The national news media has lost its mind and gone hysterical over #MuslimBan.
Forget that it's not a "Muslim ban" but instead an order to halt immigration from seven Middle Eastern countries, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia. Forget that President Obama and President Bush and President Clinton and President Other Bush and President Reagan and President Carter all issued executive orders limiting immigration from one country or another. And forget (if you can) that Cher is very angry about the whole situation.
The liberal media, those outlets that sometimes masquerade as presenting "real" news but which are in fact just biased agencies pumping out propaganda for sycophants, are running wild with the story, always sure to include "Muslim Ban" is their needled-up headlines.
Googling "Muslim Ban" -- a term that clearly signals Trump has banned people on the basis of their religion, a charge that is completely false and easily discernable by reading the 2,853-word executive order -- brings up a slew of hits. What's most fascinating is that the "journalists" typing the term know full well that it's false, but do it anyway.
So let's take a quick look at who's using the inaccurate term.
The New York Times -- "Donald Trump’s Muslim Ban Is Cowardly and Dangerous." Yes, seriously. And the paper even says "The document does not explicitly mention any religion...." So, how is it a Muslim ban? Fuhgeddaboutit.
The Guardian -- "The Muslim ban has brought the US close to constitutional crisis." Oh those excitable Brits. In a story about the "Muslim ban," writer Trevor Timm actually called Steve Bannon a white nationalist -- in the lede! top that, Americans!
Huffington Post -- "Trump’s Muslim Ban Brings U.S. To Edge Of Constitutional Crisis." Arianna must've told her boys that she liked the Guardian's headline.
NBC News -- "Trump’s Muslim ban & the backlash." Maybe Brian Williams will report on his hardships of being Muslim.
Time -- "Trump's Muslim Ban: New York Muslims Grateful for Protests." The liberal mag must have had at least one honest editors, because clicking on the link brings readers to a story headline: "New York Muslims Encouraged by Mass Support as Thousands Protest Trump's Immigration Ban."
New York Daily News -- "President Trump's Muslim ban excludes countries linked to his sprawling business empire." That was another red herring the MSM threw out there, along with allegations that the ban didn't target countries copnnected with the 9-11 attacks because Trump is soft on Saudis.
Rolling Stone -- "Inside the Huge JFK Airport Protest Over Trump's Muslim Ban." The rag mag cites "opposition to President Trump's executive order to effectively ban Muslims from entering the United States," although the ban does no such thing.
Boston Herald -- "Boston judges issue order halting Trump's Muslim ban." Boston strong!
AOL -- "Trump's Muslim ban excludes Muslim countries linked to his business empire." America offline.
Every editor who types the term "Muslim ban" knows -- or should know -- that Trump's executive order is no such thing. To do so is the height of shoddy journalism. With fake news running rampant, no wonder Trump won.