The President's Casual Remarks on Khashoggi Killing Signals a New Low.

“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 last decade – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his disregard toward journalists, for journalism – and for the facts.

The Context

The US president’s dismissive attitude of the murder of well-known reporter the Washington Post columnist came during a press conference with the Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the US intelligence found in a recent assessment had ordered the abduction and murder of the Washington Post columnist in 2018. (Prince Mohammed has rejected accusations.)

The US intelligence services were not the sole entities to conclude the murder – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was sedated and cut apart – was signed off at the highest levels. An inquiry led by then UN special rapporteur, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

International Response

For a short time, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US enacted sanctions and visa bans in that year over the murder, although it refrained of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that rehabilitation.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the visit. But what was evident at the presidential residence was more alarming than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he effectively rewrote the facts – and then pointed fingers at the victim. The crown prince, he claimed when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own spy agencies determined previously. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This represents a new and abject point for a president who has made little secret of his disdain for the facts – or for the press. He has defamed journalists (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the inquiry about the journalist at the media event “false information”), scolded them in open settings (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), taken legal action against media organizations for large amounts of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he disapproves of to be shut down.

He has pressured established media out of the White House press pool for declining to use terminology of his preference, and he has slashed financial support for vital news services at home and crucial free press internationally.

Wider Consequences

All of that has created an atmosphere in which reporters are clearly more vulnerable in the United States, but one in which their victimization – and indeed murder – becomes not just unimportant (“incidents occur”) but acceptable (“a lot of people disliked that person”).

It is no surprise that that year was the most lethal year on file for the press in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been documenting this data: a persistent failure to bring to justice those responsible for reporter murders has established a environment without consequences in which journalists’ killers are literally able to escape punishment and so persist in these actions.

In no place is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is responsible for the deaths of more than 200 journalists in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The effect on society is profound. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our freedom to exist without fear and securely.

This week, the Committee to Protect Journalists gathers for its yearly global journalism honors. My message at the event is the same as my message for the president: these things may occur. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.