Donald Trump Is Not Above the Law—But Fox News Thinks He Should Be

How a "news" story by Fox News completely distorts a nuanced New York Times op-ed

 

By Eric Butterfield

 

August 29, 2022

 

Fox News does such a bang-up job of parodying itself, it's not even fun to point it out anymore. But this one deserves a look—and a big warning.

 

Following the FBI's search of Donald Trump's residence at Mar-a-Lago, there's been a flood of speculation about the redacted affidavit for the search warrant. Fox News ran this headline:

NY Times demands 'criminal prosecution' of Donald Trump despite

the risks: 'greatest crisis since Civil War'

 

Wow. That would definitely be of concern—if that was at all what the New York Times editorial board had argued. But, they hadn't. Nevertheless, better to instill maximum panic about risks—even though the Times clearly spelled out exactly the same concerns.

 

It's this kind of "journalism" that necessitates media studies at a young age in America if we are to prevent our democracy from driving itself off a cliff. These distortions whip up partisan fervor and prevent us from discussing concerns we have in common across the political spectrum.

 

For starters, the New York Times headline reads, "Donald Trump Is Not Above the Law". Not being above the law is a little different than pushing for prosecution. So, did the Times mention criminal prosecution? Yes, more than a few times. Why wouldn't they? Trump took classified documents to his private residence, where he could have leaked information that's vital to our national security, and even used it for blackmail. What remains to be seen is how egregious Trump's actions were compared to Hillary Clinton's mishandling of confidential information on private email servers—and whether the Justice Department can demonstrate equal treatment of both cases. But let's not get ahead of ourselves.

 

So, did the Times actually demand criminal prosecution? I'll let you be the judge. Here are some quotes from the op-ed:

"...in deciding how Mr. Trump should be held accountable under the law it is necessary to consider not just whether criminal prosecution would be warranted but whether it would be wise. No American president has ever been criminally prosecuted after leaving office."

 

Doesn't sound like a demand to me.

 

Next, the Times board mentioned President Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon after Watergate, and noted Ford's warning that rousing "ugly passions" was a serious risk.

 

Further caution followed: "Pursuing prosecution of Mr. Trump could further entrench support for him and play into the conspiracy theories he has sought to stoke. It could inflame the bitter partisan divide, even to the point of civil unrest."

 

Again, being more cautionary than demanding, the board goes on to warn of the "substantial risk" of a prosecution, in part because future presidents could use the precedent to target political rivals. Sounds like a pretty cool-headed assessment of the totality of the matter.

 

This is no idle warning. Threats of a retaliatory impeachment of President Biden have been floated by some Republicans, including Ted Cruz, if the midterms deliver the GOP a majority in the House.

 

Any criticism of Trump is grist for partisan outrage on Fox News—even if it requires totally misconstruing the opinion of the New York Times editorial board. So, underneath the hyperventilating Fox News headline, the deck reads:

The board claimed that Trump 'sought to subvert

the Constitution and overturn the will of the American people'

 

The quotes suggest that this phrase is wild hyperbole—and lets Fox News readers know that this must be met with fury. To suggest a wild distortion by the bonkers Times, Fox News placed it in quotes. But that's not what's really bonkers in our nation right now. What's truly crazy is that half of Republicans still believe Trump's bald-faced lie that he won the 2020 election. And, now, the party of "law and order" is targeting the FBI. Where's George Orwell when you need him?

 

If all we've heard under oath about then-president Trump on January 6, 2020, isn't enough to qualify as an attempt to subvert our Constitution, what is? If six months' worth of lying about election fraud and 60-plus frivolous lawsuits aren't enough, and egging on an armed mob whipped up by half a year of lies isn't enough, and sitting on your hands while your violent mob chants "Hang Mike Pence!" while attempting to stop the vote-counting isn't enough, what exactly qualifies as an assault on our Constitution? If all that doesn't add up, why don't we just roll up that useless piece of paper and smoke it right now?

 

Just to put Republicans' hysterical denial and hypocrisy in context, it's worth asking ourselves how loud and melodramatic the Republicans, Fox News and the right-wing media echo chamber would be right now if a Democrat had pulled half of Trump's stunts. Let's put the shoe on the other foot.

 

Imagine the apoplexy on Fox News if Democrats had started laying conspiratorial groundwork about election fraud six months before election day. Imagine the backlash if Democrats had hatched a deranged conspiracy that voting machines had a backdoor connection to Venezuela. Never mind an insane conspiracy that Republicans are running a pedophilia ring and eating babies – what if Biden was constantly posting rambling nonsense on Twitter informed only by what he'd watched on TV?

 

The double standard is egregious. You know Fox News would be peeing its pants if a Democrat had inspired an armed mob to storm the Capitol and attempt to overturn an election. The GOP pitches itself as the law and order party. Apparently, they've decided that doesn't work any longer. I guess it's all relative. Trump changed their minds. You can't back the police and back Trump. It just isn't possible anymore.

 

This is isn't a dry run. This the real deal and January 6 was just the beginning. Only one side of our two-party system is calling for Trump to be accountable under the law. The GOP prefers to call the legitimacy of the FBI into question. Imagine the GOP's outrage if a Democrat said riots were coming but the blood would be on the GOP's hands?

 

We're in new territory. Dangerous territory.

 

Rather than defend the idea of fairness under the law, Republicans (Lindsey Graham, in particular) have warned of street violence. Way to go, Lindsey. This is the same deflection used to downplay the Jan. 6 hearings—it's the new GOP playbook. No corruption here; we're all just victims of the deep state, a derangement syndrome, and antifa. The GOP has lost its moral scruples—not because they lost them, of course, but because Democrats "weaponized" impeachment. It's all payback time.

 

When people marched in the streets for Black Lives Matter, Republicans couldn't get enough of condemning the violence. But now, when they predict Trump supporters will take violently to the streets, the blood isn't on their hands. Of course not! In a disgusting display of taking no personal responsibility for one's actions, Republicans have already preemptively deflected blame from their street-fighting goons. Way to set the table.

 

Reminds me of when Trump told the Proud Boys in September 2020 during a "presidential" debate, while pretending he didn't know who they are, "Stand back and stand by".

 

Republicans will play up FBI paranoia as long as it's politically expedient in Trumpworld. There is no higher duty to country anymore—only to party, and to Trump.

 

All we can hope for is that the GOP's willing street fighters will wake up and remember how loyalty gets repaid in Trumpworld. I'm sure Trump’s flag bearers at the Capitol, high on a lie, chanted "Hang Mike Pence!" with all the fervor of Christian love they could muster. But nothing brought home the core tenet of love and loyalty in Trumpworld like getting thrown in jail for the cause. It’s then, and only then, they found out—you're on your own.