Rules for Thee, Not for (D)
When Democrats wage war, bypass Congress, or sign executive orders, it’s leadership. When Trump does it, it’s fascism — because the media tells you so. Here’s the side-by-side proof.
The modern Democratic Party doesn’t just rely on hypocrisy — it thrives on it. Their entire strategy is built on saying the most outrageous, legally illiterate nonsense, knowing full well that much of the public won’t bother to check. When Trump bombs Iranian nuclear sites, suddenly half the Democrat caucus pretends to be constitutional scholars screeching about “Congressional approval,” even though every president in recent memory has done the same or worse without it.
They know it’s not unconstitutional. They know no approval is needed. But they also know a good chunk of the population won’t know that — and that’s who they’re aiming at. It’s not ignorance by accident. It’s deception by design.
This is their playbook: if Donald Trump does something, it’s fascism. If a Democrat does the same thing — or something worse — it’s “measured leadership.” It’s not just a double standard; it’s a strategic con job. They count on uninformed voters to carry their lies to the ballot box, while anyone with even a high school-level civics education can see through the charade.
This bait-and-switch game has infected every area of public policy — foreign policy, law enforcement, immigration, elections. The facts are out in the open. The hypocrisy is obvious. And the only reason this scam keeps working is because the media plays cleanup — spinning the lies, filtering the facts, and giving cover to a party that assumes the American people are too stupid to notice.
Foreign Policy:
The Bombs Are Okay If Blue Hands Launch Them
When Donald Trump ordered the killing of Qasem Soleimani, the Iranian terrorist general responsible for hundreds of American deaths, Democrats and media outlets erupted in coordinated hysteria. The New York Times called it a “reckless escalation.” House Democrats passed resolutions condemning it. Prominent figures like Bernie Sanders accused Trump of dragging the U.S. into war. MSNBC’s Chris Hayes declared, “The decision to kill Soleimani is very possibly the most dangerous move the U.S. has made in the Middle East in decades.”
Bernie Sanders
“Trump’s dangerous escalation brings us closer to another disastrous war in the Middle East.”
But when Barack Obama launched an unauthorized war in Libya in 2011 — a conflict that resulted in the overthrow of Gaddafi, the rise of ISIS in North Africa, and open-air slave markets in Libya — the media called it a humanitarian intervention. CNN praised Obama’s “measured and intelligent use of force.” Obama never sought Congressional approval, arguing the Libya operation did not meet the threshold of 'hostilities' under the War Powers Resolution — a justification widely criticized at the time, including by Republican members of Congress and constitutional scholars.
CNN
“Obama’s measured and intelligent use of force shows thoughtful leadership.”
Even more egregious, according to critics, was the muted media response when Joe Biden authorized strikes on Iranian-backed militias in Syria and Iraq in 2021 — without Congressional approval. These were not nuclear facilities, nor were they widely debated. Yet, the Washington Post described the strikes as “a calibrated effort to reassert deterrence.” The New York Times framed them as “a tough but necessary choice.”
Where was the outcry? Where were the “war powers” lawsuits? Where were the editorials claiming Biden had overstepped his authority or was acting like a king? They were nowhere to be found — because the party label, not the policy, determines the press reaction.
Immigration and Deportations:
3 Million Under Obama? That’s Fine.
Trump was vilified as a xenophobe for enforcing federal immigration law. The images of children in “cages” became a rallying cry — even though the photos originated during the Obama administration. In fact, it was Obama’s DHS that constructed those chain-link holding facilities in 2014. Jeh Johnson, Obama’s DHS Secretary, later confirmed this on the record.
The New York Times
“Trump’s war on immigrants is cruel, pointless, and deeply un-American.”
Under Obama, deportations reached historic highs: 3 million over two terms, including a peak of over 435,000 in 2013 alone. The New York Times noted in 2014 that more than two-thirds of those deported had no serious criminal record. The Obama administration frequently used expedited removal, meaning many migrants were denied court hearings and legal counsel.
Despite this, Obama was praised by major media outlets for enforcing immigration “smartly” and “strategically.” He was even nicknamed “Deporter-in-Chief” — not as a critique, but as evidence of his “pragmatism.”
Trump, by contrast, deported fewer than 800,000 during his first term — less than one-third of Obama’s total. His administration increased the number of immigration judges and attempted to expand due process. Yet media coverage was overwhelmingly negative. Terms like “concentration camps” and “ethnic cleansing” were invoked.
The Washington Post (2023)
“Biden navigates the immigration crisis with empathy and restraint.”
