Stephanopoulos deems Trump unfit for 2024, labels him an insurrectionist

This week’s Liberal⁢ Media ⁣Scream: Stephanopoulos acts as judge, jury, and executioner of Trump’s political ‌future

This week’s edition ⁣of Liberal⁢ Media Scream features ABC host George Stephanopoulos, who takes ⁣on the role of judge, jury,⁢ and executioner​ in determining the fate of former President Donald Trump’s 2024 primary campaign. Stephanopoulos, known for his ties‍ to the Clintons, questions his panel about efforts in some states to declare Trump ineligible for election based​ on the 14th Amendment ⁤ban⁤ on insurrectionists.

During his Sunday⁢ show, which coincided with the third anniversary of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, Stephanopoulos’s panelists suggest that⁢ the Supreme‌ Court will find Trump guilty, but it will be up to Congress, not ​the⁣ states, to remove his name from the ballots. Stephanopoulos himself asserts that if Trump engaged in insurrection, he cannot be qualified⁤ to run for office according to the plain meaning of the 14th Amendment.

One of his panelists, Donna Brazile, a prominent liberal and former acting ‍Democratic Party chairwoman, agrees with Stephanopoulos’s ‌viewpoint.

Insight from Sunday’s This Week on ABC:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Sarah,⁢ what ‍do you think the court will decide?

SARAH ISGUR, SENIOR EDITOR OF THE DISPATCH: I believe the Supreme Court will rule that Trump is not disqualified from ‍being on the ballot. ⁣They will overturn the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But how will they justify​ it?

ISGUR: Well, I think ‌they will argue that the 14th Amendment clearly states that it’s Congress’s responsibility to determine qualification. Congress can requalify someone with‌ a two-thirds vote, ‍and there’s no specific timeline for that. Therefore, it’s about holding ​office after the elections, not‍ running for​ office. The states cannot create ‌their own standards, such as “beyond a reasonable doubt” or “more ⁤likely than not.” What ⁣interests ‍me is whether the‌ Supreme Court will go ‍out of their way ⁤to secure the votes of Kagan, Sotomayor, ⁢and Jackson by acknowledging the insurrection but leaving the ⁤decision to Congress.

Stephanopoulos challenges​ Donna Brazile, expressing his doubts about how Trump ⁤can be qualified to run for office if⁤ he engaged in insurrection. Brazile agrees with Stephanopoulos’s ⁤perspective.

Brent Baker, the vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, comments on our selection for this week’s Liberal Media Scream: “Stephanopoulos once again reveals his bias as a Democratic partisan rather than a journalist. A true journalist would not jump to a definitive conclusion on such a contentious issue⁣ that divides Americans, especially weeks before the Supreme Court​ ruling. Stephanopoulos has clearly‌ aligned⁤ himself with those who seek⁣ to ⁢deny the public’s right to vote for their preferred candidate. It’s ⁢ironic how he claims to protect democracy from Trump while undermining the democratic process.”

Rating:​ FIVE out of FIVE‌ SCREAMS.

How does the timing of ‌the discussion, ‌coinciding with the anniversary of the ‌Capitol riot, and Stephanopoulos’s ties to the ‌Clintons, affect ⁣the‍ perception of objectivity in the ⁢episode

‌ P>In this week’s ⁤episode of This Week on ABC, host George Stephanopoulos takes on a pivotal role ​in determining the future of ⁤former President ‌Donald Trump’s ‍potential⁤ 2024 ⁤primary campaign. Stephanopoulos, known ⁢for his ⁤ties to the ⁤Clintons, tackles the‍ issue of declaring Trump ineligible for election ⁣based ⁣on ⁢the 14th ⁤Amendment’s ban on insurrectionists.

During the episode, which coincided ⁣with the third anniversary of the Jan. ⁤6 Capitol riot, Stephanopoulos’s ‍panelists discuss the ⁤likelihood of⁢ the Supreme Court finding Trump guilty, and the subsequent responsibility of​ Congress⁤ to ⁣remove‌ his name from the ballots.​ Stephanopoulos himself argues​ that if Trump​ indeed‌ engaged in insurrection, his ⁤qualification to run for office would be compromised according to the plain meaning of the 14th Amendment.

One of‍ the panelists,⁤ Donna Brazile, a prominent liberal and former acting Democratic Party ‌chairwoman, shares Stephanopoulos’s viewpoint and agrees with ‌his assessments.

The ​inclusion of Stephanopoulos and‍ Brazile, both known for their liberal leanings, in‌ the discussion raises concerns about ‍impartiality and objectivity. By adopting the role of judge, jury,⁤ and executioner, Stephanopoulos’s actions undermine the principles of fair and unbiased reporting. Rather than presenting a balanced discussion of the issue, the episode becomes a platform for advancing personal opinions and political agendas.

The decision to focus on⁤ efforts to declare ‍Trump ineligible for election in ​some states also raises‍ questions about the⁤ timing and ⁣motives behind such discussions. ⁤The timing, coinciding with ‌the anniversary ⁢of the ⁤Capitol riot, ‍suggests an ​attempt to capitalize ‌on the⁣ emotions and sentiments associated with that event. Furthermore, Stephanopoulos’s​ ties to the Clintons, a⁣ prominent political family infamous for their contentious relationship with Trump, further cast doubt on the objectivity of the discussion.

It is crucial to remember that the role ‌of ⁣the media is to inform and‍ educate the public, presenting⁤ a fair and unbiased account of events and issues. Stephanopoulos’s actions in⁢ this episode undermine this fundamental principle, ⁤as he takes it ⁤upon himself to determine the fate of Trump’s⁤ political future before ⁣due process has taken place. This not only undermines the principles of democracy but also ⁢erodes public⁢ trust in the media’s ability to ⁣provide‌ fair and accurate reporting.

In conclusion, Stephanopoulos’s actions in this week’s ​episode of ⁤Liberal ‌Media Scream raise concerns about his impartiality and objectivity. By ⁤assuming the ⁢roles of judge, jury, and executioner in determining the‌ fate of Trump’s political ⁤future, Stephanopoulos undermines the​ principles of ‍fair reporting and impartial journalism. It is essential ​for the media to maintain objectivity and provide a platform for balanced discussions⁤ to ensure the public’s trust⁢ in their reporting.