In an op-ed published by The Washington Post, A.G. Sulzberger, publisher of The New York Times, suggested that the Orange Man What Is Bad™ poses a unique threat to the free press similar to that of authoritarian leaders in countries such as India, Hungary, Brazil, and others.

“If Trump follows through on promises to continue that campaign in a second term, his efforts would likely be informed by his open admiration for the ruthlessly effective playbook of authoritarians such as Orban, whom Trump recently met with at Mar-a-Lago and praised as ’a smart, strong, and compassionate leader.’ Trump’s running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, recently voiced similar praise of Orban: ‘He’s made some smart decisions there that we could learn from in the United States.’ One of the intellectual architects of the Republican agenda, Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts, asserted that Orban’s Hungary was ‘not just a model for conservative statecraft, but the model.’”

In the piece, Sulzberger acknowledged that previous presidents have bristled under media scrutiny. “No American political leader likes the scrutiny of the media or has a perfect record on press freedom. Every president since the country’s founding has complained about the pesky questions of reporters who seek to keep the public informed,” he wrote.

However, the author then argued that Trump’s constant attacks on the media are somehow a signal that he intends to crack down on the press if he is elected. “Trump pledged last year: ‘The LameStream Media will be thoroughly scrutinized for their knowingly dishonest and corrupt coverage of people, things, and events,’” he wrote.

The notion that Trump’s justified criticism of the media’s extreme left-wing bias somehow means he plans to use government against them is silly on its face. As the author acknowledged, other presidents have done the same – and even worse to stop journalists from scrutinizing them. Saying mean words about reporters is not the same as weaponizing the state against them.

The reality is that journalism continued to thrive under Trump. They were allowed to spew lie after lie and peddle false narratives about the former president and his supporters without fear of retribution. Even Trump’s own lawsuits against media outlets have been largely unsuccessful.

Yet, the author even tries to frame this as evidence that Trump will crack down on the press. “Trump recognizes that even a losing lawsuit can help his cause by making journalists’ lives miserable,” Sulzberger wrote.

This is another ridiculous assertion. None of the lawsuits stopped the press from reporting critically on his administration. Moreover, Trump, along with other Americans, are within their rights to seek redress from the courts if they believe they have been wronged.

Sulzberger also fretted about Trump’s argument that the government should stop funding propaganda outlets like PBS and NPR.

“For years, Trump has expressed interest in using federal funding and the tax code to punish institutions he doesn’t approve of, including public media such as PBS and NPR. His Department of Homeland Security proposed strict caps on foreign-journalist visas, with extensions potentially depending on whether immigration officers approved of a reporter’s work. His serial displeasure with The Post led him to threaten owner Jeff Bezos’s other business interests, attempting to upend Amazon’s shipping arrangement with the U.S. Postal Service and impede its defense contracting.”

This raises an important question: So what?

Many have advocated for cutting funding to these organizations. For starters, the state should not be using taxpayer funds to prop up any news outlet – especially those that clearly have a political agenda. The state is not obligated to pour money into any of these operations, so cutting funding isn’t exactly the widespread attack on the free press that Sulzberger is predicting.

The entire op-ed amounts to little more than mindless fearmongering aimed at painting Trump as a wannabe dictator. Trump will always criticize the media because they deserve it. They have gone far beyond trying to speak truth to power and expose government corruption. Much of the press, for all intents and purposes, has become a propaganda arm of the Democratic Party. Until this changes, the criticism will not abate – and it shouldn’t.