My Comment: It is
debatable whether a newspaper editorial opinion has much sway as to the
outcome of major or even minor races for political office.
Occasionally, though, newspapers that slanted decidedly one way should
be paid attention to when for a singular moment in time they are
compelled to change their usual tune on the decidedly imperative and
mind blowing January 6, assault on the most democratic institution as
the US Capitol, the People's House. Such it is with the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal,
two usually resoundingly conservative voices and their usual
conservative political slant. I copied and pasted their views below
because I thought their opinions made the most sense and because I hoped
their opinions would land on Trump and especially his supporters' heads
like a ton of proverbial bricks which might be enough to doom this
decidedly and horrifically unqualified MAGA candidate, Donald Trump. I
thought for some time what the tenor of my opinion would be but I could
not find the strongest words which would convey the most anti-Trump
sentiment to help doom his candidacy. Both the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal newspapers did what I could not. I post them both below for your consideration.
Trump’s silence on Jan. 6 is damning -- New York Post -- Editorial Board
"As his followers stormed the Capitol, calling for his vice president to be hanged, President Donald Trump sat in his private dining room, watching TV, doing nothing
For three hours, seven minutes.
There has been much debate over whether Trump’s rally speech on Jan. 6, 2021, constituted “incitement.” That’s somewhat of a red herring. What matters more — and has become crystal clear in recent days — is that Trump didn’t lift a finger to stop the violence that followed.
And he was the only person who could stop what was happening. He was the only one the crowd was listening to. It was incitement by silence.
Trump only wanted one thing during that infamous afternoon: to
pressure Vice President Mike Pence to decertify the election of Joe
Biden.
He thought the violence of his loyal followers would make Pence crack, or delay the vote altogether.
To his eternal shame, as appalled aides implored him to publicly call on his followers to go home, he instead further fanned the flames by tweeting: “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution.”
His only focus was to find any means — damn the consequences — to block the peaceful transfer of power.
There is no other explanation, just as there is no defense, for his refusal to stop the violence.
It’s up to the Justice Department to decide if this is a crime. But as a matter of principle, as a matter of character, Trump has proven himself unworthy to be this country’s chief executive again."
WSJ editorial board: ‘Trump utterly failed’ his Jan. 6 trial by Caroline Vakil
The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board criticized former President Trump for refusing to take action on Jan. 6, 2021, as a mob of Trump supporters ransacked the Capitol, saying in an editorial published Friday that his vice president passed his “Jan. 6 trial” while Trump “utterly failed his.”
“Mr. Trump took an oath to defend the Constitution, and he had a duty as Commander in Chief to protect the Capitol from a mob attacking it in his name. He refused. He didn’t call the military to send help. He didn’t call [then-Vice President Mike Pence] to check on the safety of his loyal VP. Instead he fed the mob’s anger and let the riot play out,”
“Character is revealed in a crisis, and Mr. Pence passed his Jan. 6 trial. Mr. Trump utterly failed his,” the editorial board added.
The Journal’s editorial came one day after the House select committee investigating the Capitol riot held its final summer hearing, which focused on the 187 minutes between Trump finishing his remarks at his “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6 and a tweet he sent in the late afternoon telling his supporters to go home.
Using footage of taped depositions from officials like former White House counsel Pat Cipollone and in-person testimony from Trump White House officials Sarah Matthews and Matthew Pottinger, the committee accused the former president of dereliction of duty as they described how for hours he did nothing to stop the violence that ensued that day.
“President Trump did not fail to act during the 187 minutes between leaving the Ellipse and telling the mob to go home,” committee member Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) said during the hearing. “He chose not to act.”
The Journal’s editorial board made clear that it did not agree with the committee on all fronts of its investigation — arguing it “lacks political balance” and was “trying to make a criminal case that might be hard to prove and might tear the country apart.”
However, the editorial board also acknowledged that “the facts it is laying out in hearings are sobering” as it condemned Trump’s inaction on the day of the riot.
The editorial comes as The New York Post’s editorial board also offered strong words against the former president in its own editorial on Friday.
“It’s up to the Justice Department to decide if this is a crime. But as a matter of principle, as a matter of character, Trump has proven himself unworthy to be this country’s chief executive again,”
