Trump's Dismissal on Khashoggi Killing Signals a New Low.

“Incidents take place.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for the US president to effectively dismiss what is arguably the most notorious journalist killing of the past ten years – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his contempt for journalists, for journalism – and for the truth.

The Context

The American leader’s dismissive attitude of the murder of well-known reporter the Washington Post columnist came during a press conference with the Saudi crown prince, MBS – a man whom the US intelligence found in a recent assessment had orchestrated the abduction and murder of the journalist in that year. (The crown prince has denied involvement.)

The US intelligence services were not the sole entities to determine the homicide – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was sedated and cut apart – was signed off at the top echelons. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

International Response

For a brief period, governments were unified in their criticism of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US imposed penalties and travel restrictions in that year over the killing, although it refrained of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to Washington seemed to be the ultimate sign of that rehabilitation.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the visit. But what was on display at the White House was worse than could have been anticipated. Not only did the president fete Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the victim. The crown prince, he claimed when asked, was unaware about the murder – in clear opposition to what his country’s own intelligence services concluded four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Pattern of Behavior

This represents a new and abject point for a leader who has made no attempt to hide of his disdain for the facts – or for the media. Trump has defamed reporters (he called a news network, whose journalist asked the inquiry about the journalist at the media event “false information”), scolded them in public (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued media organizations for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he disapproves of to lose their licenses.

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 essential public media at domestically and vital independent media internationally.

Broader Implications

All of that has created an atmosphere in which journalists 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 (“many individuals disliked that gentleman”).

It is unsurprising that 2024 was the most lethal year on record for journalists in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been tracking this data: a persistent failure to hold those accountable for journalist killings has established a environment without consequences in which those who murder reporters are literally able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is accountable for the deaths of more than 200 journalists in the past two years.

Societal Impact

The effect on the public is profound. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our rights to know and on our liberty to live freely and safely.

This week, CPJ gathers for its annual International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the same as my message for the president: these things may happen. But it is our duty to make sure they do not.