The ABC sides with Erin Patterson's privacy over 'gratuitous' photos of triple killer, Malcolm Turnbull back in the media with a 'miserable ghost' criticism of Sussan Ley

Sky News AU

4 days ago

Jillian Segal, Australia's Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, appeared on ABC Radio National on Friday 11 July and was interviewed by Steve Cannane.
This followed the release of her Special Envoy's Plan to Combat Antisemitism on Thursday 10 July with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke.
One aspect of Ms Segal's report covers media reportage of the Middle East in general and the Israel Hamas War in particular.
It contains the following comment:
In view of data that shows younger Australians are more likely than older Australians to hold antisemitic views, governments should work with the Special Envoy, in consultation with the Jewish community, to support trusted voices to refute antisemitic views, particularly on social media platforms.
More broadly, publicly funded media organisations should be required to uphold clear editorial standards that promote fair, responsible reporting to avoid perpetuating incorrect or distorted narratives or representations of Jews.
Together, education, public and media messaging and media accountability can drive cultural change and build a stronger, more inclusive Australia.
As Media Watch Dog has demonstrated over the years, most journalists are sensitive to criticism of the general or personal kind.
And this was the case when Cannane interviewed Ms Segal.
Let's go to the transcript:
Steve Cannane: I wanted to bring you to some of the issues around the media that is in your report. In your report, you say, "since the seventh of October 2023, anti-Semitism has risen to deeply troubling levels in Australia, and this has been driven by conflict in the Middle East, manipulated narratives in the legacy media and social media and the spread of extremist ideologies". I'll come to social media in a moment. But can you give us some examples of the manipulated narratives in the legacy media that you say are driving conflict?
Jillian Segal: Well, I'd rather not point to a great deal of specifics, because that is only dwelling in conflict itself. But, because I do think we know that –
Steve Cannane: Isn't it important to identify those issues?
Jillian Segal: Can I just finish for a second? Just give me a second. But I say I'd rather not, but I will give you an example. So, you know, six months ago or so, the ABC to give one case study. And I'm not trying to focus just on the negatives, because I think that there's a lot that the ABC can do that's very constructive to try and build cohesion. But the ABC ran a story repeatedly about a hospital in Gaza that had been bombed, and there was incomplete information, as there is, you know, only perhaps information emanating from Hamas. But it was alleged to be, but the ABC reported it as fact that it had been bombed by Israel. And then, you know, horrified people were upset, and the Jewish community was, was looked at with disgust and worse. And then it turned out indeed, that it was not bombed by Israel, but had been from Gaza itself, and it had been a bomb that had fallen short. And –
Steve Cannane: – I remember that case and I – but, I remember, I remember it being the BBC. I don't remember the ABC reporting that.
Jillian Segal: No, the ABC reported it in great detail, repeatedly. And then the correction, as always, is very, very, very small, just once off. But the impression is left that the Israelis bombed that hospital. So that is where I'm saying, let's stop….
Media Watch Dog certainly remembers this report which was carried prominently on the ABC.
Now, Steve Cannane is an able and well-informed journalist.
But he is one of many ABC presenters who frequently does not contest claims made by critics of Israel – but frequently contests claims made by supporters of Israel.
Here's one recent example.
On 10 July, on ABC News Breakfast Steve Cannane interviewed Sari Bashi, who was described as a human rights lawyer based in the West Bank.
She had this to say:
Sari Bashi: … If the Israeli government were so worried about protecting people in Gaza, it wouldn't have killed more than 57,000 people in Gaza since October 7, 2023, the vast majority of them women and children.
Cannane said nothing in response.
But Bashi failed to mention the fact that these are Hamas' figures which do not distinguish between military and civilian deaths.
The Washington Post , which is no friend of Israel, now states in its report on the war that the casualty figures are supplied by Gaza Health Ministry controlled by Hamas – and that the Ministry does not distinguish between civilian and combatant deaths.
Such clarifications are not made by the likes of Cannane and Matthew Doran, the ABC journalist in Jerusalem.
After the Segal interview, Steve Cannane interviewed Sydney University's Professor Ben Saul, a vehement critic of Israel.
It was a soft interview which will be analysed in next week's Media Watch Dog. AN ABC UPDATE ABC CENSORS PHOTO OF MURDERER DUE TO CONCERNS ABOUT HER 'DISTRESS AND PRIVACY'
As Media Watch Dog readers know, on 8 July the jury in The King v Erin Patterson murder case brought down a unanimous verdict of guilty.
