Observations On The Viral ‘Trump Slaughtering His Enemies’ Video

The video above was, according to the the New York Times, shown at a conference for his supporters at his Miami resort last week. There is no evidence, none, that the Trump campaign, the President, or the White House had anything to do with it. The group holding the event is called American Priority. The organizer of the event denounced the video and said his organization was looking into how it came to be shown at the event.


1. Why is this newsworthy? Does the New York Times cover every violent, ugly or outrageous meme that denigrates the President? It’s newsworthy, I assume, because the Times and the rest of the mainstream media view anything that places President Trump in a bad light, even a simulated President Trump,  and represents his foes as victims as worth publicizing.

2. No, it’s not the equivalent of Kathy Griffin extolling a violent execution of the President of the United States by holding a model of his severed head. If Trump or the Republican Party produced the video, then there would be a basis for comparison.

3. I thought the video was funny, just as I find the absurd violence in “Planet Terror,” “From Dusk ‘Til Dawn,” and the “Return of the Living Dead” movies funny. If it genuinely upsets you, I’m worried about you.

4. The headlines about the video either show how stupid editors think we are, or how stupid they are. “Doctored Video…,” “Fake Video…,” “Fictitious Video”…Seriously? We need to be told that video is fake?

5. The news media demanded that the White House condemn the video, and the White House meekly complied. It should not have. This is a satirical, anti-news media video, protected political speech, and at least as valid as the anti-Trump venom CNN and others launch into the atmosphere daily, except that the video announces itself as a gag, while the news media’s relentless character assassination is presented as fact.

6. I don’t see how CNN can posture like this without promoting giggles.

“Sadly, this is not the first time that supporters of the president have promoted violence against the media in a video they apparently find entertaining — but it is by far and away the worst,” the network said in a statement. “The images depicted are vile and horrific.The president and his family, the White House, and the Trump campaign need to denounce it immediately in the strongest possible terms. Anything less equates to a tacit endorsement of violence and should not be tolerated by anyone.”

Jonathan Karl, president of the White House Correspondents’ Association, also issued a statement, saying that “We have previously told the president his rhetoric could incite violence. Now we call on him and everybody associated with this conference to denounce this video and affirm that violence has no place in our society.”

I haven’t heard the news media formally denounce actual violence against Trump supporters by the antifa, or condemn the rhetoric by Democrats like Maxine Waters calling on citizens to harass members of the Administration, or declare unacceptable, for example, the Central Park production of “Julius Caesar” that portrayed the assassination of a President Trump lookalike.  Yet the President has to condemn a virtual cartoon? Is Karl saying that the President’s rhetoric  incited fake violence? The Horror!

7. Violence does have a place in our society: in entertainment, which is what this video is, and is intended to be.

Here’s Al Pacino’s grand finale in “Scarface.” Say hello to his little friend. Did anyone demand that President Reagan condemn that film? Why not?

34 thoughts on “Observations On The Viral ‘Trump Slaughtering His Enemies’ Video

  1. Wow, I can’t imagine what prompted the White House to capitulate to calls for them to condemn this. That seems like just the kind of thing they would love to defy the media on.

    I wonder if this is a sign that Trump is feeling the media pressure on this subject, and if he’ll be apologizing for everything the media finds offensive from now on?

    To me, this underscores the President’s own well-known contempt for the First Amendment. The press and Democrat Party underscore theirs on a daily basis, but you’d expect Trump to push back purely because of who was making the demand, even if not for legitimate reasons of First Amendment defense.

      • I hope you’re right, but I’m not encouraged by “We’re gonna open up the libel laws,” and his constant reaffirmation thereof.

        Makes me skeptical.

  2. Do the media spokespeople see the irony in calling on the President to disavow and condemn a (clearly) over-the-top political ad? From what I am reading, obviously not; or perhaps, they do and are testing the Trump Administration to join their totalitarian ranks.


  3. Over a month ago, I went to Atlanta for vacation. We decided to do the bare bones CNN tour.

    When you walk into the CNN tower, the following screed was painted on the wall.

    “Facts are facts.

    They aren’t colored by emotion or bias. They are indisputable.
    There is no alternative to a fact. Facts explain things.
    What they are, how they happened. Facts are not interpretations.
    Once facts are established, opinions can be formed.
    And while opinions matter, they don’t change the facts.
    That’s why, at CNN, we start with the facts first.


    I took a photo of it. Then I giggled. I had a hard time taking anything seriously, especially when they played the obligatory Why CNN Matters video for the tourists with the soaring theme to “Man of Steel” playing in the background.

    Remember that episode of “The Office” when Andy is stalking Michael, not realizing that Michael really doesn’t want them to be joined at the hip the whole time? Michael looks at the camera while hiding behind his office door and whispers, “I don’t understand how someone could have so little self-awareness.”

