What would Donald Trump have to do for the U.S. media to frame what he is doing in Venezuela as an act of war?
This isn’t a rhetorical question. It’s an actual inquiry, the pursuit of which can reveal a lot about how U.S. media’s default posture is state subservience and stenography. In the past few months, President Trump has committed several clear acts of war against Venezuela, including: murdering — in cold blood — scores of its citizens, hijacking its ships, stealing its resources, issuing a naval blockade, and attacking its ports.
Then in a stunning escalation on early Saturday morning, the administration invaded Venezuela’s sovereign territory, bombing several buildings, killing at least 40 more of its citizens, kidnapping Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife from their bed, and announcing they will, henceforth, “run” the country.
And yet none of these acts of brazen aggression, violence, and violations of international law have, in any sustained or meaningful way, been referred to as acts of war, a coup, or invasion in U.S. mainstream media reporting.
Quick to call it the Department of War, quick to silence anyone calling it an act of war.
He tells it like it is, until he lies. Which is of course all the time. I think conservatards confuse telling the truth with having no filter.
This is so correct!
You and I think that the right to free speech means that the government isn’t allowed to prevent anyone from saying what they want and it can’t ban peaceful protests, but conservatives see it from an entirely more self centred perspective.
They confuse free speech with being able to speak freely, which is why they get so mad at people interrupting them out contradicting them, and are prepared to enact censorship to achieve it!
Nice catch that makes it even worse