This made it possible for the media to show videos released by the court, along with photos taken by the media while the trial was underway.
This included the pictures taken by an Agence France-Presse photographer of Patterson's arrival at the La Trobe Valley Magistrates' Court on 12 May.
These photos were widely available.
However, as reported by Steve Jackson and James Madden in The Australian print edition of 9 July (and online the previous day), the ABC was not happy.
Mark Maley, the manager of editorial policy at the ABC, initially ruled that some of the photos should not be shown on ABC TV or ABC Online.
As leaked documents to The Australian reveal, Maley explained his decision by stating that the photos were 'a gratuitous invasion of her distress/privacy'.
Turn it up.
Patterson has been found guilty of three premeditated brutal murders.
And Mark Maley, a senior ABC executive, was concerned about her feelings and privacy.
MWD is not aware that the taxpayer-funded broadcaster has treated other citizens who have been convicted of high-profile crimes with such concern.
There was pushback by ABC TV 7.30 producer Joel Tozer and ABC Victoria news editor Sarah Jaensch.
Grant Sherlock, ABC managing director – ABC News Digital, soon intervened.
His email read as follows:
Grant Sherlock: After further discussion with Mark and others involved, we are comfortable with using photos 1, 2, 5 & 6. Take care in each use case and give careful thought to 5 & 6 in particular. If in doubt, check with acting Vic ME [Victorian Managing Editor] Tony Hetherington in the first instance.
That instruction went out at 3.28 pm on 8 July.
The following day on ABC TV News Breakfast's 'Newspapers' segment public relations consultant Steve Carey discussed the media coverage of the murder – and showed the front page of The Australian that morning.
Here's what your man Carey had to say.
Let's go to the transcript:
Bridget Brennan: And you know, as you say, I mean, we often think of murders in a particular way, committed in a particular way, always an awful crime with victims and multiple victims, multiple survivors, left, left hurting. The Australian this morning has "killer in the kitchen".
Steve Carey: Yeah, 'killer in the kitchen'. And they've got a tripack of photos, one of which, you know, you've rightly blurred out. It's really confronting. The images are confronting….
What a load of absolute tosh.
The photo suppressed by ABC TV's News Breakfast did not relate to the victims of crime – only a murderer on her way to the trial.
The photos were newsworthy.
And yet, initially, Mark Maley believed that they were too invasive of a murderer's privacy and Steve Carey regarded one as too confronting for ABC TV viewers.
Really. ABC COMEDY CORNER JULIA ZEMIRO TO HAVE FUN WITH TRUE CRIME
ABC management may change, but its love for tonally jarring comedy panel shows stays the same.
On 9 July this week, the ABC announced a new panel show called Crime Night!
According to the press release:
The ABC is thrilled to announce that Julia Zemiro will host Crime Night! - a comedy true-crime panel show where real-life cases are examined through the lens of criminology and comedy.
You know it's going to be fun because it has an exclamation mark!
Apparently, Crime Night! will be the first product of a partnership between production companies Maverick Entertainment and Dreamchaser.
Dreamchaser was co-founded by current ABC managing director Hugh Marks.
As the AFR Rear Window reports, Marks financially divested himself from the production company when he arrived at the ABC.
The press release does not go into the details of what kind of crimes the comedians will be making light of.
It is just assuring us that comedian Julia Zemiro will be working with a 'brilliant panel of criminologists and comedians to examine the fascinating real-life cases we're all obsessed with in the funniest possible way'.
So far, Crime Night! sounds like it could be in poor taste – and the exclamation mark isn't helping.
Perhaps the program will focus on minor crimes that do not cause trauma and suffering to surviving victims, victims' families, witnesses, police officers and so on.
Time will tell.
Another question raised by the announcement is, why is the taxpayer funding a true crime show?
There is already seemingly endless true crime content available – on podcasts, YouTube, streaming platforms and commercial television – including of the more comedic kind.
It's a hugely profitable genre, but the ABC does not need to make a profit.
The ABC is a government funded broadcaster, not a desperate YouTube/TikTok comedian cashing in on human suffering to sell some ads.
Since the junking of Q+A, The Drum and Lateline, viewers can no longer find an evening current affairs program focused on discussion on the ABC.