Joe Biden, too, has quietly overseen more than 1.3 million removals and returns during his term, including controversial uses of Title 42 to rapidly expel migrants without standard asylum review. The media remained largely silent.
The facts are plain: deportation policy under Democrats is framed as humane; under Republicans, it’s cast as inhumane — regardless of actual numbers or procedures. Only the narrative shifted.
Executive Orders:
When Obama Used a Pen, It Was “Progressive.”
Donald Trump’s use of executive orders — on border security, energy independence, and regulatory rollback — was routinely described as dictatorial. Headlines like “Trump’s Authoritarian Pen” (The Atlantic) and “A Presidency of One” (The Washington Post) painted a picture of unhinged executive overreach. Legal challenges mounted with each signature.
The Atlantic
“Trump’s authoritarian pen.”
Yet Barack Obama openly boasted of his unilateralism: “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone,” he said in 2014 when frustrated with Congress’s refusal to pass his legislative agenda. He used that pen to enact DACA, which shielded over 700,000 illegal immigrants from deportation — after Congress explicitly rejected the DREAM Act. Critics argued it was unconstitutional. Obama did it anyway.
He also rewrote key parts of the Affordable Care Act without Congress. Deadlines for the employer mandate were delayed. Enforcement penalties were waived. New rules were created via memo. The New York Times called it “executive improvisation,” while progressive groups hailed it as “savvy governance.”
Executive Orders Comparison (With Court Challenges)
Joe Biden has continued the trend — signing over 120 executive orders in his first term. These include sweeping actions on student loan forgiveness (blocked by the Supreme Court), bans on new oil and gas leases, and expansive new labor mandates. Despite serious constitutional questions, media coverage remained deferential. “Biden Boldly Acts While Congress Stalls,” read an NPR headline.
NPR (2022)
“Biden boldly acts while Congress stalls.”
Compare this to Trump’s executive order to build the Keystone XL pipeline, or to restrict federal funding to sanctuary cities — both met with lawsuits and media outrage. MSNBC labeled it “governing by fiat.”
There is no principle at play — only preference for who wields the power.
Election Legitimacy:
It’s Only “Denial” When Trump Does It
We were told that questioning the results of an election is tantamount to insurrection. Trump’s challenges to the 2020 outcome were portrayed as an attack on democracy itself. Yet this behavior had ample precedent — from Democrats.
Rep. Jasmine Crockett
Suggested Elon Musk and tech interference helped Trump “steal” 2024.
In 2000, Democrats insisted George W. Bush “stole” the election from Al Gore. The infamous Florida recount and hanging chads became a national spectacle. Democrat Rep. Alcee Hastings said, “The Supreme Court appointed George Bush president.” The NAACP held protests claiming disenfranchisement of Black voters in Florida. Over a dozen House Democrats objected to certifying Florida’s electoral votes — but not a single Democratic senator would join them, so the objection failed.
In 2004, after Bush’s re-election, Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones formally objected to Ohio’s electoral votes, citing unproven allegations of voter suppression. CNN described the move as “symbolic” and quoted Boxer saying, “We must fix our electoral system.” At no point were these Democrats labeled as threats to democracy.
Election Legitimacy Challenges:
When Democrats Object, It’s “Resistance”
In 2016, leading Democrats including Jimmy Carter, John Lewis, Maxine Waters, and Hillary Clinton questioned Trump’s legitimacy. Lewis called him an “illegitimate president.” Clinton repeatedly claimed the election was “stolen” and that “he knows he’s an illegitimate president.” Those quotes were echoed by cable news hosts for months.
Hillary Clinton
“Trump knows he’s an illegitimate president.”
Stacey Abrams continues to claim that she won the 2018 Georgia governor’s race, despite losing by over 50,000 votes. Her refusal to concede became a media cause célèbre. Publications like The Atlantic praised her “fight for democracy.”
No one was banned from social media. No one was indicted. No one had their bank accounts frozen, phones seized, or lawyers raided.
Contrast that with Trump: social media bans, impeachment, a special counsel, four indictments, and efforts to remove him from ballots. Democrats objected to elections for 20 years — yet the first time a Republican does it, it’s labeled a crime.
The hypocrisy isn’t hidden. It’s weaponized.
Law Enforcement and the Weaponized DOJ
Democrats accused Trump of politicizing the Justice Department. Yet it is Joe Biden’s DOJ that has launched an unprecedented legal war against his chief political opponent. Four separate criminal indictments. Over 90 felony counts. Coordinated lawfare from New York to Georgia to Washington, D.C. The FBI raided Trump’s private residence over a records dispute — a first in American history.
