Oops!

Hell hath no fury like a confused newspaper with Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Behold: the Washington Post.

On January 13 at 2:25 p.m., the paper headlined this:

Trump amplifies incendiary tweets about Nancy Pelosi after her comments on Iran protests

The story, of course, centered on the president retweeting a photoshopped image of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, both dressed in Muslim garb. The story began this way:

President Trump on Monday retweeted a volley of incendiary posts accusing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) of downplaying protests in Iran and supporting the regime. One of them, a fake photo of Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) wearing photoshopped Islamic head coverings and standing in front of the Iranian flag, drew swift condemnation. “DEMOCRATS 2020” read the text below the image, which was originally tweeted by an anonymous user with the caption, “The corrupted Dems trying their best to come to the Ayatollah’s rescue.”

Those two opening paragraphs were followed by an image of the original tweet from the original poster. As here:

The corrupted Dems trying their best to come to the Ayatollah’s rescue.#NancyPelosiFakeNews pic.twitter.com/a0ksPHeXCy — داون آندر (@D0wn_Under) January 13, 2020

Cue the predictable left-wing outrage. And then… confusion strikes the Post.

Barely a half hour later, at 3:04 p.m., Post columnist Greg Sargent, he possessed of a particularly violent case of TDS, leaps to the attack on Trump’s posting. And one of his first sentences is this:

This blog will not reproduce the disgusting tweet that Trump retweeted.

Say what? Sargent’s “blog” is, of course, run by the Post. The paper had already run the picture — which at this writing is still posted on the Post’s website. Thus, Sargent was trying to give the impression the Post would refuse, on some lofty if imagined principle, to deign to publish such a photo — when, of course, the paper had already done just that.

Particularly interesting about this outrage is that it comes from a columnist for a paper that ran this article back in February of 2019. The headline:

Emergency powers helped Hitler’s rise. Germany has avoided them ever since. The lessons of the Weimar Republic.

The article compared the president of the United States to, yes indeed, Adolf Hitler.

Not to mention that in the photoshopping era we live in, Trump-haters have repeatedly put out photos of the president-as-Hitler. As seen here.

Oh yes. Over here was a CNN headline about two senior House Democrats:

Top House Democrats compare Trump’s rise to Hitler’s

The story began:

Washington (CNN) — Two powerful House Democrats have invoked Adolf Hitler’s actions in Germany and the treatment of Jews during World War I and in the 1920s to warn against the direction the US is moving in, with both saying Donald Trump’s presidency presents an unprecedented threat to democracy.

There was this as reported by Fox News:

Dem Rep. Johnson repeatedly compares Trump to Hitler in speech

The story began,

A Georgia Democratic congressman repeatedly compared President Trump to Adolf Hitler during a fiery speech at a Baptist church in Atlanta this week. The Atlanta NAACP posted video online of Rep. Hank Johnson’s speech in which he compared the president to the Nazi leader responsible for the killing of 6 million Jews during World War II. “Much like how Hitler took over the Nazi party, Trump has taken over the Republican Party,” Johnson said Tuesday.

Then there was this as reported by the Washington Examiner:

Missouri Democrat Maria Chappelle-Nadal posts photo of Trump morphing into Hitler

There are more — so many more — stories like this out there.

Outrage from columnist Sargent at any of this? Not to mention the Post itself? But of course not.

The bottom line here is simple: Outrage from the left is the coin of their realm. But it has to be properly directed.

Trump as Hitler? No big deal at the Post or with Democrats. A photo that imputes appeasement of Iran to Schumer and Pelosi? Call out the PC police.

But it does help if they understand what they are publishing in their own paper.