They will however find some comedians gossiping about true crime at the taxpayers' expense. NEW SEGMENT – A REPORT FROM MISERABLE GHOSTLAND MALCOLM TURNBULL BACK IN THE MEDIA WITH A (MISERABLE GHOST) CRITICISM OF OPPOSITION LEADER SUSSAN LEY
Due to enormous popular demand, Media Watch Dog has surrendered to avid readers and will, now and in the future, follow the utterances of those in our (media) midst who are Miserable Ghosts.
Flashback to 1 October 2018 when Nine newspapers published a story about a speech which former Liberal Party leader and prime minister Malcolm Turnbull had given to what was called 'a young leadership group in New York'.
It would seem that one of these New York-based younger-types had recorded the words of the Sage of Point Piper.
Your man Turnbull, who had been replaced by Scott Morrison on 24 August 2018, devoted some remarks to what he called the 'coup' of recent memory – overlooking the fact that he replaced the then incumbent prime minister Tony Abbott in September 2015 the same way.
Both men lost the support of a majority of their colleagues in the Liberal Party Room.
That's all – no weapons of the firing type were involved as occurs with a coup.
In any event, Malcolm Turnbull decided to attack former prime ministers Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott at the New York knees-up declaring:
If you want to be sane, and sanity is important – it's rare but it's important – you've got to take a live-by-the-sword, die-by-the-sword approach. But then, when you stop being prime minister, that's it.
There is no way I'm going to be hanging around like an embittered Kevin Rudd or Tony Abbott.
Well, seriously, I mean, these people are just sort of like miserable, miserable ghosts.
Since then, however, the former prime minister has thrown the switch to miserable ghostism on many occasions – attacking the Liberal Party at the federal level and such leaders as Tony Abbott, Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton.
And, wait for it, the Sage of Point Piper has now commenced criticising Sussan Ley who became Liberal Party leader as recently as 13 May 2025.
Lotsa thanks to an avid reader from Potts Point for bringing Ellie's (male) co-owner's attention to this post on X:
@AlboMP gives a measured Curtin Lecture which speaks about Australia's sovereignty and independence (while at the same time evoking the US alliance he says Curtin founded). Unremarkable you might think? But he has been lashed by @sussanley and the right wing media for DARING to suggest Australia is an independent country lest it upset Donald Trump. When will the grovellers understand Australia wins neither respect nor security by being a sycophantic supplicant.
Well, fancy that.
Malcolm Turnbull praised Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's 2025 John Curtin Lecture but criticised Sussan Ley's somewhat gentle criticism of it which was reported in The Australian at 5.42 pm on 6 July 2025.
Yet this drove the Sage of Point Piper to rise from his bed and (Trump-like) put out a post at 5.43 am the following morning – even before the birds had risen on this Winter morning.
In other words, Malcolm Turnbull metamorphosed into a Miserable Ghost of the former politician kind, for a moment at least.
[Well done. But perhaps you should have placed this in your hugely popular Can You Bear It? segment. Just a thought. – MWD Editor.] CAN YOU BEAR IT?
The Age's special correspondent Stephen Brook is one of Media Watch Dog's faves.
Your man Brook appears occasionally in the 'Newspapers' segment on ABC TV News Breakfast .
This was the case on Thursday 10 July when he brought up the topic of, yes, bogans.
Let's go to the transcript:
Bridget Brennan: We're joined by special correspondent with The Age , Stephen Brook. Good morning, how are you?
Stephen Brook: Good morning.
Bridget Brennan: You're looking over to the West this morning.
Stephen Brook: We are. We're heading over to The West Australian – one of our favourite newspapers on this segment. And WA Premier Roger Cook, who's quite a sort of laid back man, as you've never seen him before –
Bridget Brennan: What!
Stephen Brook: The headline is 'Culture King' and the issue is something that is pretty prevalent in politics, but rarely talked about, the Bogan Vote. So what's happened is that his – the former premier of WA Brian Burke has said that Labor's 'bogan vote', his words, is in jeopardy. And surprise, surprise the WA government has announced that it's going to spend about 100 million dollars building this big new facility at Burswood, which is near where the Casino is, which is gonna have Rugby League, it's gonna have motor sports and it's gonna have mixed martial arts. And this is being interpreted as a way of trying to shore up the bogan vote.
And the deputy premier has been placed in charge of this project and so the press conference has come out and said to the premier, 'Are you a bogan?' And his response was, 'I'm Roger'. So, he is dodging that, but it's interesting because every state government is doing this. So, if you look at LIV Golf in South Australia with Peter Malinauskas. And here in Melbourne, the home of the Formula 1 and you took privately to –
Bridget Brennan: I don't think F1 is a bogan sport, is it?
