🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” Just two words. That was enough for Donald Trump to brush off what is probably the most notorious journalist killing of the past ten years – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his contempt for journalists, for journalism – and for the truth.

The Context

The US president’s dismissive attitude of the killing of well-known reporter the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the CIA found in a recent assessment had ordered the kidnap and killing of the Washington Post columnist in 2018. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to determine the murder – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the late journalist was sedated and cut apart – was signed off at the highest levels. An inquiry led by then UN special rapporteur, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were unified in their criticism of the kingdom’s conduct. The US enacted sanctions and visa bans in that year over the killing, although it refrained of penalizing the crown prince himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to Washington seemed to be the final confirmation of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the regime had strongly criticized the meeting. But what was on display at the White House was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump honor Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter the facts – and then blamed the deceased. The crown prince, Trump asserted when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in direct contradiction to what his nation’s spy agencies determined previously. Moreover, the president said: “A lot of people didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or disapproved, things happen.”

Established Conduct

This represents a fresh and shameful point for a president who has made little secret of his contempt for the truth – or for the press. He has smeared journalists (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the question about the journalist at the Saudi press conference “false information”), berated them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the convicted sex offender financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued news outlets for large amounts of money in frivolous cases, and called for news outlets he disapproves of to be shut down.

He has forced established media out of the official briefing group for refusing to use language of his choosing, and he has gutted financial support for vital news services at home and crucial free press internationally.

Wider Consequences

All of that has fostered an atmosphere in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the United States, but one in which their targeting – and indeed killing – becomes not just unimportant (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“many individuals didn’t like that person”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the deadliest year on file for the press in the more than 30 years the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been documenting this information: a ongoing neglect to hold those accountable for journalist killings has created a environment without consequences in which journalists’ killers are literally able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is responsible for the deaths of more than 200 journalists in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The impact on the public is deep. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our liberty to exist without fear and securely.

On Thursday, the Committee to Protect Journalists gathers for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. My message at the event is the same as my one for the president: these things may happen. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.