AP featured image
President Donald Trump smiles at Mount Rushmore National Memorial, Friday, July 3, 2020, near Keystone, S.D. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

——-

As several of my RedState colleagues noted over the weekend, the unhinged media/Democrat reactions to President Trump’s stirring Mount Rushmore speech from Friday were both predictable and annoying at the same time.

But perhaps the most annoying and predictable of them all was the response to it from CNN editor-at-large Chris Cillizza, who was so fauxfended over Trump’s remarks that he wrote an entire piece detailing what he called the “28 most outrageous lines” from Trump’s speech.

Here are some of the more noteworthy examples he cited of the “outrageous” nature of Trump’s speech:

2. “I am here as your President to proclaim, before the country and before the world, this monument will never be desecrated.”

5. “Angry mobs are trying to tear down statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials, and unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities.”

6. “Many of these people have no idea why they are doing this, but some know exactly what they are doing.”

10. “This left-wing cultural revolution is designed to overthrow the American Revolution.”

22. “Their goal is not a better America. Their goal is to end America.”

23. “For the sake of our honor, for the sake of our children, for the sake of our union, we must protect and preserve our history, our heritage, and our great heroes.”

Imagine thinking any of those lines from Trump’s speech are “outrageous” or in need of fact checking.

But this is Chris Cillizza we’re talking about here, the guy who once infamously proclaimed that reporters “don’t root for a side. Period.” And yet here he is, rooting for a side. Or rather, in this instance, against one.

A Twitter user who goes by the name “Destructive Chemistry” tweeted out a lengthy Twitter thread dissecting Cillizza’s piece by providing the context of Trump’s remarks that Cillizza conveniently left out. The reasons why he left out the context will become more obvious the more you read the tweets. Here are a few of them:

Read the full thread here. It was a really good line-by-line deconstructing of Cillizza’s attempt at discrediting what Trump had to say.

What the thread boiled down to was pointing out in so many words that what the media most disliked about Trump’s speech was the fact that it was given by Trump, was patriotic, and pulled no punches about the current fight over preserving our history in order to learn from it versus trying to erase/cancel it altogether – along with anyone who disagrees with the mob. Had Obama given an identical speech, they would have applauded and fawned like fangirls.

It’s really a shame that the mainstream media has been reduced to claiming that a speech that should be considered as inarguably one of the most pro-America speeches Trump has ever given was actually deeply flawed and anti-American.

Rooting against America and American exceptionalism because Orange Man Bad. It’s sad, but it’s who they are now.

Sister Toldjah
North Carolina-based Sister Toldjah, a former liberal, has been writing about media bias, social issues, and the culture wars since 2003. Follow her on Parler here.
Read more by Sister Toldjah