Donald Trump’s second term in office hinges on a simple but effective strategy: he demands that major American institutions adhere to established rules and standards—even as he disregards them himself.

ABC News provides a recent illustration of this practice. On June 8, the network suspended Terry Moran, a senior national correspondent, in response to a pointed social media critique he posted about Stephen Miller. Two days later, they chose not to renew his contract.

In his now-deleted post, Moran described Miller—Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy and the architect of a hardline immigration agenda—as someone driven more by personal animus than thoughtful policy development. Moran argued that Miller’s influence springs from “a capacity for hatred” that serves as his “spiritual nourishment.”

Predictably, the White House declared victimhood. Vice President JD Vance denounced Moran’s remarks as a “vile smear,” while Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called them “unacceptable” and pressed ABC to hold Moran accountable. Yet those who champion free speech within the administration showed little tolerance when it came to criticism.

ABC News defended its decision by reaffirming its commitment to impartial reporting. The network stated that personal attacks fall outside its standards of objectivity and professionalism. However, Trump and his allies continue to leverage norms selectively—enforcing them on others while flouting them themselves.

Moran’s suspension underscores a broader dilemma: news organizations and government officials once followed mutual rules of engagement. Reporters generally avoided public psychoanalysis of officials, and policymakers accepted critical coverage without resorting to threats or investigations.

That era feels distant under Trump’s presidency. His team’s rapid retaliation against Moran exemplifies a relentless campaign to punish dissent. Historically, television correspondents would have remained circumspect; today, any critique risks retribution.

Moran’s assessment of Miller was, by many accounts, accurate: television appearances reveal a penchant for provocation and contempt toward dissenting views. Yet ABC’s swift disciplinary action suggests a willingness to placate the president’s circle rather than defend journalistic freedom.

This pattern isn’t new. In 2024, Trump sued ABC over debate coverage and secured a $15 million settlement supporting his presidential library. Critics argued the network had a strong free-speech case, but ABC chose to settle and donate, only to face further investigations by the FCC under a Trump appointee.

The stark inconsistency in applying norms highlights a partisan double standard. If Democratic officials behaved similarly, would Trump’s team demand equal accountability? The answer seems clear: rules are enforced only when convenient.

Many long for a return to mutual respect between the press and government, where standards applied evenly and criticism did not provoke institutional retaliation. But with over three years remaining in this administration, such a restoration appears unlikely.

Perhaps the best response is to mirror Trump’s tactics: treat his selective enforcement of norms as a lesson. When he casts himself as a victim, remind the public of the standards he routinely ignores. Only then might the power of genuine accountability return.

Post Views: 5,664