    This is CNN.

  4. To understand why *they* chose to see the video in this way all one has to do is read the reader comments to the NYTs article.

    Over many months now *they* have been pushing for a fight. Take as one example Charlottesville when mobs descended on the town to stop the event, to ‘shut it down’, which would surely have been non-violent as it was planned to be, but they do things to be sure that it becomes violent. They need this violence, that is my view.

    They taunt, they attack, but they of course have a right to do this because they are the good ones. They created a situation that resulted in the death of the woman, but they refuse to see their *complicity*. There is a great deal of complicity among the Antifa-types, the police, and certainly the Right-leaning people had their part. But to a significant degree after the violence ball got rolling at the hands of Antifa-types.

    This is a model of a form of activism that is being used. To incite, to provoke. Then, they get what they are seeking and can then feel justified in being right.

    This is a common strategy used by people and also by states: to incite incidents. The US in its foreign policy has used it and still is using it. For example, they have been provoking conflict with Iran.

    [But a similar cognitive mechanism operates: though it is true that the US and Israel provoke Iran, and though it is known that they must have conflict even if conflict is what they say they want to avoid (!), people tend to accept the narrative lie, as most writing on this blog do and will. Why they do this is complex but it can be dismantled and understood.]

    • Ah yes the angelic Mullahs.

      We’ve had several opportunities to bomb them further into Oblivion, but haven’t. In fact, Trump has purposefully stepped back from the brink with Iran.

      • You have zero idea what machinations are going on in respect to Iran. Nor do you care.

        You would do well to do more research. You are (obviously) unaware of the critique of Neoconservatism and its various war-machinations. I assume you are also aware of a larger critique of so-called ‘Conservative America’ and the present state of ‘conservatism’.

        Many videos by Paul Gottfried are very good.

        Bombing Iran — precipitating war on Iran — would be totally wrong, and very destructive. But in your utterly strange system of ‘ethics’ (that is, in your absence of ethics) you do not have to be at all concerned about the destruction and harm that would result. You have special rights to be above those concerns. If *they* kill 3 thousand, it is a national tragedy rehearsed for 10 years. If *we* kill 100,000 or even 500,000, directly or thorough proxies, or contingent events, *we* do not have even to be slightly concerned.

        Yet ‘we’ (as in people of this country) should be concerned. It is our duty.

        It is Israel that has significant influence and even a degree of ‘control’ over US policy in the region. And Israel is no friend of Iran nor particularly of any neighbor in the region.

        • Pathetic anti-semitism conspiracy theory. Your projections about my ethics are assumptive and weak.

          Their mantra is death to Israel and death to America. They are fortunate for receiving our patience to this point.

          Wake up and smell the reality.

          • My assumptions about your *ethics* are based only on what you write. And you have what I view as a group of problems which, un-addressed, un-confronted, lead to ethical breaches. You share your comprehension issues with thousands — millions — of other people who have been similarly indoctrinated. I use this term ‘indoctrination’ in the precise sense of the word. And I can clearly spell this out for you, as I have done numerous painstaking times.

            You use a vast ‘their’ (Their mantra is death to Israel) which is your first obvious fallacious statement. Your second is to fail to understand — simply to understand — why some people in this world have extremely negative feelings about both Israel and the US. It has to do with policies that have harmed communities. All you need to do to begin to understand *them* is to understand how you felt when ‘some people’ blew up NY buildings and caused 3000+ deaths. Study your own feelings. Then research those who have similarly suffered.

            Your other blatant fallacy is to assume that a critique of Israeli policy in the region is antisemitic. You are at the same level of slander and mis-statement as the dreaded Left with their ‘Nazi’ ‘Fascist’ and other terms. Yet you are very wrong. There are Jews and Israelis who oppose the policies of Israel, and have from the beginning.

            And you know nothing about this, have no interest in learning, and have no idea what you are talking about. Zero. To understand these things you will have to read & study. The ethical failing begins through lack of commitment. I make the suggestion — very politely — that you consider what I am saying.

            • As you ignorantly rant about secret machinations and Israel manipulating America. Nah, that’s not typically conspiratorial or anti-Semitic.

              Seek help.

              • Nothing in any sense secret about the American Neocons declarations and stated intentions. Nor the unfolding of unjust and unjustifiable wars. It’s all part of the public record.

                I will agree that other important parts are hidden and concealed. But there is deception everywhere we turn.

                I can easily notice and be concerned about dual loyalties of American public servants far too chummy with Israel and also notice and be concerned about the powerful PR efforts to influence American policy. Or especially of Israeli influence on American lawmakers through AIPAC (documented). And yes I do believe there is far too much Israeli influence on America and these are destructive ultimately. To notice that is not antisemitism.

