After the news broke that Republican headquarters in Orange County, North Carolina was firebombed, a friend of mine sarcastically quipped on Facebook “The only reasonable explanation is that this was done by some Trump supporters fueled by his hateful rhetoric.”
He was joking – but when it comes to liberalism, our parody is their reality. As Newsbusters reported, that was actually what CNN ended up taking from the act of political terrorism: According to authorities “Nazi Republicans get out of town or else” was spray-painted on a building close to the attack, but that didn’t stop CNN’s Brian Stelter from concluding Donald Trump’s “over heated rhetoric” was what caused the attack.
During a segment on CNN’s Newsroom, the panel Stelter was on was discussing the recent series of death threats being received by an Arizona newspaper. “So the Arizona Republic getting so many death threats over an endorsement is an example of how over heated the rhetoric is,” Stelter then pivoted, “Another example out of North Carolina today, the firebombing of a local GOP office.”
“We have no idea who has done this. We don’t know if it’s a Republican, a Democrat, a movement. No idea. Could be some core of extremists, some sort of radical,” Stelter rambled on. But according to a report by The Hill, two hours before Stelter was on air, authorities found the graffiti labeling local Republicans as Nazis. That’s not really a term Republicans like to call each other oddly enough, it’s usually a term flung by the left.
“But that kind of action is unacceptable,” Stelter stated before setting his sights on Trump. “And we need to have the temperature come down on all sides right now,” he opined, “Unfortunately, Donald Trump is the lead in terms of raising the temperature at this moment in time.”
The acts of political violence carried out by Donald Trump supporters this election cycle have been minuscule in comparison to the reverse. Who knew that acts of violence in both directions were Trump’s fault? When it comes to campaign violence, CNN is playing a game where the rules are “heads we win, tails you lose.”
[Note: This post was written by The Analytical Economist]