A celebration of the 1st amendment — with its chief antagonist
One dog barking: an occasional column by John Dineen
Three months after it ended abruptly and chaotically in gunfire, the White House Correspondents Association dinner is back on Friday — so cue the speculation.
The so-called “nerd prom” every year brings together in glittering, cattle-call fashion the famous and decidedly less so to celebrate the 1st amendment, this year with the amendment’s current chief antagonist, Donald Trump.
What will Trump say tomorrow night to a (smaller) roomful of journalists whom he has branded at various times “enemies of the people” — and how will the WHCA respond?
What are the prediction markets saying? (And who is on White House teleprompter duty?)
Before the start of April’s event, which was derailed by a gunman attempting to charge the venue, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt impishly addressed speculation over Trump’s pending remarks by saying there would be “shots fired” (yikes).
“It will be funny. It will be entertaining. There will be some shots fired tonight in the room,” Leavitt told Fox News before heading into the event.
Speaking from the White House hours after the shooting incident and resulting postponement of the dinner, Trump said: “I was all set to really rip it. And I said to my people, ‘This would be the most inappropriate speech ever made if I said so.’ I have to save it. I don’t know if I could ever be as rough as I was going to be tonight. I think I’m going to be probably very nice.”
Of course, “nice” is one option.
Trump also could do a reading of the subpoenas issued July 10 to several New York Times reporters and their families for reporting on the security shortcomings of the new Air Force One. Or the search warrant executed at the home of Washington Post reporter Sarah Natanson.
Hundreds of journalists in advance of the originally planned dinner wrote to urge the WHCA to condemn Trump’s routine disparagement of the press and individual reporters. They reiterated that statement this week.
The group wrote:
The dinner has long served as a symbol of the vital and irreplaceable role of a free press in American democracy and a celebration of the First Amendment and the journalists who uphold it. President Trump’s systematic, sustained, and unprecedented attacks on the free press (detailed below) render his presence at such an event a profound contradiction of its purpose.
The journalists called on the WHCA to speak truth to power:
We understand that some journalists plan to wear pocket handkerchiefs or lapel pins with the words of the First Amendment. And continuing in that spirit, we believe the White House Correspondents Association should take stronger action by issuing – from the podium – a forceful defense of freedom of the press and condemnation of those who threaten that freedom, followed by a standing toast to the First Amendment and a pledge to continue upholding such a critical cornerstone of our democracy. Speak forcefully, in front of the man who seeks to undermine our country’s long tradition of an independent, strong, and free press.
There is another school of thought: Why invite an enemy of the 1st amendment to a celebration of said amendment?
Margaret Sullivan, writing in April, barely resisted a verbal eye-roll over the pocket square protest. More broadly, she’s not a fan of the dinner — particularly now:
On Saturday, Donald Trump – with all his vicious antipathy toward the profession he has called the “enemy of the people” – will attend. He’ll no doubt be applauded; surely many in the crowd will stand to recognize him.
Some media companies or executives are going further, inviting blatantly anti-press officials, including the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, and the White House deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, to be guests at their tables, or (in the case of David Ellison, CEO of CBS News’s parent company) even holding a separate dinner to “honor” Trump. Paramount, the parent of CBS News, is said to have invited Brendan Carr to their table; he is the FCC chair who has made a mockery of what should be his independent and non-partisan role; appointed by Trump, he has come down clearly on the side of the president’s allies in consequential decisions – including those involving Paramount’s mergers with other media corporations.
The juxtaposition is bizarre.
“It’s akin to a fire department inviting arsonists to a gathering aimed at celebrating firefighting,” wrote Oliver Darcy in his media newsletter, Status.
Sullivan and Darcy were commenting on the April guest list. This Friday’s event has been moved to a smaller venue; it’s unclear which attendees will have to miss out on the sequel.
Setting aside the question of Trump’s attendance, a good number of journalists question the conflict of interest inherent in the glitzy event, with its attendant before- and after-parties, reporters and sources — and celebrities! — enjoying a night out on the town together. The New York Times hasn’t attended in years.
As Sullivan wrote:
Shouldn’t reporters maintain some critical distance? What about the “optics” of this much-publicized event (and the week of gala festivities surrounding it) that made journalists appear frivolous about holding the government accountable to the public? Given the American public’s rock-bottom trust in traditional media, hasn’t this annual, televised display worsened that problem?
The columnist Finley Peter Dunne, writing in 1902 in the voice of the fictional “Mr. Dooley,” offered that the newspaper “comforts the afflicted, afflicts the comfortable.” No one will be quoting Mr. Dooley at Friday’s dinner.
Also in the news
Israelis fear Saudi nuclear deal with U.S. could ignite Mideast arms race
WPost: Trump administration considering military options in Mali
Trial date of June 1, 2027, set for Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro in his U.S. drug trafficking case
Trump administration is pressuring undocumented immigrants to self-deport by issuing civil fines of as much as $1.8 million
House Republicans adopt $95 billion package for Iran war, farmers, voting law changes, on 216-214 vote
House passes annual defense authorization bill that includes renaming Department of Defense as Department of War, on 216-212 vote
House votes to limit stock trading by members of Congress, elevating a campaign issue, on 232-198 vote
House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan recommends criminal charges against former special counsel Jack Smith
House Oversight Committee approves bill to require all tax changes, fees in D.C. to be subject to approval by Congress
Michigan Gov. Whitmer makes the ‘science of reading’ training mandatory for state's teachers
Amish Shah wins Democratic primary in battleground Arizona House race, defeating establishment pick
ICE drops plan to convert 2 Pennsylvania warehouses into detention centers; Mullin has paused purchases of new warehouses
Heather Cox Richardson: 'Fascism has always been a vehicle for frustration with a system that was failing the people. But it has never been a solution for fixing that system.’
WPost analysis: The 50 biggest donors have contributed a combined $1,642,188,460 so far this midterm cycle
Donald Trump Jr. investment firm posts returns of 200 percent
Vigils planned for Saturday in more than 135 communities to demand justice for Lorenzo, Johan, all lives taken by ICE
AP: OpenAI blamed a hacking event on its AI models going rogue; here are some things to know
Stocks and the economy increasingly are relying on the AI boom
Gig workers join Walmart, Amazon employees as top recipients of SNAP and Medicaid, Government Accountability Office finds
You can call the Capitol switchboard, (202) 224-3121, and be connected to the offices of your representative and senators. To email your House member and your two senators, you can connect to their websites at Congress.gov. Most lawmakers seem to only accept emails from their constituents, but these leaders accept emails from Americans nationwide, at:
House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer
Senate Majority Leader John Thune