A few days back, the Washington Post carried an op-ed by Ruth Marcus regarding the gunman who was apprehended outside Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s home.
The piece
began well, condemning the assassination
plot as ‘horrifying and intolerable’. It also demanded that there be
adequate security for that the justices, their families, and staff. It also
called for better funding to protect justices of all courts and measures to
shield personal information.
The piece
acknowledged the grave tragedy that could have occurred and placed the blame on
those who create a climate of intolerance that may have fueled this dangerous
moment.
Was this
the rare occurrence, as rare as Halley's
Comet, when the WaPo was standing up for what is morally right?
Unfortunately, this was merely the setup, i.e. a ploy to draw you in by feigning fairness.
The piece
then pivots to the standard spinning, deceiving, and whataboutery that the WaPo
is known for.
The piece
urges its readers not to "assign blame or hijack the episode to reinforce
preexisting conclusions” and that “deranged individuals do deranged things”
which is true “at both ends of the political spectrum”.
When the
Democrats commit an egregious mistake, propagandists frequently attempt to
dilute the impact by applying the ‘both sides’ argument.
The piece
proceeds to indulge in a bit of monkey balancing, you can almost sense the effort
here.
It quotes
NY Democrat Sen. Chuck Schumer’s vitriolic remarks targeting Justices Kavanaugh
and Gorsuch. But covers it up by adding that Schumer said he did not
intend to threaten the justices or incite violence. It then adds that in the
current environment, Schumer’s language was 'unnecessarily incendiary'.
https://twitter.com/realDailyWire/status/1534555801561571328
The false
equivalence continues as the author compares Sen Schumer’s vile threats with
Kavanaugh’s remarks following his confirmation hearings: “You sowed the wind for decades
to come. I fear that the whole country will reap the whirlwind.”
https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1045396880698605571
But the
piece initially misquoted Kavanaugh but fixed it later.
The piece
also conveniently misses the context. Kavanaugh was excoriating Democrats for
their nefarious campaign of fabrications that attempted to derail his
confirmation. He was warning them that a similar campaign could be mounted
against a liberal judge up for confirmation. Most importantly he did not say
this before a mob like Schumer and Kavanaugh’s tone was not provocative like that
of Schumer.
Since
Politico published a
draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito that provided the
rationale on why Roe v. Wade (1973), which legalized abortion
nationwide, has to be overturned, there has been a relentless campaign of
demonization and dehumanization of the conservative justices with copious
threats hurled at them.
But the
piece paints a false equivalence, by comparing this wave of hate that led to an
assassination plot with the murders of federal judges by disgruntled litigants.
“A
handful of federal judges have been killed in office, mostly by disgruntled
litigants. In 2005, the husband and mother of a federal judge in Chicago were
murdered. In 2020, the son of a federal judge was fatally shot at her home by a
man who lost a case before her; there was evidence that the man was also
targeting Justice Sonia Sotomayor.”
The piece
attempts the 'both sides' maneuver referring to threats of violence faced by anti-segregationist
Southern judges. The inference the author wants her WaPo readers to draw is
that the perpetrators were white supremacist Republicans.
There is
a reference to the Federal jurist from Alabama Frank
M. Johnson Jr., whose historic civil rights decisions led to ostracism,
cross-burnings, and death threats. But Johnson was appointed by Republican
President Eisenhower, which means he must have been conservative. He was
appointed to the Democrat South which vehemently opposed desegregation. Johnson
famously took on staunch segregationist Democrat Governor Wallace to insure
black voter registration and desegregation.
The piece
then asks the following:
“Do we
now find ourselves in another such era, with abortion rights protesters taking
the place of massive resisters?
And, if
so, are Democrats who rail against the excesses, past, and future, of this
Supreme Court complicit in the threat of violence in the same way that
segregationist politicians spurred on Judge Johnson’s attackers?”
The
author purposefully refers to Democrats and segregationist politicians as if
they were separate entities. But the truth is the perpetrators of violence
against Judge Johnson back then and Judge Kavanaugh right now are the same
groups of violent extremists within the Democrat party.
The piece
then proceeds to question if the judiciary should enter into a political debate
better left to the legislative and executive branches. If this thinking is
followed the courts will have no cases to adjudicate because everything from
crime to science has been politicized.
The piece
concludes by urging readers to be “thankful that the man arrested outside
Kavanaugh’s home did not get further with his scheme.” But also warns people
not to “read too much into one deranged individual’s actions.”
Since the
piece is filled with whataboutery, let's imagine a scenario where an armed
Trump supporter was caught outside the home of one of the liberal Supreme Court
justices. Everyone from Biden to the WaPo would be placing the entire blame on
President Trump and demand another impeachment.
They
continue to blame the GOP and Trump after every mass shooting despite it truly
being a sole mentally unstable individual.
But since
it is a liberal intending to kill for the liberal causes, it is just ‘one
deranged individual’, nothing to see here, let’s move on.
The author
also conveniently forgets the various incidences of violence after the
leak. Miscreants
had vandalized Catholic
churches and pregnancy
centers. Hoodlums tossed
a Molotov cocktail into the offices of a pro-life group. Profanity-laced demonstrations outside the homes of conservative justices’ have been going on for over a month.
These are
not isolated incidences of violence but the result of a toxic campaign that
emanated from Washington where the powers that be gave an impression that women
would be pushed back to the stone ages if Roe vs Wade was overturned.
The
gunman probably sees himself as a civil rights activist who is bravely taking
matters into his hands because Kavanaugh was going to do great harm to women.
We now
look at the record of the author of the piece. She wrote pieces entitled “We
now see stark evidence of Trump’s toxic judicial legacy”, “Another activist
Trump judge strikes, this time at the mask mandate”, “The FBI’s ‘investigation’
of Kavanaugh was laughable” and “The impeachment of Donald Trump must proceed.”
https://twitter.com/abigailmarone/status/1507494887834464256
This
piece is more proof that the mainstream media is devoid of any morality. They
will do all in their powers to defend the left and their operatives.
This
piece reads like the works of a Democrat spokesperson, this is because the mainstream
media functions as a department of the Democrat party.
However,
even as a piece of propaganda, it is weak, verbose, unfocused, and unconvincing.
The only
reason it merits our attention is that it reveals the thinking
within Washington and the thinking that influences Washington.
Also appears on American Thinker
Comments
Post a Comment