And so, an early morning discussion commenced about who and what is a 'bogan'.
The Age's special correspondent confessed that he had 'bogan tendencies'.
He cited them (i) as 'drinking bourbon and coke', (ii) 'def[definitely] leopard [prints]' and (iii) 'burger and chips'.
Then co-presenter Bridget Brennan confessed: 'I love Food Courts' and fellow co-presenter Emma Rebellato declared, 'I go a bit bogan when I'm at a sporting event'.
Does anyone care? Moreover, Can You Bear It?
[No. Not really. However, I have never regarded the well-dressed and obviously well brought up Mr Brook as in any sense bogan. – MWD Editor.]
While on the topic of the Melbourne-based Stephen Brook, he is also a regular contributor to the 'CBD' (gossip) column in The Age and Sydney Morning Herald – often with the Sydney based Kishor Napier-Raman (he of what Paul Keating was wont to call the Hyphenated Name Set).
By the way, Nine's 'CBD' column rarely has any relationship with what is going on in the Central Business District of either Melbourne or Sydney.
But it has a somewhat obsessive interest in what is going on (or not going on) in Sydney high-fee paying private schools.
Ellie's (male) co-owner likes to believe that it is Comrade Hyphenated Name who is responsible for 'CBD' tending to engage in secular sneering about Christians.
For example, this is what appeared in 'CBD' on 9 July about the activity of the very able Queensland Liberal Party MP Amanda Stoker – who is currently assistant minister to the attorney-general in the LNP government.
In criticising Ms Stoker's forthcoming appearance at the Samuel Griffith Society conference in Perth, 'CBD' had this to say:
Now, another ghost from the Morrison government is set to join the conference, with former federal Liberal National senator Amanda Stokeralso on the speaking list.
In a past life, Stoker was a High Court associate herself, later going onto become a conservative rising star in the Liberals' Christian Soldier faction before running headlong into the party's infamous 'women problem'.
In 2021, she lost a Senate preselection to amateur psephologist and taxidermy enthusiast James McGrath, whom she claimed got up because he drank more beers with the preselectors. Stoker would later allege that former Liberal senator David Vanhad sexually harassed her while the pair were in parliament. Van denied the allegations.
How funny is that? – the reference to Christian soldiers, that is.
Which raises the question – would 'CBD' sneer at the religious belief of, say, a Muslim MP? [Not on your nelly – as the saying goes – MWD Editor.] By the way, MWD understands that Amanda Stoker is an Anglican.
Avid readers of MWD's 23 May issue will recall that 'CBD' sneered at Campion College – a liberal arts college in Western Sydney with links with the Catholic Church.
'CBD' seemed upset that some Campion College graduates are employed by Sky News.
For the record, there is no conspiracy here.
Campion College produces well-educated and disciplined male and female graduates.
They are encouraged to read books and to be informed of the history of western civilisation.
Yet 'CBD' was obsessed with who had funded a new hall at Campion College. Really.
Does anyone care?
And here's another question: Can You Bear It?
[Interesting. As I recall, 'CBD' was of the view that only Catholics attended Campion College. Wrong. 'CBD' also said that the funding issue was a 'divine mystery'. Really. MWD Editor.]
On 9 July, ABC News Breakfast discussed the proposal that President Trump receive the Nobel Peace Prize.
Bridget Brennan was the interviewer and The Daily Aus' Harry Sekulich was commenting on the media. The following exchange took place:
Harry Sekulich: It's actually not that unusual for US presidents to be nominated. Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter have both received the top honour, but this also takes place in the background of some ceasefire negotiations. It's expected that Netanyahu and Trump will be discussing some of the terms of the truce while Netanyahu is visiting the White House….
Bridget Brennan: Yeah, quite, quite a stunning nomination from you know, regarding two characters who, in many people's views, have not added much to peace around the world in recent years.
Hold on a minute.
Contrary to Brennan's assertion, it's not clear that anyone is seriously suggesting that Benjamin Netanyahu should be nominated for a Peace Prize.
And then there is the fact that President Barack Obama received a Nobel Prize for, eh, essentially being Barack Obama.
As to Donald Trump, he has achieved some success in the area of peace.
Most notably, his success in bringing about the Abraham Accords in the Middle East and his role in ending hostilities between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda.
And Trump is working on a cease-fire in the Israel-Hamas War.
Sure, like many politicians, Trump wants praise, awards and so on.
