How Journalists Were Stumped by Trump's Constant Lying

Used to horse-race reporting or both-sides-do-it narratives, the media in 2016 weren't prepared for Donald Trump's baldfaced-lie approach to almost every issue.

The Donald opened his yap and spat out crap, and journalists choked on it.

No, I have neither pity nor understanding for how ill-prepared most journalists and media outlets were to cope with the unprecedented scope of Donald Trump's pathological lies. They could have taken a "Wait a minute, that's not right" approach to Trump's utterances from the beginning, but they didn't. Most of the campaign, most journalists used terms like "unproven," false statement," "controversial," "stretched the truth," when they questioned Trump's mendacity at all. Rarely did they call out his near constant prevarication for what it was: utter, contemptible tripe. Horseshit. Dishonesty. Lies. Nonsense. Baloney. Malarkey, for you Joe Biden fans.

Media Matters for America lays it bare for all to see:

Despite that cabaret of nonstop fabrications, media observers praised Trump’s debate performance even though they were built around lies and fabrications. The standard that journalists still to use for Trump was that if he looked and sounded presidential while lying during debate, he scored points.

That’s scary.

Read the whole Media Matters piece. When we look back at the 2016 campaign, what will stand out is what a terrible -- and untruthful -- candidate Donald Trump was. Hopefully, the media won't want to be gamed by a candidate like Trump again. America will be the better for it.