Washington Post: Antifa is violent. Will the rest of the media finally tell the truth, too?

As Harvey made landfall and was wreaking havoc in Texas, there was another sort of destruction unfolding in Berkeley, California, this one of the human variety. On August 27th, hundreds of Antifa, the black-clad violent fascist anarchists, set like locusts upon about 20 peaceful sign-holding Trump supporters in a Berkeley park, threatening, chasing and beating them.

Yet something different happened after this typical scene of Antifa-organized violence—a major American newspaper told the truth. The Washington Post’s headline was shocking, not because of the subject matter, but because it actually reflected the facts of the matter on the ground: “Black-clad antifa members attack peaceful right-wing demonstrators in Berkeley.”

The end result of the attack was like every other Antifa riot—people were injured, some sent to hospitals, and over a dozen Antifa were arrested.

Up until Berkeley, which was not even one of Antifa’s most violent actions, the media had soft-pedaled the group’s violence. Reporters and journalists, inexplicably, generally refused to name them in coverage and worked to cast their violence as self-defense or action against “haters” or of course, the now ubiquitous “fascists.”

Other headlines around the country about their brutality continued to obscure the true nature of what Antifa was doing. The San Francisco Chronicle announced, “Berkeley police identify 13 people arrested amid violence at right-wing rally.”

The August 28 Washington Post headline and article, which bluntly laid out the truth of the violence by Antifa at Berkeley, sent a message to the liberal political and media world: that the romance was over.

The Los Angeles Times: “Protests in Berkeley turn violent as counter-protesters, pro-Trump forces clash.” Really? There was no clashing, unless you consider a father and son Trump supporters running for their lives a “clash.” Antifa didn’t “turn” violent, they came ready to inflict harm.

CNN’s coverage of Antifa has been Orwellian and even seemingly sympathetic. With a headline (eventually scrubbed) that actually noted, “Unmasking the Leftist Antifa Movement: Activists Seek Peace Through Violence,” they then compared Antifa’s rhetoric to Founding Father John Adams.

Antifa is not new. The media know who they are and what they do. They are an extension of the “Black Bloc” anarchists best known for their violent actions at World Trade Organization and G8 gatherings. They were a part of the now defunct Occupy movement. Their current incarnation is as laughably absurd fascist anti-fascists.

Reporters have been the subject of Antifa violence. One was arrested at Charlottesville for punching a female reporter for “The Hill.”

On Twitter, various journalists reported being attacked or seeing assaults by Antifa on other reporters. Also at Charlottesville, Katie Couric tweeted that she and her production team were sprayed with urine, a regular assault tactic of Antifa.

At a rally in Richmond, Virginia, one day after the Charlottesville horror, a local CBS reporter was hospitalized after being struck in the head with an object. Antifa admitted the assault on social media, which the reporter said began after the thugs ordered him to stop filming, which he refused.

Then finally, the Washington Post story, out of the blue, naming and blaming Antifa, while at the same time making it clear the “right wing” victims were peaceful.

In part, the media sees the message of anti-Trump Antifa as helpful to their anti-Trump narrative.

After all, we’re told, Mr. Trump’s election signals the spread of racism throughout America. How better to facilitate that narrative than to elevate and highlight people who claim the urgent need to attack America’s growing problem with fascism?

The August 28 Washington Post headline and article, which bluntly laid out the truth of the violence by Antifa at Berkeley, sent a message to the liberal political and media world: that the romance was over.

Some didn't get the message right away. Just a few hours after the Post’s story, the headline in New York Magazine’s "Daily Intelligencer" column was “Antifa beats up Trump supporters, Fuels Right-Wingers.” Their spin against Antifa wasn’t that mindless, anarchic violence against innocent people was bad, it was “images of defenseless Trump supporters being mobbed by their ideological nemeses lent stark visual support to the conservative narrative that antifa is a menace equivalent to white nationalism.”

Yet 24 hours later, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi issued a statement condemning Antifa which in part read, “The violent actions of people calling themselves antifa in Berkeley this weekend deserve unequivocal condemnation, and the perpetrators should be arrested and prosecuted…”

It’s arguable that media’s choice to coddle Antifa came at a time when liberals believed it would help their narrative casting Mr. Trump and his supporters, as racists. That did not work, and in fact is backfiring.

The Washington Post sent a message that the party was over. At least now perhaps we can expect more in media to be honest about Antifa and its violent agenda.