However, Bridget Brennan's contribution in this instance is just another example of a journalist promoting her own opinion rather than allowing her guest to state a case devoid of an interviewer's opinion.
Can You Bear It?
ABC TV Insiders on 8 July discussed the anti-Semitic attacks in Melbourne on 6 July and 7 July – including the attempted fire-bombing of the synagogue in East Melbourne.
Presenter Patricia Karvelas tackled the issue directly. But two panellists – The Saturday Paper's Karen Middleton and ABC's Tom Crowley – were at times very vague.
So much so that it was difficult to determine what they were saying. Here are a few examples:
Tom Crowley: ….I think there's an opportunity for us here to resist the temptation that we had in the last term of government, to immediately frame this in the context of federal politics and the bipartisan political contest. There was a reason that that was the case in the last term, because it was so stark the difference in what the two parties were saying. Peter Dutton clearly saw it as a campaign issue.
Karen Middleton: ….now the challenge for the government to find a way to reassure the whole community, and particularly the Jewish community, that they do have their back and not let this escalate into the kind of politics that we saw that was so damaging and divisive, and that really only ends up exacerbating more violence, I think, that we saw in the last term of government.
What does this verbal sludge mean?
There were serious instances of anti-Semitism, leading on occasions to violence, in Australia before the May 2025 election.
Particularly in Melbourne and Sydney.
And there have been serious instances of anti-Semitism, leading on occasions to violence, since the May 2025 election.
Most notably, the violence in Melbourne last week.
Yet, on Insiders , Comrades Middleton and Crowley seemed to be suggesting with carefully worded – and excessively vague – language that somehow or other Peter Dutton and the Coalition were responsible for the government's handling of the issue before – but not after – the May election.
Can You Bear It? DOCUMENTATION BRUCE WOLPE'S REVIEW OF ORIGINAL SIN BY JAKE TAPPER & ALEX THOMPSON GOES SOFT ON TAPPER'S EARLY DENIAL OF PRESIDENT BIDEN'S COGNITIVE DECLINE
Media Watch Dog fave Bruce Wolpe reviewed Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up And His Disastrous Choice To Run Again by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson in The Age and Sydney Morning Herald .
Tapper is CNN's Washington DC anchor and Thompson is the national political correspondent for Axios.
The date was Saturday 7 June.
Your man Wolpe has served on the Democratic staff in the United States Congress and as chief of staff to former prime minister Julia Gillard.
Wolpe made the point that, according to the authors, President Joe Biden's 'original sin' is what he told CNN journalist Tapper in 2020.
According to Tapper's report, Biden told him: 'I guarantee you I will be totally transparent in terms of my health and all aspects of my health'.
Tapper now says, 'He was not' transparent.
The point here is that Tapper believed Biden's assessment of his own health.
How naïve can a top CNN journalist get?
It's true that Biden's declining cognitive health was not commented on in the mainstream media – like, eh, CNN.
But anyone who saw the (somewhat sad) footage of Biden in 2020 and beyond knew that he was not medically fit for purpose.
Sure, the United States' free-to-air television stations ABC, NBC and CBS – or, indeed, subscription channels CNN and MSNBC – did not cover Biden's mental health.
However, anyone who watched footage of Biden on Fox News in the US and Sky News in Australia would have been well aware of Biden's mental and physical decline.
Early in his review, Wolpe had this to say:
Tapper and Thompson's clinical indictment is fleshed out in forensic detail. They set out to prove that any view that Biden was not addled and could handle the presidency 24/7 was false. The palace guard of senior staff around the president – Tapper and Thompson call them 'The Politburo'– led Biden to believe that the work of his own pollsters showed that he could beat Trump. The authors report that no such polls existed. The public saw the realities of Biden's day-to-day functioning: the stiff gait, his voice of whispers, his lack of command in unscripted media events, his misspeaking of names, places, dates. But 'what was going on in private was worse'.
Bruce Wolpe failed to make the point that Tapper himself did not see the realities of Biden's day-to-day functioning before his abysmal performance when debating Donald Trump on 27 June 2024.
And now they are on book tours flogging Original Sin.
Thanks to Sky News' Paul Murray Live for drawing attention to The Megyn Kelly Show on 31 May 2025 when Kelly interviewed Tapper. Let's go to the transcript:
Megyn Kelly: You covered the Biden presidency aggressively throughout the four years and you didn't cover mental acuity hardly at all. I mean, time and time again, when issues came up, you seem to be running cover for the President.
Jake Tapper: I don't think that's true.