                I know what antisemitism is. I have first hand experience of aversion to Jews. You have zero knowledge of antisemitism, its origin and its history. But I have studied it.

                You quack. I discourse.

                😉 But don’t think I don’t like you.

                You cannot see straight because of constraints imposed on you. What is most interesting is how you uphold the structure imposed from without. That is what I see as ‘the collusion of the self’. Your very self gets wedded somehow with mistruths. And you defend them. Detrimental to the Republic.

                This is a culture-wide phenomenon. You are definitely not alone!

  5. On a lighter note related to point 3, have you seen Machete? If not you should see it, this Mexican immigrant gives you a pass for all the “racist jokes” you’ll laugh at. 😛

  6. Outrage is a one way street and anyone to the right of AOC or CNN is going in the wrong direction. Just ask them. Therefore any and all vile behavior and vitriol against Trump or Trump supporters is permitted or even encouraged.

  7. It appears the video was shown during a presentation of political “memes”.

    “President Trump condemns video depicting a macabre scene of a fake President Trump shooting, stabbing & brutally assaulting members of the news media & his political opponents. The video was shown in a breakout session on political memes” (Youtube description, https://americanpriority.com/ampfest19/session/175487/memetics-).

    Thus it may well have been shown for its academic value, rather than its raw enjoyment value alone. The organizers vowing to investigate how it got shown has ominous implications itself.

    One could argue the video has no “academic” value, yet here we are discussing the damn video and its implications in society. Demanding the video be condemned, regardless its content context has chilling effects discussing any controversial topic. It is not up to outside hecklers to decide what a freely assembled group of individuals decides has discussion value.

  8. To me, the video is neither funny nor evil, it is stupid. But, that’s just me.
    It is newsworthy because it provides some insight into the nature of some of Trump’s supporters. For those who see the video as evil, it is further evidence that Trump attracts evil people to support him. No, he does not choose those who support him, but an argument can be made that some of what he says appeals to these people.
    The video itself does not upset me. What does, however, is the stupidity of showing it at a conference for his supporters. Did they not imagine this would become public? Did they not understand what the reaction would be in the news media and among a large segment of the population? While Trump had nothing to do with this video (so far as we know), it has been and will continue to be tied to him and used as another example of just how bad he is.
    Both the video and the clamoring for Trump to denounce it presented him with a no-win situation. A refusal to denounce it would repeatedly be characterized as Trump supporting violence against the media. If there were an actual attack on a media person, Trump would immediately be accused of promoting violence with this video as evidence. He’d be accused of that anyway, but with one less piece of ‘evidence’ to be used against him.
    The organizer of the conference where the video was shown said it was not authorized and it was shown in a side room. So, was this just some Trump supporters having fun, showing off their video editing skills? If so, how did the Times get it? Or, was it one of the #NeverTrumpers creating another bad news day/week for Trump?

    • “It is newsworthy because it provides some insight into the nature of some of Trump’s supporter.”

      It provides only the trivial insight that some thought it was entertaining. Just like the trivial insight that some people found the underlying movie entertaining.

      On a slightly different note, the Simpson’s once again predicted reality, more or less:

    • There have been multiple physical attacks on journalists lately…by Antifa and the Left.

      There was also actual political violence…against Trump supporters in Minneapolis, just last week. With mobs surrounding, attacking, robbing and throwing urine at people coming out of Trump’s rally (whom they safely calculated could not be armed, weapons being screened by the arena.) With almost zero repercussions and police not doing their job after charging Trump half a million for event security.

      The timing of CNN and others claiming we’re all supposed to be hitting our fainting couches over a meme right now…because it might inspire violence against corporate-State-sponsored journalists….it’s so bad.

  9. It looks like Trump did, in fact, kill off his media enemies. So much so that ABC had no ability take videos of the Turkish slaughter of the Kurds so they had to use archive footage to show intense the fighting is, and document Turkish genocide. Turns out they got the war zone and year wrong. The footage is from a Kentucky gun range, showing a savage firing range in 2017.

  10. Unless I’m mistaken, I believe the TRUMP video traces to, or is modeled on, a scene in one of the “Kingsman” movies, where there is a wholesale slaughter inside a church service. But that was all OK, because all the deserving dead were white American bigots.

      • Golly, I simply MUST add “open carry” wearing of thick, dark-rimmed glasses to my everyday dress – after all, NO ONE, especially no one of the American leftist religion, expects a BESPECTACLED, remorseless, cold-blooded mass shooter with a concealed pistol with an infinite-round capacity magazine to take advantage of one of THEIR churches’ hive-mind malfunctions…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.