The President's Dismissal on Journalist's Murder Signals a Disturbing Development.
“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That was enough for the US president to brush off what is arguably the most infamous murder of a reporter of the last decade – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his disregard toward the press, for the media – and for the facts.
Background Details
The American leader’s dismissal of the killing of well-known reporter Jamal Khashoggi came during a media briefing with the Saudi crown prince, MBS – a man whom the CIA found in a recent assessment had orchestrated the kidnap and killing of the journalist in that year. (Prince Mohammed has rejected accusations.)
The US intelligence services were not the only ones to determine the homicide – which occurred in the Saudi diplomatic building in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old journalist was sedated and cut apart – was approved at the top echelons. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.
Global Reactions
For a short time, governments were in agreement in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The US imposed penalties and visa bans in that year over the killing, although it stopped short of penalizing Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to the US capital seemed to be the final confirmation of that rehabilitation.
White House Remarks
Opponents of the regime had roundly condemned the visit. But what was evident at the presidential residence was more alarming than could have been anticipated. Not only did Trump fete Prince Mohammed but he effectively rewrote history – and then blamed the deceased. The crown prince, Trump claimed when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in direct contradiction to what his nation’s spy agencies concluded previously. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals disliked that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, things happen.”
Pattern of Behavior
This represents a fresh and shameful low for a president who has made little secret of his contempt for the truth – or for the media. Trump has smeared journalists (he called a news network, whose journalist asked the inquiry about the journalist at the media event “fake news”), berated them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his connection with the convicted sex offender financier Jeffrey Epstein), taken legal action against media organizations for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he disapproves of to lose their licenses.
He has pressured veteran news services out of the official briefing group for refusing to use terminology of his choosing, and he has slashed financial support for vital news services at home and crucial free press internationally.
Broader Implications
All of that has created an atmosphere in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the United States, but one in which their victimization – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“incidents occur”) but acceptable (“many individuals disliked that gentleman”).
It is unsurprising that that year was the deadliest year on record for the press in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been documenting this information: a persistent failure to hold those responsible for reporter murders has created a environment without consequences in which journalists’ killers are actually able to escape punishment and so continue to do so.
In no place is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is accountable for the killing of more than 200 journalists in the past two years.
Effect on Society
The impact on the public is deep. Targeting reporters are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our rights to know and on our liberty to live freely and securely.
On Thursday, the Committee to Protect Journalists gathers for its annual International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the identical as my one for Trump: these things may happen. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.