Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump, walks out to the stage to greet Republican Vice Presidential Nominee Gov. Mike Pence of Indiana during the third day session of the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Wednesday, July 20, 2016. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

What if Dylann Roof’s Dad Showed Up To a Trump Event?

Two events happened in the news media worth examining in the last twenty-four hours.

First, we discovered Omar Mateen’s father showed up at an event for Hillary Clinton. Not only did he get on stage behind Hillary Clinton at the event, but later he spoke to local news media and was highly critical of Donald Trump.

A terrorist’s father was allowed on stage at a Clinton event.

The second event was watching the news media circle the wagons around Hillary Clinton to protect her. The news media quickly noted that she was not responsible and did not invite Mr. Mateen and that she probably did not know he was there. But the Clinton campaign had to orchestrate the faces on stage with Mrs. Clinton. Perhaps they just thought this man’s name sounded Arabic and it’d be great to contrast with Trump. But Mr. Mateen did not wind up on stage behind Hillary Clinton accidentally and with no notice. Someone allowed it to happen.

Staging of Presidential campaigns in the general election do not happen by accident if only because the Secret Service is involved in protecting the candidate. Staging details are not impromptu events.

That the media dismissed the story outright instead of digging into it is another example of how much more protective the media is of the left than of the right.

Ask yourself this question: what would be the media’s reaction if Dylann Roof’s father showed up at a Trump event and made it on stage? I submit to you that the media would not circle the wagons, dismiss the story, or absolve Donald Trump from blame. We would be in an endless cycle of news stories about the Trump campaign allowing this to happen and what it means and what message is being conveyed.

Consider Trump yesterday. On stage he made an ambiguous statement about second amendment types dealing with Hillary Clinton. The immediate reaction, and admittedly a plausible one, was that Trump was talking about someone shooting Hillary Clinton. But another plausible explanation was second amendment voters turning out en masse to stop Hillary Clinton or the NRA obstructing votes on judges.

To be sure, I suspect Trump was making a flippant, bad, off TelePrompter remark that he should not have. But the media has already given it vastly more attention, and vastly more negative attention, than it did Hillary Clinton claiming James Comey said she did nothing wrong.

I’m not a fan of Trump’s and do not much care to defend him on these things, but let us not delude ourselves into thinking the media treats the parties the same. They don’t. The media is far more likely to give a Democrat the benefit of the doubt than a Republican. More so, the media is far more likely to give other Republicans a pass than Trump.

Yes, part of it is Trump’s own doing. But not all of it. A portion of it is a media predisposed to be hostile to him exercising a lot of charity toward Hillary Clinton and none at all toward Donald Trump.

About the author

Erick Erickson

View all posts