Is there actually a Trump tape of him saying the “N-Word”? DOESN”T MATTER!
The press has been in full consumption about the possibility that a tape exists that the President uttered a particular racial epithet. This springs off of the claims made by the previously-derided-but-currently-deified book hawker Omarosa Manigault Newman. CNN, for one, is in full Malaysian airliner mode, approaching fifty stories posted and broadcast news segments surrounding Newman — just in the past few days.
In a sign of abject self-aware obliviousness, the news titan has declared that Trump is the one obsessed with the story.
Omarosa is a woman proven to be a questionable source, but that has not stopped the media from pumping and pimping the story of the President saying a racist term on tape. What is remarkable about this is two glaring factors: No one in the media possesses evidence of this tape, and there is only one person — Omarosa — stating this recording even exists. Yet, while the Peter Strzok firing was announced on Monday CNN has run dozens of stories concerning Omarosa.
Vox, the esteemed explainer web portal, has taken a new position on ethics. In a very lengthy piece on the non-matter Anna North details the possible GOP reaction to a possible n-word tape. That is, she writes at length about what Republicans MIGHT say in response to the POSSIBLE existence of this tape. Vox now becomes our source for definitive speculation on hypothetical reactions to theorized evidence!
The entirety of this all hinges on a lone source making the claim that a tape exists of President Trump saying the n-word. That is it. No one is in possession of such a tape. No one has heard the quote in question. But the media is in full throat over what is being dubbed “The N-Word Controversy”. The reason the press feels justified is purely circumstantial evidence was ferreted out. In the past journalists would have been embarrassed and shamed for running with details this opaque.
When the matter of the tape’s possible existence was brought up during the White House press briefing Sarah Sanders answered a loaded question, and her non-denial sparked headlines. The inquiry she fielded was so broadly framed that it seemed designed to generate outrage:
“Can you… guarantee to the American people that they’ll never hear Donald Trump utter the n-word on the recording, in any context?”
Sanders replied, “I can’t guarantee anything.” That sent the news nets into overdrive, suggesting the White House was unable to deny Trump spoke the nefarious word! But look at the wide absolutes she was presented in the question. She was asked to “guarantee”, that we would “never” hear what someone else may say, in “any” context. No sane person would have answered that minefield-laden question in any other fashion. Oliver Darcy, taking a break from staking out Alex Jones’ home, blasted out what was his network’s interpretation of Sanders’ comment.
CNN chyron right now: "WH: 'CANNOT GUARANTEE' TAPE WON'T REVEAL TRUMP USING N-WORD"
— Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) August 14, 2018
Not only does this misrepresent her words, note that it presumes the existence of this tape — that no one has heard. Why is there all of this hyperventilating conjecture about a recording? Because the press is trying to will it into existence.
While in her role in the administration Omarosa went on what has to be regarded as an evidence-gathering spree. She began recording conversations, and reaching out to staff in a manner seeming to generate specific conversations. One of those talks involved speaking to Katrina Pierson, and Lynne Patton. There was at least one conference call where they discuss this tape of the President possibly existed, supposedly deriving from a recording of “The Apprentice”. The ensuing discussion was one of managing the story, should such a tape end up surfacing.
This has led to a supposed “gotcha” in the press. In her book Omarosa declared Pierson had been involved in the call, and Pierson had denied such. Omarosa has since produced a recording where Pierson is heard saying, “I am trying to find out at least what context it was used in to help us maybe try to figure out a way to spin it.” What this reveals is a staff preparing the messaging, if such a tape were to ever surface.
Lynne Patton, working in the administration HUD department, has come out with a lengthy statement that disputes each and every claim made about this tape. Omarosa had named Bill Pruit, producer of “The Apprentice”, as the source who had the tape, and reputedly played it for Omarosa to hear. Patton states that Patton is a mutual friend, and has told her he was never in possession of such a tape.
Now, it would be no different for me to state that Patton’s words are entirely accurate, given she is also a lone source. However in a case of conflicting claims like this one thing should rise to the fore: the evidence. And to this point there is none. It is Omarosa’s contention, and that is the extent of the “proof”. The media seems at ease with blasting wild accusations and producing multiple headlines — based solely on the comments of a woman desiring to sell a book.
This is our contemporary media. Things like multiple sources and the gathering of hard evidence became archaic story-standards that have been dispatched. Rumor and conjecture now qualify as enough content for those journalists offended by the charge of “fake news” to make reports. Consider how ridiculous this is; the outlet offended by anyone suggesting they are biased, and run false stories, has gone ahead with DOZENS of reports about a recording nobody has heard.
Other outlets are contemplating on the possible reaction of an entire political party based on what might happen if a rumored recording manages to turn up. This is the kind of behavior that would shame a journalist one generation ago. As modern reporters have revealed, shame is no longer part of journalism’s skill set.