🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” A mere phrase. That was enough for Donald Trump to effectively dismiss what is arguably the most notorious murder of a reporter of the past ten years – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his disregard toward the press, for the media – and for the facts.

The Context

The US president’s dismissive attitude of the killing of prominent journalist Jamal Khashoggi came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA concluded in a recent assessment had orchestrated the abduction and murder of the journalist in 2018. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to determine the murder – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and in which the late journalist was drugged and cut apart – was approved at the highest levels. An investigation led by then UN special rapporteur, the UN investigator, reached comparable findings.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were unified in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The US enacted penalties and travel restrictions in 2021 over the murder, although it stopped short of penalizing Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the crown prince’s visit to Washington seemed to be the ultimate sign of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the regime had strongly criticized the visit. But what was evident at the White House was more alarming than could have been imagined. Not only did the president honor Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter history – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. The crown prince, Trump claimed when asked, was unaware about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his nation’s intelligence services concluded previously. Moreover, the president said: “A lot of people didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, incidents occur.”

Pattern of Behavior

This marks a new and abject low for a leader who has made no attempt to hide of his disdain for the facts – or for the press. He has defamed journalists (he called a news network, whose reporter asked the inquiry about the journalist at the media event “fake news”), scolded them in open settings (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the convicted sex offender financier the convicted criminal), sued news outlets for eye-watering sums of money in frivolous cases, and called for media groups he doesn’t like to lose their licenses.

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 financial support for essential public media 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 victimization – and indeed killing – becomes not just unimportant (“things happen”) but tolerated (“many individuals didn’t like that person”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the deadliest year on file for the press in the over three decades the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been tracking this data: a persistent failure to bring to justice those responsible for reporter murders has created a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are literally able to escape punishment and so persist in these actions.

Nowhere is this clearer than in Israel, which is responsible for the deaths of more than 200 journalists in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The impact on society is deep. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our rights to know and on our freedom to live freely and safely.

This week, CPJ meets for its annual International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the identical as my message for the president: these things may happen. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.