fbpx

How Hatred of Trump Undermined Journalism

When the disastrous debate made Biden’s mental condition no longer possible to cover up, the media had to immediately pivot to cover up their cover-up.
[additional-authors]
July 9, 2024

The biggest media cover-up of modern times is being covered up, and hardly anyone is saying a word.

Imagine if a Republican president had been showing signs of mental decline over several years, but his inner circle aggressively denied it and discouraged the media from poking into it. Do you really think the same legacy journalists who went after President Trump with a vengeance on everything from Russian collusion to irregular accounting would have ignored signs of possible dementia?

Not a chance.

And yet, that is precisely what they did for years with President Joe Biden. As this truth is now becoming more and more clear, why are we seeing so little outrage at this historic example of journalistic malpractice?

Because the cover-up is being covered up.

You see, the guilty media want us to believe they themselves were duped by a sinister White House cover-up. They want us to believe the signs of Biden’s decline were not obvious enough to warrant the most basic level of investigative journalism.

They want us to believe Biden’s woeful debate with Trump is when they finally saw the problem, which is why they’ve been in meltdown ever since.

But they’ve been in meltdown not because they finally saw the truth about Biden’s mental state but because of another, more dangerous truth: This widely exposed version of Biden is likely to put Trump back in the White House, a scenario so unacceptable anything must be done to prevent it.

Up until the debate debacle, the thinking was that if the media protected Biden while bashing a legally compromised Trump, even a diminished version of Biden could take the Dems over the finish line. For these Trump-hating journalists, the ends of no Trump justified the means of hiding a declining Biden.

“The media were in on it,” Washington Times columnist Tim Murtaugh writes. “They helped cover up President Biden’s dramatic cognitive decline and gaslit Americans regarding his mental and physical condition.”

Of course, when the disastrous debate made this mental condition no longer possible to cover up, the media had to immediately pivot to cover up their cover-up. That’s why all we’ve been hearing from them is that Biden must be replaced, and the many ways this might happen.

The last thing they want us to talk about is their own responsibility for this debacle.

“The Biden White House clearly succeeded in a massive cover-up of the degree of the president’s feebleness and his serious physical decline,” former executive editor of The New York Times Jill Abramson said to the news outlet Semafor. “Shame on the White House press corps for not [having] pierced the veil of secrecy surrounding the president.”

Shame indeed. But how does Abramson explain such flagrant malpractice? She has the courage to say what many are thinking but are afraid to say.

“I worry that too many journalists didn’t try to get the story because they did not want to be accused of helping elect Donald Trump,” she said.

Think about that. Professional journalists stayed away from the mental decline of the leader of the free world because they didn’t want to be accused, God forbid, of helping someone from the other team.

Professional journalists stayed away from the mental decline of the leader of the free world because they didn’t want to be accused, God forbid, of helping someone from the other team.

The hypocrisy is off the charts. As Bret Stephens writes in The New York Times, “it perfectly fit the narrative of a deep state that protects its own, that calls its critics liars while lying all the time, that can barely hold it together but maintains a very high opinion of itself.”

The failure of mainstream media to take on their own side out of fear it would help Trump only confirms the corrupting influence on journalism of a political agenda. For years, that agenda came before investigating and divulging the truth about a Democratic president’s decline, and today, it comes before the ethical obligation to fess up to an inexcusable cover-up.

Both the cover-up and the cover-up of the cover-up have been driven by that same incorrigible impulse—the desperate desire to take down one man.

That agenda may be appropriate for activists and lobbyists, but for journalists and their profession, it has done harm to their nation and should be cause for immense shame. In the interest of redeeming the truth that sets us free, the last thing we ought to do now is cover up the cover-up of the cover-up.

Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.

Editor's Picks

Latest Articles

More news and opinions than at a
Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.