What Nerve: NY Times Sniffs at Trump’s ‘Praetorian Guard of Friendly Media’

Now that the House Jan 6 hearings have concluded, New York Times’ reporter Jeremy Peters unloaded on a familiar target in Monday’s Business section — the conservative press — in “As Jan. 6 Panel’s Evidence Piled Up, Conservative Media Doubled Down.”

Peters first outlined how Peters thinks about January 6. He cited two objective media outlets: CNN and MSNBC, where Peters also contributes.

After the Jan. 6 committee’s final summer hearing last week, The talk at the CNN sets and MSNBC turned to an intriguing if familiar possibility about what might result from the panel’s finding. A number of pundits felt that the prosecution of Donald J. Trump for criminal offense was justified, especially considering the fact that he did not act as the Capitol was occupied by rioters.

If that felt like déjà vu — more predictions of Mr. Trump’s looming downfall — the response to the hearings from the pro-Trump platforms felt like something new, Reflecting the extraordinary lengths that his Praetorian Guard of friendly Media went toWe have gone back to the beginning of history, trying to erase all that violence.

As if Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden didn’t enjoy the overwhelming support of CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, PBS, WP, NYT…

Midway through this “media memo” came this odd, parenthetical insertion:

(The author of the article is a MSNBC contributor.

Peters is also proud of this book. He wrote an entire book (Insurgency) condemning Donald Trump and conservative media, especially Fox News, whose popular morning show Fox & Friends is “three hours of sex and red meat,” while crowing about the “incredibly dedicated professionals at MSNBC.”

Peters’s distrustworth when it comes to conservative media is all the more evident.

Part of the right’s message to Trump supporters is, in effect: You may have initially recoiled in horror at what you thought happened at the Capitol, but you were misled by the mainstream media.

Peters pointed out contradictions that don’t necessarily exist.

It can seem confusing. The same Fox News hosts who were imploring the president’s chief of staff to intercede with the president or risk “destroying his legacy,” as Laura Ingraham put it in a text to Mark Meadows on Jan. 6, now accuse the mainstream media of exaggerating the events at the Capitol.

Well, the hosts couldn’t well accuse the press of exaggerating things Before the press’s coverage revealed itself over time, could they? They might have watched the news and seen how exaggerated things seemed.

The narrative often relies on kernels of truth about incomplete or inconsistent statements from law enforcement and witnesses — a typical occurrence in any investigation so sprawling — that Mr. Trump’s allies in the media then magnify.

Peters didn’t care about a patient suffering from cancer, as evidenced by his tastelessness.

New heroes are emerging as Capitol Police officers become less heroic. The viral story about Pam Hemphill (a 69 year old woman) who was sentenced to 60 days in prison for trespassing at the Capitol in January 6th, went viral. The way Ms. Hemphill was portrayed on the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show, which replaced Rush Limbaugh’s program in many markets, was typical of the sympathetic messages conservatives heard about her. Her hosts described her as an innocent victim — she was a grandmother, and she was a patient with cancer who was sentenced to an unfairly harsh sentence.

While the liberal media march in Trump-loathing lockstep, Peters complained of the “uniformity” of the pro-Trump press.

Part of the effectiveness of the conservative media’s defense of the former president’s conduct on Jan. 6 has been its uniformity. Few have broken ranks to question his actions as the committee made its case….

About Post Author

Follow Us