Safe to say President Trump is not happy with The Washington Post. Or, as he called it, “The Washington Compost”. Talk-radio hosts have used that term a bunch.
The President’s bone that he’s picking? The Post ran a story suggesting the President blew up at his Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. The paper’s story headlining:
Trump, Hegseth clashed at Camp David over Iran missile depletion concerns
The sub-head:
At a Camp David summit this weekend, President Trump demanded answers from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over extreme munitions shortages.
The President took to the cyber pages of his Truth Social site to refute this, saying:
“The Fake News, as usual, is spreading false and completely unfounded rumors. I am extremely happy with the job that Pete Hegseth is doing. Everything has been extraordinary, including our attack on Venezuela, where the result was accomplished in less than one day, allowing us to bring one of the worst criminals anywhere in the World, Nicolas Maduro, to Justice! Likewise, Iran, where the country has been decimated for the purpose of NOT ALLOWING IT TO EVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON, is going very well! Pete is highly respected within the Military, and has made tremendous improvements, including getting rid of DEI, and increasing recruitment to historic levels. This rumor was started by The Washington ComPost, one of the worst Media Outlets in the business, despite our telling them their story is completely FALSE. In actuality, I really believe their fake "reporting" is treasonous!”
In essence? This is but the latest example of a media outlet - in this case a media outlet that cannot abide the President - running with a story the President says un-equivocally is- (in his capital letters)- “FALSE.”
The President didn’t stop there, either. As noted above, his very last sentence in his statement was, “In actuality, I really believe their fake ‘reporting’ is treasonous!”
Well now. There’s no pulling punches with that presidential statement, is there? In fact, its just another day and another headline from a media outlet that famously can’t stand the President and has zero intention of correcting any story seen by the subjects of the story -- the President in this case -- as glaringly inaccurate.
You're supposed to just trust their sources without having the slightest clue who they are. We're just told they're "people familiar with the conversation, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity due to fear of retaliation."
Then there was this headline jewel from the Post: "Under Trump, 90% of ambassador nominations have gone to political supporters". That story breathlessly reported:
“More than any other president in recent history, Donald Trump is relying on wealthy donors and political loyalists rather than career diplomats to fill ambassadorships, a Washington Post analysis found."
Oh the horror. A President who fills ambassadorial posts with political donors. Hmmm. Not mentioned?
Along with the very, very long history of Presidents appointing wealthy donor to Ambassadorships, does the name “Kennedy” ring any bells?
Yes, Kennedy.
For whatever reason The Post does not recall that the self-same family that would later produce the 35th President of the United States, an Attorney General, three United States Senators and a few members of the House got its seriously national political start in 1938 when President Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, appointed to an Ambassadorship a wealthy Democrat donor/businessman with no diplomatic experience whatever. The Ambassadorship in question was to the United Kingdom. And recall that this came about as World War II loomed, making this particular Ambassadorship appointment a highly sensitive one. The businessman/donor’s name was, of course, Joseph P. Kennedy.
And oh yes. On the GOP side? In the 1960’s there was a wealthy Houston, Texas businessman who, after a quick term in Congress was appointed by President Richard Nixon to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. He went on to serve, before the U.S. official recognition of China, as the “Chief of the Liaison Office to the People’s Republic of China”, followed by time as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. The appointee in question, of course, would be George H.W. Bush.
All of which is to say that the executive branch of the American governmental system is frequently run by American businessmen who initially come to some high-level job without previously holding any position other than being a big donor to their political party of choice.
The only people this upsets are, no shock here, those who spend their professional lives as “careerists” -- moving up through the career diplomatic or governmental ranks. Starting with appointment to a low-or-mid-level government job and slowly rising through the ranks. And, in the end, having little to no private sector experience at all.
Suffice to say, when you get to the core of The Washington Post’s complaint it is that neither President Trump or Secretary Hegseth have spent their professional lives in government jobs. They are, to say the least, not “careerists”. Which is, politically speaking, a capital offense to all of the Washington Establishment.
So in other words? The President’s “zing” targeting The Post is just another round of the ongoing battle between private sector appointees and the Washington government careerists, whether actually in the government or outside it. But still part of the careerist mentality. Safe to say, there will be more of this in the Trump term. And for that matter? If President Trump’s successor ends up being a non-Washington careerist, the battle between the next non-careerist President and the Washington Establishment media will go on.
Count on it.
