Connect with us

News

Media Elites Not Trump Supporters Are Disconnected From Reality

Published

on

It’s not Trump supporters who are living in a fantasyland, but members of the corporate media who sense their power and influence waning.

With the end of Donald Trump’s presidency fast approaching, we’ve seen a surge of columns and posts asserting that Republicans and Trump supporters have lost touch with reality. After four years of marinating in “falsehoods” and “disinformation”—a term that really just means “information I don’t like”—Trump’s backers are all turned around, we’re told. They believe much that isn’t so.

David Brooks of The New York Times explains that these poor saps, most of whom, he says, are uneducated, uncredentialed people who don’t live in prosperous cities, have retreated to conspiracy theories to explain their misfortune and unhappiness. “People in this precarious state are going to demand stories that will both explain their distrust back to them and also enclose them within a safe community of believers,” he writes. Trump, QAnon, and Alex Jones “rose up to give them those stories and provide that community.”

Over at The New Yorker, editor David Remnick ponders the grave costs of Trump’s “assault on the press and the truth,” asking how many COVID-19 victims “died because they chose to believe the President’s dismissive accounts of the disease rather than what public-health officials were telling the press? Half of Republican voters believe Trump’s charge that the 2020 election was ‘rigged.’ What will be the lasting effects on American democracy of that disinformation campaign?”

These are just representative samples, but across the mainstream commentariat the gist is all the same: if you support Trump, you’re likely a poor person who believes conspiracy theories and is dangerously disconnected from reality, partly because you resent successful people like Messrs. Brooks and Remnick. You live in a fantasyland because it assuages your feelings of inferiority, which are mostly justified. You’re paranoid because you’re powerless, and the alternate reality you’ve constructed for yourself gives you a sense of power and agency in a confusing, unsettled world.

But here’s the thing. Everything these media elites say about Trump supporters can more properly be said about media elites themselves. Who really has been living in a fantasyland these last four years? Is it the ordinary Americans—including a lot of educated, white-collar professionals—who voted for a president they felt would shake up the sclerotic status quo in Washington, or a press corps that perpetuated an actual conspiracy about Trump-Russia collusion for years?

It was Remnick’s New Yorker, after all, that published a serious-seeming essay in September 2018 that claimed Facebook had been weaponized by “Russian agents who wanted to sow political chaos and help Trump win” in the 2016 election—an effort, the author said, that had an “astonishing impact.” Never mind the preposterousness of claiming that a couple hundred thousand dollars in Facebook advertising had an “astonishing impact” on the outcome of the 2016 election, there has never been a shred of evidence that “Russian interference” changed or altered even a single vote in 2016.

A New Yorker staff writer named Evan Osnos wrote that article. Osnos won the National Book Award in 2014 and in 2015 was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. He’s won many other prizes and worked all over the world, and, just before the election, published a flattering book about former Vice President Joe Biden. Osnos is the sort of fellow Brooks has in mind when he talks about “professional members” of the “epistemic regime”—the people who know what’s real and tell us so, a job for which they are richly rewarded.

What else has this supposedly enlightened member of the epistemic elite told us? In June, he compared Trump’s White House, which had a temporary fence around it after Black Lives Matter protests turned into riots, to the Zhongnanhai, the seat of China’s communist government in Beijing, where “people are more accustomed than Americans are to the notion of leaders who live and work secluded from the public.”

Earlier that month, Osnos dashed off a post that described—falsely, as it turned out—protests in Lafayette Square on June 1 as “peaceful.” We all know, even if the media refused to report it, that the protesters were not at all peaceful, and in fact were hurling “bricks, frozen water bottles and caustic liquids” at police.

This isn’t really about Osnos, his hackery notwithstanding, but about his professional class—a class that fervently believes much that isn’t so. Despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, members of Osnos’ class still believe that Trump got substantial help from Russia in 2016. They believe, still, that Trump is a dangerous authoritarian who might just destroy the republic. They believe, still, that the only reason tens of millions of Americans would support Trump is that they are racists or rubes, or both.

Osnos and Remnick and the rest of our media elites believe these things for the same reason Brooks thinks Trump supporters are conspiracy theory-addled suckers: they are becoming irrelevant, they are losing power and influence, their status as members of the epistemic regime is uncertain—indeed, their entire regime seems to be collapsing, and they know it.

It’s not too much to say, quoting Brooks, that “people in this precarious state are going to demand stories that will both explain their distrust back to them and also enclose them within a safe community of believers.”

So we will continue to see stories and commentary from the epistemic regime that soothe men like Brooks, Remnick, and Osnos, assuring them all is well, that credulous, mendacious Trump supporters have been put in their place, and that after a harrowing four years, all is once again as it should be.
John is the Political Editor at The Federalist. Follow him on Twitter.

Author: John Daniel Davidson

Source: The Federalist : Media Elites, Not Trump Supporters, Are Disconnected From Reality

Continue Reading

News

Georgia Prosecutor Increasingly Likely To Open Criminal Investigation Into President Trump

Published

on

‘…it tracks the communication you might see in any drug case or organized crime case’

A top Georgia prosecutor is reportedly considering whether to open a criminal investigation into President Donald Trump’s alleged “attempts to overturn the results of the state’s 2020 election,” the New York Times reported. In fact, the Times reported that a criminal probe into Trump has become “increasingly likely.”

According to the report, the central concern of a possible investigation would be Trump’s call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) earlier this month in which Trump allegedly demanded that Georgia officials overturn Joe Biden’s victory there.

The controversial phone call was cited in the new article of impeachment against Trump, which House Democrats passed this week.

