The following is satirical.
Media pundits seem to be discovering the hidden charms of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Ever since President Donald Trump arranged for the erasure of the ISIS leader, press anti-Trumpers seem to be asking themselves: If Trump ordered him killed, can he really have been so bad?
The Washington Post, where Democracy dies strangling on hatred after taking a heavy dose of mindless venom, called the terrorist leader an “austere religious scholar,” and blamed the United States invasion of Iraq for distracting this “academic” from his intention to live a “quiet life as a professor of Islamic law.”
Never Trumper Max Boot, meanwhile, objected to President Trump calling the austere scholar a coward saying, after all, the terrorist had been brave enough to blow himself and three children to smithereens.
I’ve prayed God would allow me to wake up in a world where I’m making all that up, but so far no dice. I haven’t even gotten to the satire part yet.
We can now look forward to articles from, say, The New York Times, a former newspaper, praising al-Baghdadi for his wistful appreciation of female beauty, and maybe Chuck Todd will chime in on al-Baghdadi’s artistic camera work as he made videos of innocent people being beheaded in order to recruit more austere scholars to his cause of slaughtering everybody in sight.
There was, of course, also al-Baghdadi’s fabulous fashion sense which led MSNBC to offer him a hosting spot on their new show “Muslim Eye for the Christian Guy,” which has now unfortunately been canceled due to Trump’s brutal indifference to fostering really good TV.
Meanwhile, McCarthyite Congressman Adam Schiff is whining because Trump didn’t inform him of the operation ahead of time. Trump said he worried Schiff would leak the mission to the press. But Schiff said that was absurd, according to anonymous sources on the Intelligence Committee who spoke with the Times.