Adobe StockUsed only with express written permission
Fake News as an Enemy of the American People
A number of media personnel - some reporters, some pundits - expressed varying degrees of disdain for President Trump's characterization of certain News outlets (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) as purveyors of "fake" News; what particularly has drawn a the most agitated response is the President's assertion that these agencies are "...not my (President Trump's) enemies, but instead they are enemies of the American people!" Now the reflex is to assert that the Press's job is to hold politicians to an account, and it seems, that on that point POTUS seems to agree, Trump did not make the claim against every News outlet, but only against those which he identified. The questions: 1.) What is it that differentiates fake-News from legitimate News? 2.) What is it about those agencies identified by POTUS as fake-news agencies/outlets and 3.) In what way can these media outlets be construed as enemies of the American people?
We choose to answer the questions in reverse order; thus, regarding question: 3.) These outlets named above - if they are reporting stories made up out of whole cloth - we must ask to what end? Answer to thwart the advance of the Trump agenda! If Trump is POTUS, and his agenda is that by which he was able to be elected, then these Press agents are thwarting the agenda of the American people. If these members of the Press have information which legitimately shows Donald Trump to be guilty of actions in violation of the laws of the United States then they are Constitutionally obliged to unveil whatever information they have so as to put an end to Trump's malefactions. If they do not have any such information, but are attempting to malign the President and his subordinates, then those Press agents properly characterized by President Trump. they are not only enemies of the American people, but enemies of the U.S. Constitution.
2.) It seems that those outlets have a tendency of reporting rumor and innuendo as if they have hard evidence upon which they base their claims. Particular to these stories is that Putin and Russia helped Trump win the election, but all investigations have provided not even a smidgeon (we borrow the term from President Obama; his use of the term regarded the IRS preventing and/or harassing conservative PAC's from being able to effectively campaign for the Republican candidates in the 2012 Presidential election cycle...) of collusion or assistance from Russia in electing Trump. Hillary won the popular vote, so it would seem that Hillary just was too dull to realize she had a lock on California, and New York, and she should have spent time and money in States (hell, her campaign had the money to buy enough votes; although that may be illegal, she is a Democrat, and Obama's Department of Injustice wouldn't have lifted a finger to investigate any such claims, and the Media would have dismissed any Trump complaint as sour-grapes); fortunately - for the Nation of United States - Hillary, the Press and the Demonic-rats were convinced that Trump didn't have a snow-ball's chance in hell.
1.) "Fake-news" agencies are those which are more virulently openly ideological (i.e., A Demonic-rat of social-political Leftist could argue that 2 + 2 = 5 a PhD in Mathematics, and those networks would indict the mathematician as a lying partisan...). Such agencies are littered with people Chris Mathews (Mathews - on air - asserted he had a "thrill running up his leg" as Obama spoke), Brian William's - do we need to indicate the amount and depth of his fakery regarding his reporting? Yes, Williams is gone, but his News agency has only replaced him; they are no more objective than they formerly were... And then there was Dan Rather (Note: during Rather's interview of Bill Clinton - during Clinton's first term - Dan made a personal on-air gesture of awe vis-à-vis Clinton; Rather asserted something like: 'If only we could all be so wonderful as you!' I kid you not, and it was disgusting!) And although CBS removed Dan Rather form its network (he was trying to breath life into a story - regarding George W. Bush - which was demonstrably false, but Rather so wanted the story to be true, that he revealed his real-face, the face most tendentious Media types do their best to hide. Once a reporter is revealed as irrationality is so blatantly revealed he damages the reputation News outlet which welcomes his/her association.
At the end-of-the-day those agencies and individuals which resent being called "fake" ought to do as Steve Bannon suggested, viz: 'the should listen and ask questions, rather than characterizing President Trump, his Administration and his policies. If the Press allows Trump to articulate his policies, and if those policies are either inherently contradictory, un-Constitutional or antithetical to the American peoples interests (this is not something one feels, Trump's executive order regarding banning immigrants was shot down on an emotional criteria; the 9th Circuit Court did not deal with the law as law...), then the Press will have laid the predicate to respond as the Press was/is intended to respond. Real journalists - too - must find obsequious sycophants like Mathews and Rather to be nauseating and a blight upon the journalistic profession.
And at the end-of-the-day News outlets, agencies and individuals that promote a specious narratives - hoping to create enough smoke in hopes of creating a fire - are distracting from real stories, and end by undermining the credibility of Press! The purpose of a free-Press - as the Founders understood the Press - was/is to unveil those things which may prove inimical to Constitutional liberties. If Media sources promote false/dubious narratives because those narratives are in keeping with the reporter's desire, those reporters serve neither the interest of the American people, not do they fulfill their Constitutional obligations, and that would seem to make Trump right about such media persons; it would make them enemies of the U.S. Constitution, the legitimate Press and the American people!
Thomas J. Donegan