From the New York Times:

The new Fulton County district attorney, Fani Willis, is already weighing whether to proceed, and among the options she is considering is the hiring of a special assistant from outside to oversee the investigation, according to people familiar with her office’s deliberations.

At the same time, David Worley, the lone Democrat on Georgia’s five-member election board, said this week that he would ask the board to make a referral to the Fulton County district attorney by next month.

Although Trump’s supporters have defended his call with Raffensperger, others have claimed the call is evidence that Trump committed a crime.

In fact, Slate claimed that Trump broke federal and state laws, citing one federal law that prohibits one from “knowingly and willfully…attempts to deprive or defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by…the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held.”

Indeed, a former U.S. Attorney in Georgia, Michael J. Moore, told the Times that, in his legal opinion, there was “a clear attempt to influence the conduct of the secretary of state, and to commit election fraud, or to solicit the commission of election fraud” by Trump in his phone conversation with Raffensperger.

“If you took the fact out that he is the president of the United States and look at the conduct of the call, it tracks the communication you might see in any drug case or organized crime case,” Moore explained. “It’s full of threatening undertone and strong-arm tactics.”
What about impeachment?

The House voted to impeach Trump for a second time this week, charging him with “incitement of insurrection.”

The impeachment article claims Trump’s rhetoric about the election, that it was “stolen” or “rigged,” incited the deadly violence on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, the same day a joint-session of Congress convened to certify Biden’s Electoral College victory.

The impeachment resolution was approved by a vote of 232-197. Every Democrat supported the resolution, and they were joined by 10 Republicans, including Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), the third-highest ranking House Republican.

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze : Report: Georgia prosecutor ‘increasingly likely’ to open criminal investigation into President Trump

Continue Reading

News

Alan Dershowitz: House Violated Constitution

Published

on

President Donald Trump did not commit any impeachable offenses, but the House violated the Constitution to suggest he did and are, ironically, immune from reprisals, according to constitutional law expert Alan Dershowitz on Newsmax TV.

“We all hear that the president is not above the law, but Congress is not above the law: When Congress impeached the president earlier this week, they committed six independent violations of the Constitution,” Dershowitz told “Saturday Report.”

“They violated the free speech provision. They violated the impeachment criteria. They violated the bill of attainder. They violated due process, on and on and on.”

Ironically, lawmakers are protected from legal culpability from their congressional actions, so unlike they are doing with the president, they cannot be sought for the allegations against them.

“But the only sanction is to vote them out of office and to bring them to trial in the court of public opinion,” Dershowitz told host Carl Higbie. “Senators and congressmen are immune from lawsuits for what they do or say on the floor of the Senate, so there can’t be any personal lawsuits.

“And I wouldn’t favor recriminations.”

All House Democrats and 10 Republicans impeached the president for the second time this week for inciting the storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6, but the president’s pursuit of an Electoral College challenge is not grounds for impeachment, Dershowitz noted.

“How can you impeach a president for a speech that is constitutionally protected?” he lamented.

Ultimately, impeachment should die in the Senate as it did the last time, according to Dershowitz, a member of the president’s first Senate impeachment trial team.

“The Constitution is very clear, the purpose of impeachment is removal,” he concluded, adding the president will be out of office by the time a trial can be held, pointing to the precedent of former President Richard Nixon’s resignation ending an impeachment trial in the Senate.

“The Senate cannot try an ordinary citizen.”

Important: See Newsmax TV now carried in 70 million cable homes, on DirecTV Ch. 349, Dish Network Ch. 216, Xfinity Ch. 1115, Spectrum, U-verse Ch. 1220, FiOS Ch. 615, Optimum Ch. 102, Cox cable, Suddenlink Ch. 102, CenturyLink 1209, Mediacom Ch. 277, Frontier 615 or Find More Cable Systems – Click Here.

Author: Eric Mack

Source: News Max : Alan Dershowitz to Newsmax TV: House Violated Constitution

Continue Reading

News

Acosta Thanks Colleagues, Judge After WH Ordered To Return His Pass: Let’s Go Back To Work

Published

on

CNN’s Jim Acosta thanked his colleagues and the judge who ordered the White House to — at least temporarily — return his hard pass on Friday and restore his regular access to daily press briefings.

“I want to thank all of my colleagues in the press who have supported us this week,” Acosta told reporters as he left the courtroom. “And I want to thank the judge for the decision he made today. And — let’s go back to work!”

CNN also offered a statement on the ruling, saying, “We are gratified with this result and we look forward to a full resolution in the coming days. Our sincere thanks to all who have supported not just CNN, but a free, strong and independent American press.”

Acosta was allowed to return to the White House immediately following the ruling.

His return may be temporary, however, because in Friday’s ruling, the judge also provided a roadmap for the White House to follow in order to revoke any reporter’s hard pass without pushback from the court.

The court ruled in Acosta’s favor based on the argument that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated — saying that the White House did not allow Acosta due process.

As White House press secretary Sarah Sanders noted in her response, the court also made it clear that no reporter had “an absolute First Amendment Right to access the White House.” As such, the court’s ruling opened the door for the White House to revoke any reporter’s hard pass provided due process was granted.

Author: Virginia Kruta

Source: Daily Caller : Acosta Thanks Colleagues, Judge After WH Ordered To Return His Pass: ‘Let’s Go Back To Work’

Continue Reading

Join Our Mailing List

Recent Post

Trending

Ad Blocker Detected!

Advertisements fund this website. Please disable your adblocking software or whitelist our website.
Thank You!