0:00
/
0:00
Transcript
0:00
SPEAKER 2
Hi, this is Stephen Beschloss with America America. Hi, and I'm Mark Jacob with the Stop the Presses newsletter. And this is Media Misses. This week, we're going to share with you a story about, well, about the criminal defendant and his relationship with the police.
0:19
And, you know, the story, you know, I would say is actually a pretty good story that gets into the history of and the more current reality of Trump's relationship with police officers and his sort of history of sort of portraying himself as a law enforcement guy, right? A law and order guy.
0:41
And of course, this is a guy with 88... felony charges and is currently a criminal defendant in a criminal trial, which makes this a rather messy situation. And as I say, the story itself is pretty good. It comes from the New York Times. Mark, you might have a slightly different take on it, but

Media Misses: It’s a travesty how criminal defendant Trump pushes “law and order”

It’s not a “complicated relationship” with police – it’s an exploitative one

Today’s Media Misses video looks at a New York Times story about how Donald Trump – facing 88 felony counts – pushes a law-and-order message. But it’s not ironic. It’s just dishonest.

Watch our conversation below:

Media Misses pairs me with

, author of the outstanding  newsletter. Consider subscribing. Also, subscribe to my free newsletter if you haven’t already.

Share

Discussion about this video

You guys were much too generous to the New York Times. That was an absurd story, and the headline was a caricature of the Times' gutless, both-sidesing headline-writing style.

Expand full comment

Well, I would like to have seen the word used in the headline to be "hypocrisy" but nowadays too many trump types seem to take that as a badge of honor.

I am getting tired of people saying they will vote for trump because they feel "isolated" or "unappreciated." Particularly for cops, isn't the way to stop being unappreciated is to police themselves, weed out the "bad apples" whether by firing or desk duty or demotion, and get to a place where those you are hired to protect really believe that's what you are doing? Whatever the union leaders may say (all three of them) do the rank and file really believe in beating up folks? Letting them hit their heads when they enter the cop car because "that'll teach them?"

I can understand that cops may make mistakes, resulting in unwarranted shootings. I don't have any trouble letting them continue if they admit it was a mistake and take whatever penalties there are for actual negligence.

And obviously, all mistakes aren't negligence. Some are just mistakes. If this were the consistent approach to truly mistaken shootings or beatings, maybe the public would be less incensed when a kid gets shot after wielding a toy gun in bad lighting.

"Defund the police" was a really, really unfortunate slogan. Virtually everyone who used it meant "reallocate funds" so that cops would be relieved of having to respond to things that others were in a better position, with better training, to handle. I should think your basic cop would PREFER that model.

Expand full comment

I really appreciate that you write/speak about headlines and word choices!

Expand full comment