Trump’s criticism of press speaks volumes about him

For years, a complacent press covered Donald J. Trump in haphazard fashion, first as an oddity, then as a political phenomenon. Reporters rarely asked a tough question or challenged his increasingly bizarre contention that he would “make America great again” through his unparalleled powers of persuasion and finely honed skills as a negotiator.

And Trump loved it. He even bragged about all the free press he was getting and how it allowed him to spend less on his campaign than his Republican opponents. His ability to use the press was, he implied, yet another indication of his brilliance and business acumen.

But as his free-spending opponents fell by the wayside, it began to dawn on editors and reporters that Trump was more than a novelty act. Against all odds, he had emerged as a contender, and then as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.

The reporters responded by starting to ask serious questions about Trump, his policies and his behavior. Mr. Trump was not amused. And in recent weeks his lack of amusement has taken a vicious and alarming trend.

On May 31 he called a news conference to address an issue that reporters – especially David Fahrenthold from the Washington Post – had been asking about for months: What happened to the $6 million that he said he had raised in January and had promised to distribute to veterans organizations?

It was a more-than-legitimate question. Among the things Trump has bragged about is his ability to get things done by hiring the best people. Why, then, would it take his campaign more than four months to distribute the $1 million that Trump said he would personally pledge and the $5 million that he said others would donate on his behalf?

A week after the Washington Post ran its story reporting that Trump had not distributed the proceeds of his February media event to veteran groups, Trump held his press conference. He produced a list of charitable groups to which $5.6 million had finally been delivered, but in the process painted himself as the victim of an “unbelievably dishonest” press that would have the temerity to question his intentions. And, of course, it wouldn’t be a Trump press conference without him making it personal, calling an ABC TV reporter “a sleaze,” for instance.

Fascinating insight

The incident provides a fascinating insight into the Trump personality. He feels free to accuse reporters and judges of bias, he’s comfortable denigrating opponents with sophomoric nicknames, he can label anyone who doesn’t match his arbitrary standard of success as a “loser,” and yet when somebody says, “show us the money,” Trump paints himself as a victim.

It is one thing to dislike press scrutiny. Richard Nixon had his vice president, Spiro Agnew, attack reporters as “nattering nabobs of negativism” and his White House put together an enemies list that included a number of journalists. It was the beginning of a movement aimed at branding the press as liberal elites who couldn’t be trusted and it has been exceedingly successful in some quarters over the last 46 years.

But just as Trump has shown himself to be tone deaf in so many ways, his contempt for the press belies a misunderstanding of the adversarial relationship that should exist between reporters and those who are in power or seek to be in power. He doesn’t have to like the tension, but he should respect it.

Almost 230 years ago, Thomas Jefferson wrote that if he had to choose between government without newspapers and newspapers without government, he would choose the latter. Jefferson recognized that a free and unfettered press was the natural enemy of politicians who were more interested in exerting power than in governing.

By contrast, Trump has said a number of times and in a number of ways that he believes the press is too hard on him.

Trump has taken particular issue with The New York Times and The Washington Post, saying that when he’s president. “they’ll have problems.” He’s also said that if he’s elected, “I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.”