Many media outlets have steadfastly described the violent riots that have gripped cities across the country in recent months as “mostly peaceful protests.” What’s left out of this absurd description is the arson, assault, vandalism, and wanton destruction that people can view through social media or with their own eyes.
The Associated Press and ABC News manipulated the language even more this weekend when they described setting a federal courthouse on fire, vandalizing a police station, and assaulting of police officers as what happened when a “peaceful demonstration intensified.” Here is the Associated Press write-up:
OAKLAND, Ca. — Protesters in California set fire to a courthouse, damaged a police station and assaulted officers after a peaceful demonstration intensified late Saturday, Oakland police said.
Demonstrators broke windows, spray painted graffiti, shot fireworks and pointed lasers at officers, the Oakland department said on Twitter. Several tweets called for peace and asked organizers to “help us provide safe spaces and safe places for demonstrators.”
ABC News picked up this report and tweeted it out:
Dictionary.com defines “peaceful” as “free from war, strife, commotion, violence, or disorder; not argumentative, quarrelsome, or hostile.” Dictionary.com defines “intensify” as “to make more acute; strengthen or sharpen.”
For a “peaceful” protest to “intensify,” then, would mean that it somehow became even more peaceful. Few people would say that assaulting people, setting buildings on fire, pointing lasers at police officers, vandalizing a police station, or destroying property, suggest the intensification of peace.
The media have not explained why they have worked so hard to downplay or obscure the left-wing violence laying siege to cities across the country. However, it is the same approach being taken by Democrat leaders such as Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y. Asked about the left-wing violence in Portland, Nadler denied it was happening:
Can someone please explain to me how this works? We are willing to spend all credibility to defend what can be INSTANTLY invalidated. Who came up with this policy, why does it exist, and how is anyone able to maintain it without deviating from the script?pic.twitter.com/K4RFozkQde
— Eric Weinstein (@EricRWeinstein) July 27, 2020
In the video above, Nadler says the evidence of wanton violence in Portland is a “myth” being spread only in “Washington, D.C.” As he says that, another video of that widespread violence is played.
The media and other Democratic activists seem to believe that if the truth of the violent sieges of cities is told, it will benefit Republican candidates in November. While their gamble with the truth may pay off electorally, it is at great cost to the republic, the citizens of those cities, and the public benefits that were once provided to the journalism industry.