At the “Wall” Street Journal . . .

A typical thinly veiled effort to negatively portray Trump and supporters; while cautioning the media to not blow the chance

The Media Will Re-Elect Trump (pay wall*)

They would rather believe tall tales about Russia than hear what voters said in 2016.

“He is universally reviled by elite institutions, including the media. Except for his knack for turning their hatred into lemonade, his only asset is his rapport with an unrich, unconnected voter segment that falls far short of a majority.”

Holman Jenkins writes for the Wall Street Journal. His views reflect generally the contempt that most of the Journal’s editorial board has for the president.

In this column, Mr. Jenkins, in his patented sneering condescension, puts that contempt on display in what presumably he thinks us rubes will view as an “even-handed analysis”.


While he effectively takes the media to task for its biases, glaring incompetence, and unseemly affection for the Democrat party’s often comedic pursuit of Trump, Jenkins also manages to do it while at the same time bashing the president and characterizing his supporters as ignorant, unsophisticated, uninformed rubes.

I believe that, both the WSJ’s liberal news section and its slightly right-of-center editorial board would have much preferred a Hillary Clinton presidency, along with her ‘open borders’ and damaging to the US “one world” trade policies, and even the lethal Iran nuclear agreement President Trump thankfully repudiated!

Here are just a few of our favorite excerpts from Mr. Jenkins’ latest column:        DLH

•”Donald Trump’s tenure has been a pleasant surprise compared to expectations, which isn’t saying much…”

•”There is a humongous irony here. Not expecting to win, Mr. Trump allowed his organization’s desultory pursuit of a Trump tower in Moscow to continue during the 2016 campaign. Make no mistake, though a report that he instructed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about this matter has been debunked by none other than special counsel Robert Mueller, it remains true that Mr. Cohen lied to Congress. The lack of any other crime will not stop this episode from being central in a Democratic House impeachment hearing resting heavily on hints that there is something fishy about Mr. Trump’s attitudes about Russia.

•”But what is true of Mr. Trump is also true of James Comey. He also expected Mr. Trump to lose. The FBI’s own highly questionable actions during the campaign, which inadvertently helped elect Mr. Trump, he and his Obama colleagues also expected to go unexamined.”

•”Rep. Adam Schiff has signaled that he intends to rake through Mr. Trump’s business and bank records searching for the motive for collusion crimes that exist only in his imagination.

•”All this will be cheered on by backward-rationalizing pundits in the New York Times, justifying their own hysteria by portraying the routine, predictable and typically opportunistic partisan opposition faced by Mr. Trump as somehow exceptionally heroic.

•”A more honest rendition would notice that Mr. Trump—in many ways an accidental president—is also an unusually inexperienced and weak president, lacking even meaningful institutional roots in his own party.
“It takes no heroism to oppose him.”

•”Indeed, it is hard to explain how Mr. Trump can simultaneously be such a menace and such a pushover that every Democratic officeholder in the country thinks, “If only I can stumble into the nomination, I’m sure to be the next president.”

•”The answer, of course, is pundit vanity: Mr. Trump is a threat to democracy because writers opposing him then are very important people.

•”Our wonderful English language gives us a perfectly good word for major media interpretations of the Trump phenomenon. That word is fatuous. When historians weigh his well-advertised nature vs. the fantastic overreaction to his election, their first question will be: How did he become president? Voters must have had something in mind when they pulled the lever for somebody so seemingly unsuitable.”

•”So here we are. The media will eventually take notice of the strange acts of the U.S. intelligence community and their role in the 2016 election. Either that, or the story of the decade will continue to be told by alternative media outlets that, for all their faults, at least provide a venue for ignored realities to be taken account of. “

Note: “… the strange acts of the U.S. intelligence community and their role in the 2016 election.”

“Strange acts”??!! Mr. Jenkins, those “strange acts”were treachery, treason, and unusually dangerous criminal actions!!!

*”paywall” – ironic for the easy border WSJ isn’t it – control something with a wall, electronic or other wise, in order to claim something as yours, prevent its use, what have you

This entry was posted in UNCATEGORIZED. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *