\n
<\/p>\n
U.S. President Donald Trump has a long and well-documented history of launching incendiary rhetorical attacks against the press and his political opponents. But rights groups warn that the president\u2019s anti-free speech crusade reached an alarming and dangerous new level this week, raising grave concerns about the potentially rippling consequences for reporters and freedom of expression more generally.<\/p>\n
Since last Friday alone, U.S. President Donald Trump called a female reporter \u201cpiggy<\/a>,\u201d lambasted another reporter for questions that she asked during his meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and appeared to endorse the idea that congressional Democrats should be executed over public statements they made encouraging U.S. troops to uphold their oath to the Constitution and refuse any unlawful orders.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n U.S. President Donald Trump has a long and well-documented history of launching incendiary rhetorical attacks against the press and his political opponents. But rights groups warn that the president\u2019s anti-free speech crusade reached an alarming and dangerous new level this week, raising grave concerns about the potentially rippling consequences for reporters and freedom of expression more generally.<\/p>\n Since last Friday alone, U.S. President Donald Trump called a female reporter \u201cpiggy<\/a>,\u201d lambasted another reporter for questions that she asked during his meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and appeared to endorse the idea that congressional Democrats should be executed over public statements they made encouraging U.S. troops to uphold their oath to the Constitution and refuse any unlawful orders.<\/p>\n \u201cPresident Donald Trump\u2019s comments this week marked a new low for an administration that has routinely shown contempt for the truth or facts. Berating and demeaning journalists for doing their job\u2014asking questions\u2014is the action of a playground bully not a head of state. It is not \u2018frankness<\/a>,\u2019 as Karoline Leavitt argued, it is behavior meant to intimidate, humiliate and demean,\u201d Jodie Ginsberg, the CEO of the Committee to Protect Journalists, told Foreign Policy<\/em>. <\/p>\n \u201cSmearing journalists creates an environment in which others feel free to harass and attack them and makes all reporters less safe,\u201d Ginsberg said. \u201cNews organizations and politicians on all sides of the political spectrum should be denouncing such actions loudly.\u201d<\/p>\n During Trump\u2019s meeting<\/span> with Mohammed bin Salman at the White House on Tuesday, the U.S. president called ABC News\u2019s Mary Bruce a \u201cterrible reporter\u201d and \u201cinsubordinate\u201d for asking the Saudi leader a legitimate question about the brutal murder of Washington Post<\/em> journalist Jamal Khashoggi. While taking issue with other questions that Bruce asked, Trump also threatened ABC\u2019s broadcast license in addition to lobbing insults at her.<\/p>\n A declassified U.S. intelligence assessment released under the Biden administration concluded that Mohammed bin Salman had approved the operation that led to Khashoggi\u2019s killing and dismemberment at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October 2018.<\/p>\n Though Khashoggi once had close ties with the Saudi royal family, he eventually went into self-imposed exile after he began to publicly criticize the crown prince\u2019s policies, including his approach to the war in Yemen. Khashoggi\u2019s killing sparked outcry around the world and was seen as an egregious assault on freedom of the press. Along these lines, Bruce asked Mohammed bin Salman, who was visiting Washington for the first time since 2018, why Americans should trust him.<\/p>\n Trump, who has previously bragged<\/a> about shielding the crown prince from retribution over Khashoggi\u2019s killing, jumped in to answer the question and once again stood by the Saudi leader. Contradicting the U.S. intelligence finding on the matter, Trump said Mohammed bin Salman \u201cknew nothing\u201d about Khashoggi\u2019s killing. Trump went on to denigrate Khashoggi<\/a>, calling him \u201csomebody that was extremely controversial\u201d and saying that a \u201clot of people didn\u2019t like\u201d him, before brushing off his killing by saying, \u201cThings happen.\u201d<\/p>\n While the insults that Trump has hurled toward journalists in recent days are part of a pattern of behavior that should not be ignored, Ginsberg said that the president\u2019s \u201cassertion that Prince Mohammed had nothing to do with the murder of reporter Jamal Khashoggi\u2014directly contradicting his own intelligence service findings\u2014 is even more chilling.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIt shows contempt for the facts, not just those who seek to uncover and report them,\u201d Ginsberg added.<\/p>\n Similarly, the National Press Club said<\/a> in a statement that it was \u201cdeeply troubled\u201d by Trump\u2019s remarks on Khashoggi\u2019s murder while emphasizing that for reporters around the globe, statements from powerful leaders such as the president \u201cthat appear to minimize or excuse the killing of a journalist have real-world consequences\u201d and can \u201cembolden those who wish to silence reporters.\u201d<\/p>\n In another attack<\/span> on freedom of expression, Trump this week appeared to endorse violence against a group of congressional Democrats who released a video<\/a> urging members of the U.S. military and intelligence community to disobey unlawful orders.<\/p>\n \u201cThis administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens,\u201d the lawmakers said in the video, which came at a time when Trump\u2019s immigration crackdown and deployment of U.S. troops in major cities face legal challenges and public pushback.<\/p>\n Trump, who railed against the video in posts on Truth Social, said<\/a> it was \u201cseditious behavior, punishable by DEATH!\u201d The president, who in recent months has accused the left of inciting political violence in the United States following the assassination of Charlie Kirk<\/a>, also reshared posts<\/a> from Truth Social users suggesting that these Democrats should be hanged.<\/p>\n Though the White House denied that Trump was calling for lawmakers to be executed, and the president said<\/a> on Friday that he was not \u201cthreatening death,\u201d his comments have raised serious alarm.<\/p>\n \u201cThe President of the United States just called for Democratic members of Congress to be executed,\u201d Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy wrote<\/a> on X. \u201cIf you\u2019re a person of influence in this country and you haven\u2019t picked a side, maybe now would be the time to pick a fucking side.\u201d<\/p>\n Meanwhile, congressional Republicans have been fairly muted in their reaction to Trump\u2019s attacks on Democrats this week. House Speaker Mike Johnson defended Trump<\/a>, stating that he was responding to \u201cwildly inappropriate\u201d behavior from Democrats. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky was more critical, stating<\/a> that he doesn\u2019t think it\u2019s \u201ca good idea to talk about jailing your political opponents or hanging them or whatever else.\u201d Paul said that political disagreements should be worked out \u201cin a political way.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThat kind of rhetoric isn\u2019t good and it stirs up people among us who may not be stable who may think well \u2018traitors,\u2019 what do we do with traitors? It\u2019s the death penalty. Maybe I\u2019ll just take matters into my own hands, which is not something we should be encouraging,\u201d Paul said.<\/p>\n Advocacy groups have also spoken out. Steady State, an organization of former U.S. national security professionals, excoriated Trump and said<\/a> that the message sent by the Democratic lawmakers was \u201cnot radical\u201d but rather a clear and calm reflection on the limits of presidential authority and the \u201cobligations of all who swear an oath to the Constitution.\u201d<\/p>\n The group noted that it is long-standing U.S. military doctrine<\/a> that troops must refuse to obey unlawful orders\u2014a principle that was established in the Nuremberg trials<\/a> of Nazi leaders after World War II.<\/p>\n \u201cAccusing elected Members of Congress of \u2018treason\u2019 or \u2018insurrection\u2019 for restating binding military law, misinforms the public, endangers the professional ethics of the armed forces, signals that lawful restraint is now treated as partisan, and creates incentives for abuse of the chain of command. The United States has long relied on a military that is apolitical, professional, and governed by law. Undermining those norms risks real and lasting damage,\u201d Steady State wrote.<\/p>\n The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
\n
\n