NY Times Writer Falsely Claims Democrats Don't Use Violent Rhetoric Despite Clear Evidence
Source: Eddie Scarry. "How Media Lie: NY Times Claims Dems Don't Use Violent Rhetoric." May 5, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that a New York Times writer is lying when he claims Democrats don't use violent political language. The author provides several examples of Democratic politicians making statements about killing, choking out, or shooting Republicans to prove the Times writer wrong.
Conclusion
The New York Times and media generally lie by claiming Democrats don't use violent rhetoric when there is abundant recent evidence that prominent Democrats have used violent language
Premises
- NY Times writer Jamelle Bouie claimed that no elected Democratic leader has called for violence and that heated Democratic language falls within ordinary political discourse
- Kirk Bangstad (Democrat gubernatorial candidate) made jokes about poor marksmanship regarding an assassination attempt on Trump
- Abdul El-Sayed (Democrat Senate candidate) said Republicans should be taken 'to the mud and choked out'
- DNC Chairman Ken Martin said Democrats need to stop 'bringing a pencil to a knife fight' and can't be the only party playing by rules
- Multiple other Democratic candidates and officials have made statements involving killing, shooting, or executing Trump or Republicans
- These examples of violent rhetoric from Democrats directly contradict Bouie's claims about Democratic discourse
Assumptions
- The quoted statements from Democrats constitute 'violent rhetoric' comparable to what Republicans are accused of
- Media outlets like the NY Times have a responsibility to accurately report on political rhetoric from both parties
- The examples provided are representative of broader Democratic Party rhetoric rather than isolated incidents
- There is a meaningful distinction between metaphorical political language and actual incitement to violence