It’s amazing how similar events, or “offenses,” are treated based on the party of the person committing them. When Donald Trump does something that upsets the sensibilities of liberal journalists, or they think they can get some mileage out of pretending they’re upset, it gets non-stop coverage. When it’s a Democrat, it might as well not have happened. Consider the case of the “Trump chant” vs. the situational deafness of Kamala Harris.
It was the chant heard ‘round the world – “Send her back!” When the crowd at a Trump rally in North Carolina chanted it about anti-Semitic alleged homewrecker Ilhan Omar, it was national news. For a week, cable news hosts expressed outrage at how the president could have allowed the chant to continue for “13 seconds!”
That’s right, 13 whole seconds.
That’s not a lot of time, but when you’re made aware of it, it can seem like it. And “journalists” wanted people to be aware of it. CNN ran the footage with a counter on the screen. As if that weren’t enough, two of the dumbest people to ever read a teleprompter – Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo – reenacted the silence on air. It was the smartest thing either has ever said.
Missing from all the coverage was a few simple truths.
First, 13 seconds is nothing at a rally. The president was derided for saying he quieted the crowd by resuming speaking as soon as he heard what the crowd was chanting. It’s true. When crowds at other rallies chanted “Lock her up” or “CNN sucks,” the president gleefully peacocked around the stage, reveling the energy of the venue. That didn’t happen in North Carolina.
Recommended
Second, why assume the president heard the chant from the moment the cameras did? If you’ve ever been at a sporting event where the crowd starts taunting a ref, umpire, or player, it’s not easy to understand a crowd when a chant first starts. It has to be repeated several times and spread to a large percentage of the people before you really know what they’re saying.
The cameras at the Trump rally were well in the back of the venue, with mics attached to them to get the ambient noise of the crowd. The mics picked up the chant from the back of the crowd long before the president could make it out over the natural noise of the event.
All of this is irrelevant because who cares if a few liberals on TV clutched their pearls over a chant at a political rally? They clutch their pearls so often and so hard that their hands are fused to them, like the fat guy who grows into his easy chair.
It’s only relevant when you compare the reaction to it to the reporting surrounding 2020 Democratic hopeful Kamala Harris and her convenient deafness the other day.
A man in New Hampshire, after a mini-monologue, asked Harris, “What are you going to do in the next one year to diminish the mentally retarded action of this guy?”
The word “retarded” has been shadow banned since at least the '90s. Being a good Democrat, Harris should have chastised the man immediately and moved on. She didn’t.
Rather than calling out the man, Harris laughed along with the crowd and responded, “Well said, well said,” then gave him an answer. This would be the end of a Republican’s campaign, but Harris is a Democrat.
In an interview the next day, Harris apologized and claimed she hadn’t heard the comment, which is as believable as saying JFK committed suicide. He spoke them into a microphone, the crowd and candidate laughed at the moment it would’ve been a punchline, and she answered the question. If this were Donald Trump, rather than a Democrat mocking Donald Trump, all presses across the country would’ve been ordered stopped as the networks broke into programming to inform the world of the latest awful, horrible, insensitive, mean-spirited, racist, sexist (these last 2 are just Pavlovian responses of leftists) the president was involved in.
But Harris is a Democrat, so the Washington Post story on the event read, “Harris apologizes after seeming to agree that Trump’s policies are ‘mentally retarded.’” (Emphasis added.)
Seeming to? She laughed, praised his comment, then answered the question. Are cautious politicians known for recklessly answering questions they only heard part of? Of course not. But when you’ve committed an offense against the woke army, even the generals will lie to protect themselves.
It is very easy to ask, “What if Trump had done it?” But sometimes it has to be asked. And every single time it is, the answer is clear: there are two sets of rules, one for Republicans and none for Democrats.
Derek is the host of a free daily podcast (subscribe!) and author of the book, Outrage, INC., which exposes how liberals use fear and hatred to manipulate the masses.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member