Media singing a different tune now that it’s a Democrat abusing presidential powers


Out of the Washington Examiner, Becket Adams, reports on the realization that some media outlets are flipping their spin on news topics, where they were critical of the Trump Administration, and are now favorable for the Biden Administration.  People are smart…and perhaps this is the reason why only 15% of American’s believe the news.  Here’s the report:

Certain newsrooms have made peace (again) with executive overreach.

Just ignore those four years when they pretended to care about constitutional order, the health of democratic institutions, and political norms. It’s probably just a coincidence their abrupt change of heart happens to coincide with a Democratic presidency.

President Joe Biden announced this week he is unilaterally extending the COVID-19 eviction moratorium, which prevents landlords from evicting delinquent tenets. The president’s decree is clearly unconstitutional. He has no legal authority to extend the moratorium. He certainly has no legal authority to enforce fines on landlords who fail to comply.

It’s a clear-cut example of overreach, a breach of the president’s clearly delineated constitutional authority.

For some in the press, however, it’s a little more complicated than all that. You see, there’s some good and (possibly) some bad, according to the same news organizations whose first reaction to the previous president’s legal COVID-19 executive orders was to scream about constitutional order.

“Biden shows he’s ready to make drastic moves in COVID-19 fight — even if he’s not sure they’re legal,” CNN reported this week of the Biden White House’s moratorium edict.

The story’s first line reads, “Even President Joe Biden doesn’t know whether his new federal eviction moratorium for renters is legal and sustainable. But crushing humanitarian and political pressure left him no choice but to take a chance on an emergency move.”

Let’s compare this framing to how CNN covered then-President Donald Trump’s executive actions in Aug. 2020 making COVID-19 relief funds available: “With executive actions, Trump proposes a far-from-perfect solution that faces legal challenges.”

The report’s first line reads, “President Donald Trump signed executive actions Saturday, brazenly moving around Congress and daring Democrats to sue him over measures he thinks will be popular in the country.”

CNN also published a story in 2020 titled “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls President Trump’s coronavirus relief executive actions ‘absurdly unconstitutional.’”

In 2020, the Los Angeles Times reported, “Trump’s order to bypass Congress on coronavirus relief faces likely legal challenges.” Its editorial board even argued that Trump’s “rescue plan would let state and local governments drown in red ink.”

Now, the paper reports, simply, “Biden administration announces new two-month eviction moratorium.”

The New York Times, meanwhile, reported in 2020 of Trump’s COVID-19 executive orders: “Trump’s Order on Coronavirus Relief Alarms Governors as Stimulus Talks Stall,” “Trump Goes Around Congress to Provide Pandemic Relief,” and “Trump’s Orders on Coronavirus Relief Create Confusion.”

Now, however, we have these headlines, much friendlier ones, for Biden’s moratorium order: “Administration Seeks to Blunt Effects From End of Eviction Moratorium,” “With the eviction moratorium back in place, the Biden administration is racing to distribute aid,” and “The Biden administration issues a new eviction moratorium as the virus surges.”

It appears some executive orders are better than others, even if the ones that are “better” are clearly unconstitutional.


  • 08/06/2021
  • Becket Adams