" are scattered about as Phillips concludes the address sends the message that spouting racist ideas makes for "just another night in America."
The mainstream leftist Daily Beast website trumpeted late-night "comedian" Jimmy Kimmel's "fiery rebuttal" to Trump's speech. That's right, an after-hours comedy talk show giving rebuttals to presidential addresses is considered perfectly normal in media circles nowadays. “It was historic," Kimmel cackled. "Rarely does a president of the United States interrupt primetime television to warn us about a completely made-up thing.” Hilarious. I don't think the Daily Beast understands just what seems made-up here.
And then there are more soft-shoe displays of bias, such as CNN analyst Stephen Collinson's take on the address. Collinson takes the reader down a gentle path before slamming the president well into his article for daring to detail the criminal exploits of illegal aliens in America. "Trump's depiction of undocumented migrants as crazed criminals, when many are desperate asylum seekers fleeing persecution and economic deprivation, was meanwhile deeply offensive to Trump's opponents," Collinson writes. That is not analysis, sir. It is personal political opinion.
No Humanity for Citizens
Taxpayer-funded liberal establishment icon NPR similarly shows how simply framing an issue can be all the bias one needs. For NPR, the "humanitarian crisis" over illegal immigration only has to do with those trying to steal their way into our nation. There is no concern stated for the security of American citizens.
"[S[ome in the global aid community are outraged that Trump used the term 'humanitarian' to describe the crisis without pledging any action to alleviate the suffering — and are alarmed that he's using the situation as a bargaining chip to build the border wall," an article on NPR's website feverishly declares. Why an entity titled National Public Radio is more concerned with the "global aid community" than it is with the suffering of actual Americans harmed by criminal illegal aliens is a mystery only to those still unaware of how thoroughly corrupt our government institutions have become across the board.
Grave bother about "humanitarianism" leads us to our closing lowlight. The Boston Globe, one of the most left-leaning daily newspapers in the country, decided to invite an "immigration lawyer" to "hate-watch" the presidential address and provide his duly inspired thoughts. They were quite hateful indeed. Here is how the Globe chose to focus on the serious issue of illegal alien crimes against U.S. citizens:
"'This is really what he’s going to do for 10 minutes? He’s going to go this low?’” [Matt] Cameron wondered aloud, as Trump rattled off a handful of truly horrific crimes committed by people in the country illegally.
"As the litany of horrors continued, Cameron offered a rueful laugh. “’I'm not downplaying these crimes, these are horrible. But they happen in this country constantly and it's usually white guys.'”
The ludicrously biased and often mean-spirited coverage of a presidential address on securing our nation's borders emphasizes once again just how much our brand-name media outlets truly despise regular Americans. They have an agenda to serve, and they see you as being in the way.
