CNN's Stephen Miller Incident Proves How Fake News Ignorantly Smears Conservatives
A Commentary By Charles Hurt
White House adviser does not play mental footsie with fools
Behold, the anatomy of a “fake news” smear.
The latest drive-by character assassination of White House adviser Stephen Miller began, as it so often does, in a fact-free live TV orgy of public posturing by a journalist eager to display his virgin-snow virtue when it comes to unalloyed hatred of President Donald Trump.
This time it was CNN anchor Jake (Mr. Trump calls him “Fake”) Tapper, who invited Mr. Miller on his Sunday show to respond to Mr. Tapper’s complex conspiracy theory about how the president is somehow unfit or too mentally unstable to occupy the White House.
Obviously, Fake Tapper missed the report on Twitter that actually Mr. Trump is a “very stable genius.”
“I think I’ve wasted enough of my viewer’s time,” he petulantly whined before cutting off Mr. Miller’s mic.
It was a small, sad, silly moment in the death gurgles of American journalism. But enough to whip up a little buzz on Twitter or some Internet echo chamber. Which is all Fake Tapper was going for in the first place.
In all the frenzy, doddering old House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi clamored over to the bright lights to declare through her unglued dentures that Mr. Miller — a Jew — is somehow a “white supremacist.”
And then she declared that the Jew be fired from the White House. How that does not make Nancy Pelosi — a Christian, despite her infatuation with abortion — an anti-Semite?
Details. Minor details.
Then, along comes a Washington reporter who announces that Mr. Miller is “standing in the way of an immigration deal.”
Not clear if this “deal” is a good one or a bad one. Mr. Miller is just standing in the way of it, which further proves he is a white supremacist.
Her entire story was entirely based on unnamed “sources,” according to the reporter. Another death gurgle of American journalism.
The story includes a link to a “very tense and loud exchange” Mr. Miller had last year with another CNN reporter in which Mr. Miller utterly eviscerated the reporter over his near total ignorance of immigration policy in America.
All that matters to doltish reporters around here, though, is that the exchange was “very tense and loud.” Mr. Miller is not only a (Jewish) white supremacist, he is an angry (Jewish) white supremacist. So, like Hitler, basically. Only Jewish.
It is true that Mr. Miller can come off as serious. After all he is a very serious guy. He does not play mental footsie with fools. The guy has studied U.S. immigration more deeply than just about the entire Washington press corps combined. He knows more about immigration than any of them.
Mr. Miller is not going to get into intellectual soft-pillow fights with reporters and lawmakers wearing their silly, soft and fuzzy pajamas.
Rather, Mr. Miller — and his boss — wants desperately to fix a horribly broken immigration system that created this whole unfortunate class of illegal Dreamers in the first place and prevent a future generation of “Dreamers.”
If you have any doubt about the challenge Mr. Miller and Mr. Trump face in honestly addressing illegal immigration in this country, consider this: During this week’s bipartisan meeting in the White House to begin negotiations, the word “DACA” was uttered 61 times. The universal sentiment among lawmakers from both parties was to pass some kind of “DACA” legislation that would legalize the illegal-immigrant Dreamers.
The word “American” was used just 20 times. “Worker” only twice. “Citizen” not once.
“Citizenship” was used three times — as in the DACA bill should give Dreamers “citizenship.”
The words “miner,” “unemployed,” and “lawful” were never uttered during the 55-minute confab.
Perhaps Mr. Miller is “standing in the way of an immigration deal” with these people. But is that a bad thing?
• Charles Hurt can be reached at email@example.com and on Twitter @charleshurt.
Views expressed in this column are those of the author, not those of Rasmussen Reports. Comments about this content should be directed to the author or syndicate.
See Other Political Commentary by Charles Hurt.
See Other Political Commentary.
Rasmussen Reports is a media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion information.
We conduct public opinion polls on a variety of topics to inform our audience on events in the news and other topics of interest. To ensure editorial control and independence, we pay for the polls ourselves and generate revenue through the sale of subscriptions, sponsorships, and advertising. Nightly polling on politics, business and lifestyle topics provides the content to update the Rasmussen Reports web site many times each day. If it's in the news, it's in our polls. Additionally, the data drives a daily update newsletter and various media outlets across the country.
Some information, including the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll and commentaries are available for free to the general public. Subscriptions are available for $4.95 a month or 34.95 a year that provide subscribers with exclusive access to more than 20 stories per week on upcoming elections, consumer confidence, and issues that affect us all. For those who are really into the numbers, Platinum Members can review demographic crosstabs and a full history of our data.
To learn more about our methodology, click here.