Look, we all know the mainstream media sucks. But every now and again there are moments that make even the most hardened cynics among us pause and ask "er, what?"
And we got a major "er, what?" moment when ABC's George Stephanopoulos (long-lost cousin of Mr. Snuffleupagus) interviewed Rep. Nancy Mace ... and asked how she can possibly endorse Trump "as a rape victim."
Let's begin with the obvious: Trump has not been found guilty of sexual assault charges in criminal court, and yet Stephanopoulos is ignoring that minor detail to bully and/or guilt Mace into defending her endorsement of the clear leader of her party.
Now, this question would be a little more reasonable if this question would ever, ever, ever be posed to a Democrat after they endorsed Joe Biden, who has his own history of allegations of sexual assault.
To be fair, who doesn't in Congress? Sexual deviancy is a pre-requisite for office these days.
But here's the kicker: Before becoming the latest member of the politics-to-media-propaganda-machine-club, George Stephanopoulos worked for none other than Bill "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" Clinton, first as his White House Communications Director and then as a Senior Advisor. He even worked on his presidential campaign.
This is the same Bill Clinton who has so many sexual assault and misconduct allegations they have their own Wikipedia page.
The left-wing retort here is to cry "whataboutism," or point out that Donald Trump's list of allegations also has its own Wikipedia page. And that would all be fair if Stephanopoulos hadn't been the one who clambered up onto that interviewer chair and asked Nancy Mace — a rape victim — how she could possibly endorse Donald Trump given the allegations leveled against him.
- all while ignoring Bill Clinton, Joe Biden, and every other Democrat whose history with women is ... less than perfect.
Stephanopoulos was the one who opened that door, so it's up to us to force him through it.
George, if Mace's endorsement of Donald Trump is so morally unpalatable to you, how could you endorse Bill Clinton given his comparable history?
Oh, wait a minute, the answer is simple: Stephanopoulos couldn't care less about women, having helped cover up Clinton's "bimbo eruptions" in the past. Because Stephanopoulos (like so many political hosts on mainstream networks who have reinvented themselves as objective arbiters of truth) was a hack, is a hack, and will always be a hack.
Stephanopoulos will happily bully an actual rape victim for daring to support a Republican, while women who dare to accuse a Democrat are ignored or dismissed.
Believe all women, indeed.
Shame on George Stephanopoulos, and shame on ABC for continuing to hire this bite-size clown.
Follow Ian on X (@ighaworth) and Substack.
