🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” Just two words. That was enough for the US president to brush off what is arguably the most infamous journalist killing of the last decade – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his contempt for the press, for the media – and for the facts.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissal of the killing of well-known reporter the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the CIA concluded in a recent assessment had ordered the kidnap and killing of the journalist in that year. (The crown prince has denied involvement.)

The US intelligence services were not the only ones to determine the homicide – which occurred in the Saudi diplomatic building in Istanbul and in which the late Khashoggi was sedated and dismembered – was approved at the top echelons. An investigation led by then UN special rapporteur, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

Global Reactions

For a short time, nations were unified in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The United States enacted sanctions and travel restrictions in 2021 over the murder, although it refrained of penalizing the crown prince himself. Since then, the kingdom has been gradually restoring itself – and the leader’s trip to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Critics of the government had roundly condemned the meeting. But what was evident at the presidential residence was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he effectively rewrote history – and then blamed the deceased. The crown prince, he asserted when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own spy agencies concluded four years ago. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals disliked that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This represents a new and abject low for a president who has made little secret of his contempt for the facts – or for the press. He has defamed journalists (he called a news network, whose reporter asked the question about the journalist at the Saudi press conference “fake news”), berated them in public (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), taken legal action against news outlets 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 official briefing group for declining to use terminology of his choosing, and he has gutted financial support for vital news services at domestically and crucial free press internationally.

Wider Consequences

All of that has fostered an environment in which reporters are manifestly less safe in the US, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“incidents occur”) but acceptable (“a lot of people disliked that gentleman”).

It is no surprise that that year was the deadliest year on file for journalists in the more than 30 years the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been documenting this information: a ongoing neglect to bring to justice those accountable for reporter murders has established a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are actually able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is responsible for the killing of more than 200 media workers in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The effect on the public is deep. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are attacks on our entitlement to information and on our freedom to live freely and safely.

This week, CPJ gathers for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the same as my one for the president: such events may occur. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.