The USA Today editorial board deliberately used a misleading statement against President Trump as a basis for a scathing attack.
The newspaper’s editors made the statement:
“A president who’d all but call a senator a whore is unfit to clean toilets in Obama’s presidential library or to shine George W. Bush’s shoes.”
The false imagery of Trump implying a female senator was “a whore” is based on a tweet the President made after attacking comments from New York junior Senator Kirsten Gillibrand:
The statement from the President does not actually use any kind of sexually oriented language when examined truthfully through the filter of past political rhetoric.
The statement made is one that has been made for decades toward politicians who come to large donors and make promises of using their political clout on behalf of that financial benefactor.
The same language used in reference to a male senator would not have been given the accusations of sexual tones that the USA Today wants to imply because truthful inspection of the statement would show it to be similar to previous statements that refer to politicians offering their clout for money.
The USA Today editorial board is in itself showing a sexist slant in their actions because they are downplaying the idea that Senator Gillibrand could be offering to wield political power for money the same as ANY OTHER ELECTED FEDERAL OFFICIAL.
The USA Today editorial board, in their actions falsely claiming Trump’s statement was sexual in tone, is saying that Gillibrand is somehow a special case and therefore not subjected to the same motivations for obtaining financial support for her political endeavors.
In essence, the USA Today editorial board is saying that Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is unlike the 1,971 other men and women who have held a seat in the history of the U.S. Senate.
You cannot back with facts the USA Today Editorial Board’s assertion this one particular female Senator is immune from the historically backed original meaning of the words in Trump’s statement just to ride a wave of accusations against men of improper sexual statements or actions.
Thus, their basing an editorial on that position is a deliberate and calculated attempt to deceive the American people and to promote Democratic party propaganda on the pages of their newspaper.
Now, because this is an editorial and not “hard news”, the USA Today can claim that they’re free to be as biased as they want to be and to twist the truth of any situation to promote their particular agenda for or against a President, elected official or candidate for public office.
The USA Today also claims their editorial board is not connected at all to their news reporting, which you as a reader can either believe or not believe based on what credibility you think the USA Today has established in the marketplace.