Megyn Kelly: You didn't seem interested. Well, I mean, we'll start with the Lara Trump issue that you referred, here it is. This happened in 2020.
[Video of Lara Trump on CNN dated 18 October 2020 is played]
Jake Tapper: Joe Biden, as we all know, has worked to overcome a stutter. How do you think it makes little kids with stutters feel when they see you make a comment like that?
Lara Trump: First and foremost, I had no idea that Joe Biden ever suffered from a stutter. I think what we see on stage with Joe Biden, Jake, is very clearly a cognitive decline.
Jake Tapper: Okay.
Lara Trump: That's what I'm referring to. It makes me uncomfortable to watch the man on stage search for questions.
Jake Tapper: You have no, I can't, it's so amazing.
Lara Trump: You are trying to tell me that what I was suggesting was a stuttering –
Jake Tapper: I think you were mocking his stutter.
Lara Trump: I had no idea Joe Biden –
Jake Tapper: [interjecting] Yeah, I think you were mocking his stutter.
Lara Trump: No I was not, Jake.
Jake Tapper: And I think you have absolutely no standing to diagnose somebody's cognitive decline.
Lara Trump: And it's very concerning to a lot of people that this could be the leader of the free world.
Jake Tapper: Okay.
Lara Trump: That is all I'm saying. I am genuinely sorry for Joe Biden.
Jake Tapper: Thank you Lara Trump. I appreciate it. I'm sure it was from a place of concern. We all, we all believe that. Lara Trump, thank you so much.
How about that?
Megyn Kelly put it to Jake Tapper that he had covered-up Biden's health when reporting the Biden presidency for CNN.
Tapper vehemently denied this.
Then Kelly produced the Jake Tapper/Lara Trump video from 18 October 2020 – which was three months before Biden was sworn in as president on 20 January 2021.
The following exchange took place:
Megyn Kelly: Do you want to apologise to Lara Trump now?
Jake Tapper: I've already apologised to her. I called her months ago.
Megyn Kelly: And what does she say?
Jake Tapper: I mean, I don't want to disclose the contents of a private conversation. But I thought the conversation went well, and she said - she has said this publicly, so I feel fine sharing it. She said that she would never mock anybody's stutter. But, I mean, after we did the research for this book and I realised how bad his acuity issues were, I like, I mean, I, I called Laura Trump and I said, 'you were right'.
Megyn Kelly: She was totally right. That's the thing, because when I watched that clip, and I'm giving voice to what a lot of people watching the show are feeling, Jake, I feel angry because she was right. And not only did you not allow her to make her comments, but you seem to try to humiliate her.
You had a hostility toward the position, but she was totally right, and then you lectured her on how she was in no position to diagnose cognitive decline, which you guys do at length. Including on page four of your book, you describe at length his cognitive decline, which is all she tried to do with you. But you had such a visceral reaction to her. And my feeling is that's because you didn't want to hear it.
Jake Tapper: No, I mean, if we can, I'm happy to talk about this. I didn't come here thinking that you weren't going to ask me about this. I'm happy to talk to you about it.
Megyn Kelly: No, I know.
Jake Tapper: The first time I saw the coverage of Lara Trump's comments, which were interpreted as her mocking Joe Biden's stutter, was in January 2020. I read it in conservative media. I read it in the Daily Mail , and that's where I saw that her comments were being interpreted that way. After those comments were publicised, it got a lot of coverage and Sully Sullenberger wrote an op ed in the New York Times criticising her about this.
So, that's the context for that – that I was following up on a story that had been out there months before. This is also in the context of October 2020. A very intense time. People on the Biden side are saying crazy things about Trump. People on the Trump side are saying crazy things about Biden, including Don Junior, suggesting that Joe Biden is a pedophile. So, that is the larger context. But as I said, her comments have aged well. My comments have aged poorly. I own that. [The discussion continued about Original Sin beyond the Lara Trump/Tapper exchange.]
What a load of absolute tosh.
Tapper effectively terminated his CNN interview with Lara Trump in October 2020 because he did not want to hear about Biden's cognitive decline.
It had nothing whatsoever to do with people on Trump's side saying 'crazy things' about Biden.
Ms Trump was not saying anything crazy – what she was doing was to query Tapper's denial about what was evident to others.
Tapper was doing what activist journalists tend to do – believing what they want to believe.
Well, at least Jake Tapper apologised to Lara Trump – breaking the maxim that being a journalist means never having to say you are sorry.
* * * *
Until Next Time.
* * * * *