47 days to Nov. 8th: Hillary Clinton’s media assist

More fun to watch than the candidates is the liberal media's coverage of the candidates. Its a sitcom.

The media assist of Hillary Clinton

WASHINGTON, September 20, 2017 — CNN has put words into Donald Trump’s mouth, further spreading the meme that the Republican nominee is a racist.

The Hill Reports that CNN falsely adds “racial” to Trump’s recent comments about vetting:

CNN added the word “racial” to Donald Trump‘s Monday comments on terrorism and immigration and is running headlines reporting that the GOP presidential nominee spoke of using “racial profiling” to stop terrorism.

But a review of the transcript of Trump’s comments to Fox News that CNN quoted shows that Trump never used the word “racial” in his comments to the network and only spoke of “profiling.”

“You know in Israel, they profile,” Trump said Monday to Fox News. “They’ve done an unbelievable job—as good as you can do. But Israel has done an unbelievable job. And they’ll profile. They profile. They see somebody that’s suspicious. They will profile. They will take that person in. They will check out.”


In a later interview with Bill O’Reilly, Trump also expressed a need to profile in the manner Israel does, but again didn’t use the word “racial.” When pressed by O’Reilly how the profiling would work, Trump wouldn’t elaborate.

“It works. If we see somebody that we think could be a problem at airports and other places you talk to them and you see what’s going on. We don’t do that. Not much.”

CNN has been running headlines throughout the day that specifically quotes Trump as using the words “racial profiling.” CNN.com also is using the term “racial profiling” in its headlines.

The decision by CNN to add “racial” to Trump’s comments comes in the wake of intense criticism this weekend after the network edited out a key portion of Hillary Clinton‘s Saturday night statement following the terror attacks in New York and New Jersey.

In a gaggle with the press aboard her campaign plane after the attacks occurred, the Democratic nominee referred to the explosions as “bombings,” as Trump had earlier in the evening.

Trump was later criticized on the network and elsewhere for using the word “bomb” too soon.

And a bomb it was, as Hillary said it was, before she didn’t (note the non-partisan reporter helpfully dialing back Hillary’s statement that it was, in fact, a bomb):

So when is candy more than candy? When it’s an analogy that makes liberals angry. Donald Trump Jr. asked how many militant Muslims are too many to allow un-vetted access to the United States.

IJR.com reports: The Great Skittles Non-troversy: How Trump Jr.’s ‘Sweet’ Analogy for Refugees Provoked Liberal Fury

There are non-troversies and there are non-troversies.

The following story undoubtedly falls into the latter category, as the media’s faux outrage in reaction to a Donald Trump Jr. “Skittles” tweet has spurred mass collective eyerolls among people who know what an analogy is when they see it.

This is what Donald Trump Jr. tweeted out that caused a news media uproar:

The caption on the Tweet-in-question:

“If I had a bowl of skittles and I told you just three would kill you. Would you take a handful?”

“That’s our Syrian refu­gee problem.” Trump Jr. wrote in his Tweet: “Let’s end the politically correct agenda that doesn’t put America first. #trump2016”

It’s been fascinating to watch the media reaction, which includes all manner of heated responses—except one that addresses the argument Trump Jr. actually made.

The Trump campaign’s reaction boils down to “Speaking the truth might upset” some people. One might suspect that Trump Jr.’s tweet caused an outraged reaction precisely because it was a little too effective.

It was not unreasonable for Donald Trump Jr. to point out the obvious danger of bringing in a mass influx of refugees from a hotbed of terrorist activity, because it only takes a few bad actors to do Americans grave harm.

What is unreasonable is a media that won’t make a sensible counter-argument. Instead, the liberal media is resorting to playing dumb with a literal interpretation that no one over the age of 11 years old should be making, while insisting it’s the son of a political candidate who is out of line.

Read the entire article with graphics

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Communities Digital News

• The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or management of Communities Digital News.

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.