I dislike Trump and his policies. I dislike Merkel and her policies. Both are my political enemies. But what I dislike even more are lying media which try to deceive for undeclared political aims.
A recent example:
The pieces linked above go on to speculate about personal animosities between Merkel and Trump and about diverging U.S. and European political directions.
While differences may exist between Trump and Merkel they have nothing to do with a handshake in an Oval Office photo op. Not mentioned in the above reports is that Merkel and Trump shook hands with each other several times and in cordial ways.
Here as Merkel arrives at the White House:
And here at the end of the press conference after their talks:
So why the headlines above?
Trump rejected to shake hands in the Oval Office. This was at a photo opportunity where typically some 20 to 30 photographers have a chance to snap a picture of an event. During such shootings the photographers try to get the persons in front of lenses into a position that makes for salable pictures. When one watches the video of the event one can clearly hear some photographers urging Merkel and Trump to shake hands. Trump ignores the request. But Merkel does not get it and asks Trump if he wants to shake hands. Trump continues to ignore the request.
His faked ignorance was not directed against Merkel though. As one can see above he has no aversion at all to shake hands with here. His behavior was directed against jerky photographers.
Consider the headlines of earlier handshakes Trump exchanged with his guests:
This seems like a pattern to me:
- The "awkward" handshake with Abe happened on February 10 during the photo op in the Oval Office after prompting by photographers.
- The "awkward" handshake with Trudeau happened on February 13 during the photo op in the Oval Office after prompting by photographers.
- The "refusal" of a handshake with Merkel happened on March 17 during the photo op in the Oval Office after prompting by photographers.
Had Trump shaken hands with Merkel at the event the media would certainly have found some "awkward" aspect to it. They would have written similar stories as they have written about the handshakes with Abe and Trudeau. Trump tried to avoid that. But the media now write similar stories about the "rejected" handshake request. This time Trump did not fall for the photographer request for an "awkward" handshake. But there was no escape from the trap. The stories about the "ill behaved Trump" and "bad relations" with Merkel had, in all likelihood, already been written.
But why do the media do this?
During the election some 98% of all editorial media endorsements went for Clinton. It is no question on which side they are on. They dislike Trump. I understand that, I dislike him too. But that does not mean that I have to shun objectivity. He is the duly elected president of the United States and any analyzing and anticipating of his policies requires to keep that in mind. Analysis based on the false handshake story will inevitably be false. The media are obviously out to get Trump, if not over false claims of Russian influence on him and the elections then over "awkward" handshakes.
The current media task is, in military termini, to "soften the target". To drive up his disapproval rates as they successfully do. This to -in the end- enable his impeachment:
The intention [.. is ...] to hamstring and delegitimize the new administration coming in, and to bring about the resignation or impeachment of Donald Trump. It is in all intents and purposes a coup, though without military intervention, as it seeks to overturn a completely legal and constitutional election.
The now ongoing hearings in Congress about alleged Russian hacking, influence on the election and collusion with the Trump campaign - zero evidence has been provided for these claims - aims in the same direction.
We previewed this "elite" coup at this site in December 2016. I still do not understand the end aim the Democrats and their masters have in mind. A president Pence would likely be even more devastating to domestic liberal aims than Trump. His foreign policy would be more hawkish.
Is that last point the feature, not the bug, that drives the anti-Trump campaign?
Posted by b on March 20, 2017