The mainstream media refuses to cease mischaracterizing policies President-elect Donald Trump has proposed to protect America from terrorism, insisting that he plans to “ban all Muslims” from entering the country.
Almost without exception, online, print and television media are describing Trump’s policy as a ban against all Muslims from traveling to the U.S., even though he has repeatedly limited the scope of his proposals to a temporary ban of immigrants traveling from radicalized hot spots in the Middle East.
A Washington Post article with the headline, “Donald Trump is expanding his Muslim ban, not rolling it back,” initially fools the reader into thinking that Trump is broadening his ban to include more Muslim people. However, the facts of the report contradict the headline, when Trump makes his intentions clear: “Here is what I want: extreme vetting.”
Trump’s policy is-and always has been, about reducing the flow of radicalized Muslims into America until a system is in place to better discriminate between peaceful and dangerous visitors. There is currently no formal process in place by which U.S. customs officials might pose questions to refugees meant to investigate their potential for radicalism. This systemic deficiency resulted in 27 “honor killings” by Muslims on American soil in 2015, while 40 refugees have been charged with terrorist-related crimes.
Yet, as the discussion has turned from talks into specifics, hostile journalists continue to be deceptive in their characterizations.
Claire Lampen of Open Mic condemns all Americans that voted for Trump as bigots, “In electing Donald Trump to the presidency, Americans effectively endorsed a ban on Muslims entering the United States…”
NBC News could have found more productive outlets for their time when writer Ari Melber thoroughly researched just how difficult a full Muslim ban would be to execute. Melber went to great lengths interviewing immigration officials and national security experts, who all agreed that such a policy would be a “bureaucratic nightmare.”
And it would be a nightmare-if Trump ever planned to pursue it. But the President-elect has been clear throughout his election that the process has always been about carefully vetting immigrants that originate from historically dangerous countries.
This misinformation campaign started just after the massacre in San Bernardino, California, when Trump’s calls for increased vetting were unspecific and vague.
But like any political candidate seeking to reform an existing law, rhetoric turns to specific policy proposals over time. Trump is on record with Fox News Radio in May 2016 calling for a “temporary ban…until we find out what’s going on.”
Trump is even more specific on his policy following the massacre at an Orlando LGBT nightclub in Orlando perpetrated by a Muslim man. Instead of capitalizing on the fear and hate that some had for Islam at the time, Trump was clear on the meaning of his policy. “It will be lifted, this ban, when as a nation we’re in a position to properly and perfectly screen these people coming into our country.”
Later that summer, reporters tried to get Trump to say that even Muslims from European countries could not emigrate to the U.S. He offered an explanation from Twitter that once again defined his ban as temporary and aimed at troublesome countries. Trump wrote, “We must suspend immigration from regions linked with terrorism until a proven vetting method is in place.”
By August, the republican nominee dismissed accusations that his plans included a religious test for Muslim immigrants by explaining that he was considering an “ideological test” instead. He is also on record numerous times stating that he understands the difference between “peaceful Muslims” and groups like ISIS.
These admissions from Trump and his campaign are not sufficient for media agencies intent on painting him as a Muslim-hater. CNN wrote in July that, “Trump has not once publicly disavowed his original policy proposal to ban all foreign Muslims from the US.”
These unqualified designations, or calling Trump’s policy a ban on Muslims, has continued post-election, despite numerous clarifying statements from Trump, his campaign and Republican Party supporters.
In an NBC Meet the Press interview with Trump’s chief of staff Reince Priebus, Chuck Todd asked if Trump would ever consider a “Muslim registry.”
Priebus responded: ““Look, I’m not going to rule out anything. But, we are not going to have a registry based on religion.”
However, in an intentional misquote to stir up fear and dissatisfaction for Trump, NBC later went to Twitter and only used the first half of Priebus’ response to make it appear that the administration is seriously considering a Muslim registry.
Such misrepresentations are no surprise coming from the Left, in a political culture that is blinded by ultra-sensitivity and political correctness. Trump has tapped into many Americans dissatisfaction with being shamed into censorship.
“People were so upset when I used the word ‘Muslim’: ‘Oh, you can’t use the word “Muslim.”‘ Remember this. And I’m okay with that, because I’m talking territory instead of Muslim.”
Many voters were so fearful of being labeled a racist or a xenophobe that they intentionally lied to pollsters. This radically skewed the polls in favor of Hillary Clinton, resulting in a victory for Trump that shocked the world.
In a country where self-censorship through shame is so powerful that citizens are afraid to publicly proclaim support for a candidate, Americans are certainly tired of this politically correct, apologist culture. Yet the media embraces these attitudes when they call Trump’s policy for improved vetting of immigrants a Muslim ban.
Become a Truth Crusader