Next News Network

The CNN Newsroom was abuzz on Monday as Jim Acosta smugly discussed former President Donald Trump’s uncomfortable appearance at the Libertarian National Convention. He was joined by the ladies of The View, Ana Navarro and Democratic strategist Maria Cardona, all too eager to put their spin on the situation.

A video clip showed a crowd of Libertarians booing Trump’s speech, which led Acosta to comment on what he described as Trump’s visible unease. He claimed the Trump team had dropped the ball, failing to insulate the former president from a potentially tricky situation.

Regardless of Acosta’s triumphant attitude, this wasn’t an everyday situation for Trump, yes, being a dominating figure, he’s used to rallies and applause, not boos. Trump, undeterred continued the speech, demonstrating a spirit of resilience that many would argue had served him well since his early business days.

Maria Cardona pointed out that Trump seemed taken aback, describing his demeanor as “redder, sweaty, deer in the headlights.” She speculated this was because he wasn’t used to such reactions. She also put forth the notion that Trump’s policies were far removed from the libertarian ethos, alluding to a dictatorial agenda that would target women’s rights and voting rights.

This assertion might seem severe to some, considering that throughout his tenure, Trump repeatedly echoed the phrase ‘Make America Great Again,’ signifying his commitment to a vibrant civilian democracy rather than a dictatorship.

Another guest, Ana Navarro, was keen to emphasize Trump’s supposed discomfort at being away from his MAGA crowd. It seemed all too convenient that the panel focused entirely on Trump’s plastered on grimace, rather than engaging with his policies or the merits of his speech.

Acosta gleefully agreed with her, adding, “Yes, that was definitely not the mothership.”

In sum, the CNN panel had a productive day of analyzing Trump’s demeanor and appearance rather than his broader political agenda. While they were patting themselves on the back for their derisive commentary, one could argue that this discussion was more reflective of their established biases than an accurate analysis of the political event.

Their dismissal of Trump’s resilience and perseverance, and their focus on extracting the worst possible interpretation of his appearance, all served to distract from the more important issues at hand – was his speech impactful? And, are his policies and ideologies, in fact, incompatible with libertarian values? Not to mention, the slighted attitude towards the Libertarian crowd themselves, felt arrogant and dismissive. A cautionary tale, indeed, for news outlets that choose the path of subjective commentary over substantive political discourse.

SOURCE