Out of left field: Resisting presidential fake news

Michael Dinnocenzo

Presidential “credibility gaps” during the 1960s and ‘70s by Democrat Lyndon Johnson and Republican Richard Nixon have left scars on our democracy.

There is also a legacy of continuing doubts about Congressional enablers who do not challenge excessive executive conduct.
Now, since Jan. 20, 2017, the Presidential “credibility gap” has become a creditability canyon.

It is easy to count dozens of lifetime conservatives and Republicans who are dismayed by the unparalleled – and continuous – falsehoods by Mr. Trump.
Many even wonder whether the 45th president is suffering from some kind of psychological malaise.

Nonetheless, his Republican supporters in Congress say nothing about his abhorrent personal conduct so long as he helps deliver lifetime judges, privileged tax cuts and removal of government regulations (including environmental protections).
One wonders what this President’s supporters say to their children about his personal conduct, exacerbated when he spews venom and falsehoods from the most powerful office in the world.

Recently, a North Shore Long Islander wrote that Trump had “normalized nasty.”

Supreme Court analyst Jeffrey Tobin notes the irony that Justice Kennedy, whose favorite word was “dignity,” left his successor’s nomination “to the least dignified man ever to serve as President.”
But columnist Michelle Goldberg avers that this is worse than aberrant personal conduct by the president: “We have a crisis of democracy, not manners.” The editorial in USA Today (July 2) was: “White House bleeds credibility, one lie at a time.”
The editorial emphasized “Most Americans have come to recognize Trump’s long and sordid abuse of facts. In recent weeks, his falsehoods have come even faster and with greater vigor.

The Post tracked 3,251 false or misleading claims by Trump in his first 500 days. The Toronto Star reported that Trump recently hit a record of 15 lies per day.”
With regard to the earlier Johnson and Nixon “credibility gaps,” a striking judgment comes from a man who had ardently supported the war in Vietnam.

But once he was assigned to the Defense Department and worked on the Pentagon Papers project, Daniel Ellsberg realized it was an act of patriotism to be a whistleblower against Presidential fake news.
Ellsberg said “It was a compliment to the American people that Presidents felt they had to lie to them to get their support, but it was no compliment to the American people that it took them so long to discover they were being lied to.”
The supreme irony is that Mr.Trump accuses everyone else of “fake news,” even while he tweets and speaks falsehoods on nearly a daily basis.
With his nonstop attacks on “mainstream media,” aided by shills like Hannity on Fox, he is totally unmindful of the professionalism of modern journalism. Unlike Trump and Hannity, when newspapers and networks make a mistake, they give a correction.
There are folks who think the media is too critical of Trump. To be sure it is highly critical of him, including the New York Post (front page, July 6) and often The Wall Street Journal. The key matter is that Trump has earned that level of criticism because of his conduct.
A model for confronting Presidential falsehoods and “post-truth” scenarios is by following Ellsberg’s example of providing documented, reliable facts that should inform the judgments of caring citizens.
But while many of Mr. Trump’s supporters don’t like his personal conduct, they support him for other reasons. The challenge is to engage Americans who are self-described independents in addition to not giving up on reaching folks who voted for Donald Trump.
It is important to subscribe to newspapers and magazines that offer the most reliable data for informed political judgments and to share that data with others who are missing it.
Tipping points take time, but, with civility and persistence, even folks in resistance or denial can alter their opinions.

Sheila Krumholz, Center for Responsive Politics, says: “We need to be here building the record so that when the opportunity arises, when people on both sides of the aisle decide that enough is enough, we will have armed them.”
You can hasten the process by reading what life-long conservatives say about Mr. Trump and fake news: Bruce Bartlett, “Truth Matters;” Michael Hayden, “The Assault on Intelligence.”
Other books amplify the need for responsible citizenship: Michael Eric Dyson, “What Truth Sounds Like;” Michael D’Antonio, “The Truth About Trump.” David Cay Johnston, “It’s Even Worse Than You Think.”
Most important, introduce Trump supporters to the book by Jack and Sara Gorman, “Denying to the Grave: Why We Ignore the Facts That Will Save Us.”
Then, try to follow the Gormans’ advice with supporters of Mr. Trump, that “changing minds requires compassion and understanding not disdain.”

Share this Article