🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for Donald Trump to effectively dismiss what is arguably the most infamous murder of a reporter of the last decade – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his disregard toward journalists, for the media – and for the facts.

The Context

The US president’s dismissal of the killing of well-known reporter Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA found in a recent assessment had orchestrated the kidnap and killing of the Washington Post columnist in that year. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to conclude the homicide – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was sedated and dismembered – was approved at the highest levels. An inquiry led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a brief period, nations were unified in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The US enacted penalties and travel restrictions in that year over the killing, although it stopped short of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the crown prince’s visit to the US capital seemed to be the final confirmation of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the visit. But what was on display at the presidential residence was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump honor Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. The crown prince, he asserted when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies concluded four years ago. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals disliked that gentleman 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 leader who has made no attempt to hide of his contempt for the facts – or for the media. He has smeared journalists (he called a news network, whose reporter asked the inquiry about the journalist at the Saudi press conference “fake news”), berated them in public (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his connection with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued news outlets for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for news outlets he doesn’t like to be shut down.

He has forced veteran news services out of the White House press pool for declining to use terminology of his choosing, and he has gutted funding for vital news services at domestically and crucial free press internationally.

Wider Consequences

All of that has fostered an atmosphere in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the US, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“things happen”) but acceptable (“many individuals didn’t like that gentleman”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the most lethal year on record for the press in the more than 30 years the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been documenting this data: a persistent failure to bring to justice those accountable for journalist killings has established 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 accountable for the killing 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 attacks on facts. They are attacks on our entitlement to information and on our freedom to live freely and securely.

On Thursday, CPJ meets for its annual International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the same as my one for Trump: these things may happen. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.