Critics Slam Politico for ‘Sanitizing’ Trump’s Asheville Speech: ‘What Fresh Hell Is This?’
BY JABIN BOTSFORD/THE WASHINGTON POST/GETTY IMAGES
A Politico article published Monday has sparked outrage, with critics accusing the outlet of downplaying former President Donald Trump’s controversial behavior during a speech in storm-ravaged Asheville, North Carolina. The article, written by Natalie Allison, attempted to highlight a more “somber” tone from Trump, but many argue it glossed over his more extreme remarks and recent erratic actions.
The Politico piece described Trump’s speech as a departure from his entertainment-heavy campaign moments, which recently included joking about Arnold Palmer’s genitalia, cooking McDonald’s fries, and attending a Steelers game. In Asheville, the article claimed, Trump delivered a “more somber address” about the resilience of storm survivors while simultaneously criticizing the Biden-Harris administration’s disaster response.
However, social media quickly lit up with criticism, accusing Politico of “whitewashing” Trump’s behavior. Dave Willett of the League of Conservation Voters quipped, “In 2024, Trump being ‘somber’ just means he didn’t explicitly mention anyone’s genitalia or call for using the military against Americans.”
Several commentators, including Kamala Harris campaign spokesman Ian Sams, noted that Trump’s tone wasn’t as somber as Politico suggested. Sams shared a video clip of Trump praising gunmen who threatened FEMA workers, saying, “I think you have to let people know how they’re doing. If they’re doing a poor job, we’re supposed to not say it? By doing that, they’ll do a better job next time.”
The criticism didn’t stop there. National security attorney Bradley Moss tweeted, “Politico wrote this up with a headline about Trump striking a somber tone,” expressing disbelief at the characterization. Former news reporter Jennifer Schulze echoed the sentiment, asking, “What fresh hell is this @politico?! Take a look at the actual clips of Trump in NC and see if you think this is anyone’s idea of somber. Good grief.”
Others, like former Wall Street Journal editor Bill Grueskin, urged journalists to fact-check candidates’ claims rather than just repeating them. He pointed out that Trump’s remarks about the disaster response in North Carolina were factually incorrect but went unchallenged in Politico’s report.
Progressive reporter Aaron Rupar added to the chorus of criticism, questioning the motivations behind Politico’s editorial decisions: “I’ve resisted the conclusion that the mainstream press wants Trump to win, but stuff like this really makes me wonder what the hell is going on in some of these editorial meetings.”
The backlash underscores a broader concern among media critics, who argue that Trump’s controversial rhetoric is often softened or overlooked by major news outlets, leaving readers with a skewed perception of his actions.
