Staff Reports
Former President Donald Trump’s victory speech after the Iowa caucuses was conspicuously absent from the airwaves of CNN and MSNBC, and conservative commentator Clay Travis had some choice words for the networks. In a recent appearance on Fox News, Travis accused them of attempting to “rig” the 2024 election by intentionally withholding Trump’s remarks from the public.
‘Trying To Rig The Election’: Clay Travis Rips Liberal Networks For Not Airing Trump Victory Speech https://t.co/YJERTD7Jmz #BreakingNews #Breaking #News pic.twitter.com/z9U2qJ6IWp
— Patriot Pointman 🇺🇸 (@PatriotPointman) January 16, 2024
Travis didn’t hold back in his criticism, claiming that the Democrats were so terrified of the former president that they couldn’t bear to let him speak. He argued that it was a disservice to voters, as hearing from the leading candidates is crucial in making an informed decision. Travis went on to assert that this was all part of a larger plan by the Democrats to remove Trump from the political arena entirely. According to Travis, the Democrats not only want to keep Trump off the ballot but also throw him in prison! Talk about extreme measures.
The fact that MSNBC and CNN refused to broadcast Trump’s speech also raised concerns about their biased coverage. Travis highlighted CNN’s excuse for cutting away from the speech, claiming that they couldn’t allow Trump’s “anti-immigrant rhetoric” to air. This, in Travis’s view, was a clear attempt to manipulate public opinion and rig the election.
It’s worth noting that Trump won the Iowa caucuses with over 50% of the vote, making it even more baffling why his victory speech wasn’t given the airtime it deserved. It seems that the mainstream media is more interested in pushing their own narrative than in providing fair and balanced coverage.
Rachel Maddow of MSNBC defended the network’s decision not to air Trump’s remarks, citing a concern for broadcasting “untrue things.” But Travis didn’t hold back in calling her out, pointing to past instances where she made false claims without issuing an apology. This selective application of journalistic integrity further solidifies Travis’s argument that MSNBC is more interested in pushing their agenda than in giving viewers access to all political viewpoints.
In the end, Travis makes a compelling case for the importance of free speech and the need to hear from all political candidates. Suppressing one’s opponents not only undermines democracy but also prevents voters from making informed decisions. It’s clear that MSNBC and CNN need to reassess their priorities and remember that their role as journalists is to provide fair and unbiased coverage, rather than pushing a partisan agenda.
