The media's incoherent response to South African policies

Red State:

During Trump 2.0, much of our press industry has been operating with a sense of default opposition to nearly anything President Trump says and/or any policy put forth by the administration. This emotional approach to the news has led to numerous examples of outlets putting out ridiculous coverage and commentary.

Look how they have opposed deporting hardened criminals, supported pro-Hamas student protesters, screeched loudly about efforts to cut government waste, and insisted that positive economic progress is bad news. The latest item to crop up in recent days sees the press once again opposing things they should support, and backing details that rational people abhor, and the New York Times is leading this charge. Attacks and the killing of white farmers and the confiscation of their land have been ongoing, but our media is in denial due to who is in the White House.

The press has strained to say that Trump made baseless claims about South African violence and the practice of government-sanctioned farm seizures. Reporters are desperate to debunk the administration on all matters, such as Yamiche Alcindor arguing over the white crosses showing the deaths of white farmers. This was a disputed element of Trump’s video, where a past memorial was displayed that no longer exists. However, in another part of the country, the white crosses commemorating slain white farmers are a feature. (Something the Associated Press struggles over, as it both denies AND displays the evidence of this taking place.)

This is but one instance of the press wanting to refute a detail in order to sweep away an entire story. The leading newspaper is no different, so the New York Times rests heavily on its reporter stationed in the country, and he delivers this bizarre explanation of Trump’s claim of governmental farm seizures that is supposed to be disqualifying. He literally says there is no government confiscation of farms; it is merely a new law permitting the government to take over the lands without making a compensation payment to the owners. Uh…huh.
...

This looks like another example of the media hating Trump more than they love the truth.   I think Trump is closer to the truth about what is happening than many in the media.