Yet when Joe Biden was found to have stored classified documents in his Delaware garage and D.C. office — from his time as Vice President and Senator — there was no raid. No charges. No photo op of documents scattered on the floor. Special Counsel Robert Hur concluded that Biden had “willfully retained” sensitive materials but declined prosecution due to his “poor memory” and advanced age. The same justice system that called Trump a criminal called Biden a harmless old man.
Under Barack Obama, the Department of Justice secretly obtained the phone records of over 20 Associated Press journalists and labeled Fox News reporter James Rosen a criminal co-conspirator for reporting on classified information. The Obama-era IRS, under Lois Lerner, targeted conservative nonprofit groups for additional scrutiny, delaying or denying their tax-exempt status in the run-up to the 2012 election. No one went to jail. Most of the public forgot it even happened.
During Trump’s term, Democrats and the media decried the politicization of law enforcement. But the same outlets had no problem when the FBI labeled traditional Catholics as potential extremists or surveilled school board meetings at the request of teachers’ unions during Biden’s presidency. Parents were labeled domestic threats for objecting to curriculum changes and mask mandates.
The FBI even flagged terms like “red pill,” “based,” and “Chad” as signs of “violent extremism” in leaked documents — absurdities that would be laughable if they weren’t part of official policy.
The weaponization didn’t start with Trump. It started long before him — and it has continued under Democrats with near impunity.
Media Coverage:
92% Negative — And Proud of It
The Harvard Shorenstein Center studied media coverage of Trump’s first 100 days. They found that 92% of it was negative. CNN, NBC, CBS, and The New York Times were the most slanted. By contrast, Obama’s coverage was 42% positive in his first 100 days — despite launching drone strikes, expanding the surveillance state, and bailing out Wall Street.
A 2017 Pew Research Center report also found that only 5% of stories about Trump during his early presidency were positive — compared to 42% for Obama, 22% for Bush, and 27% for Clinton. Media Research Center analysis found that 93% of ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news coverage of Trump in 2018 was negative. For Biden in 2021, the same outlets ran only 59% negative stories — despite Afghanistan, inflation, and a border crisis.
Meanwhile, Gallup polls show that over 80% of Americans believe the media is biased, and with good reason. Studies by the Center for Public Integrity revealed that over 96% of journalists who donated in the 2016 election gave to Hillary Clinton. Similar numbers held in 2020 with donations overwhelmingly favoring Democrats.
Examples abound:
Trump's travel restrictions were called the "Muslim Ban" — even though Obama had restricted visas from the same countries in 2015.
Biden’s border wall extension in 2023 was described by NPR as a “difficult but necessary concession,” while Trump’s was called “a monument to hate.”
When Obama ordered drone strikes that killed U.S. citizens overseas without trial, media labeled it a "grim necessity" in the war on terror. When Trump did the same to ISIS leaders, the press asked if he was escalating chaos.
Over 90% of journalists vote Democrat or donate to Democrat campaigns. This isn’t a conspiracy — it’s a cultural reality. And that culture does not tolerate ideological dissent.
The press does not exist to inform. It exists to frame. And the frame says: Trump = danger, even when doing what Democrats already did.
The Hypocrisy Is the Point
If Trump enforces the border, he’s a fascist. If Obama does it, he’s pragmatic.
If Trump uses force abroad, it’s reckless. If Biden does it, it’s responsible.
If Trump questions an election, it’s sedition. If Democrats do, it’s principled resistance.
If Trump signs executive orders, he’s ruling like a tyrant. If Obama or Biden signs them, they’re showing bold leadership.
The standard isn’t moral. It’s tribal. The rules change depending on the jersey you wear. And the real sin of Trump wasn’t that he did anything new — it’s that he exposed how fake the old rules really were.
He didn’t follow the script. He didn’t kiss the rings of legacy media or bow before the D.C. status quo. He ripped off the mask — and revealed that the emperor has no clothes, just talking points and a smug sense of superiority.
That’s why they hate him. Not for what he did, but for who he exposed.
He showed that their righteous outrage is performance art, their “democracy” is conditional, and their tolerance is a one-way street.
And the tragedy is that millions still fall for it — still believe CNN and The View and the editorial boards that call Trump an existential threat while cozying up to actual race-baiters, warmongers, and soft-totalitarians who happen to have a (D) next to their name.
As Thomas Sowell often said: “Facts are not liberals' strong suit. Rhetoric is.”
The facts are now plain. The mask is off. And the only question left is: are you still buying the narrative, or are you finally ready to burn the script?