By John Q. Hosedrinker 
HuffPost reflects on its two decades of unwavering commitment to truthful, fact-based journalism. The publication acknowledges the crucial role reader support has played in its success and resilience. As HuffPost looks towards the future, it emphasizes the continued need for reader backing to sustain its mission. The article hopes its readers will continue to support them.
Read the original article here
“No other president in history could have ever dreamed of such a success,” Leavitt’s pronouncement, seemingly referring to a particular airstrike on Iran, is the subject of much debate. What immediately springs to mind are the achievements of past presidents, like the Moon Landing, which immediately puts her statement into perspective. Critics are baffled as to why the media even bothers to entertain her briefings, filled as they are with what many consider to be blatant falsehoods and a dismissive attitude.
Leavitt’s approach involves blaming “hostile actors within the intelligence community” for leaking information to “push a fake news narrative” and portray Trump in a negative light. Yet, it’s her sweeping assertion about presidential success that has truly ignited the ire of her critics. Comparisons to the propaganda machine of North Korea’s state-run media are rampant.
The perception is that Trump aspires to the level of media control seen in North Korea. Leavitt’s lack of credibility, save for her support for Trump, is widely recognized, even among many elected Republicans who seem to see through her pronouncements. The suggestion that she may soon be praising Trump for the weather, much like in North Korea, underscores the level of hyperbole. Some have even made unflattering remarks about her appearance, implying the role she is playing is affecting her. The consensus seems to be that when this administration eventually faces its reckoning, her role within it will prevent her from ever holding a position of genuine authority.
There are comparisons to historical figures, such as Baghdad Bob, to illustrate the perceived absurdity of her pronouncements. This administration, many believe, seems to disregard criticism and inquiries, dismissing them outright as false or dishonest.
The frustration expressed by many is palpable. The feeling is that the media gives her too much leeway and fails to treat her statements with the skepticism they deserve. The hope is that journalists will begin to challenge her pronouncements for what they are: fabrications designed to deceive the public.
Leavitt is seen as embodying the worst aspects of North Korean state television. She seems to operate with a similar toolkit: hyperbole, lies, and the normalization of the administration’s policies. The unsettling part for many is her use of her “Christian Faith” as a supposed indicator of honesty and morality.
It’s the “no other president could have done what you’ve done” type of rhetoric that sparks the most concern, viewed as a form of cult-like adoration. The contradiction between such statements and the perceived reality of the administration’s actions further amplifies the criticism. The chorus of praise and the apparent delusion in her voice, as some have described it, only adds to the perception of propaganda.
The comparison to North Korean state media, and the suggestion that her actions might somehow involve her engaging in sexual favors for Trump, underscores the level of animosity and distrust. The fact that she seems to genuinely enjoy her role, as opposed to being compelled, as might be the case in North Korea, further adds to the criticism.
The notion that her actions are a deliberate choice, made with full awareness of their implications, adds a layer of negativity. She is seen as being in it for herself, or at least, for the benefit of one individual, the President. The dismissive attitude toward her and her statements is obvious.
The effectiveness of the airstrike, and whether Trump had the right to order it, are secondary issues. Leavitt is merely viewed as an instrument of a propaganda campaign. The feeling is that she may be willing to say anything to remain in favor, seemingly willing to sacrifice credibility and integrity for her position. Her future is seen as limited to the political realm and is one of potential notoriety rather than respect.