Liberal Media Scream: ABC’s Rachel Scott doubles down on Trump – Washington Examiner
The article discusses a recent segment on ABC’s show “This Week,” featuring Rachel Scott, who highlighted her criticism of former President Donald Trump during a National Association of Black Journalists convention. Scott confronted Trump about his past remarks on race, prompting his irritation. In the discussion, she expressed admiration for Vice President Kamala Harris’s nuanced handling of her mixed-race identity, suggesting that Harris could bring strong debating skills against Trump in future campaigns. The piece underscores the media’s portrayal of Trump and Harris, focusing on themes of identity and political strategy within the context of their respective roles.
Liberal Media Scream: ABC’s Rachel Scott doubles down on Trump
This week’s Liberal Media Scream features ABC’s Rachel Scott, fresh from zinging former President Donald Trump at a black media convention, whacking him again while discussing campaign debates on the network’s Sunday public affairs show, This Week.
Participating in a panel discussion, Scott praised Vice President Kamala Harris’s “nuance” on her mixed-race heritage. “It has been really notable for us reporters who have picked up on the nuance about how she has responded to some of these attacks questioning her racial identity,” she said.
Scott was criticized by Trump when she opened a Q&A at the National Association of Black Journalists convention by questioning his past comments on black people and why they should support him. An irked Trump shot back, “I think it’s a very nasty question.”
On This Week, she channeled a Harris campaign talking point as she fancied a Harris-Trump debate: “And imagine that on the debate stage where you have a prosecutor possibly facing off against someone who has just been convicted.”
From Sunday’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on ABC:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: I was struck, Rachel, in the vice president’s response to what happened at your interview. She seemed to be aware of what Jonathan Martin is talking about. Don’t make this back about her after he gives those comments.
RACHEL SCOTT: And it has been really notable for us reporters who have picked up on the nuance about how she has responded to some of these attacks questioning her racial identity. She is not going there, and Democrats say, “Look, she knows who she is.” She identifies as a black and Asian woman. Why does she have to go out there and respond in that sort of way? What she is doing is putting it back on Donald Trump and Republicans, saying they’re dividing, and then pivoting back to the issues.
….
SUSAN PAGE, USA TODAY: I moderated the last debate she did in 2020, the vice presidential debate. She is a good debater. She is confident. She uses a little humor. She made Mike Pence be quiet, which is something I struggled to do, and she came across as a prosecutor, and that is a good message for her.
STEPHANOPOULOS: That seems to be her sweet spot.
SEE THE LATEST POLITICAL NEWS AND BUZZ FROM WASHINGTON SECRETS
SCOTT: And imagine that on the debate stage where you have a prosecutor possibly facing off against someone who has just been convicted, right? And that’s the sort of image that, of course, Democrats are hoping that they can actually have on the debate stage. But yes, and thinking back to her taking on President Biden when they were running against each other in the Democratic primary, Democrats see her as someone who can thrive potentially on the debate stage. The question is, does it actually happen?
Brent Baker, vice president of research and publications for the Media Research Center, explained our weekly pick: “Scott seems near-giddy over Harris, acting more as a Kamala Whisperer than as any kind of independent journalist. She may couch her ‘reporting’ by citing ‘what Democrats are hoping,’ but it’s clear she’s hoping for the same thing: eagerly anticipating ‘the prosecutor versus the felon’ debate followed by a Harris election victory.”
Rating: FOUR out of FIVE SCREAMS.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
Now loading...