By Greg Smith

Why does so much of the media feel compelled to lie about Donald Trump’s proposal to temporarily halt Muslims from entering the country as a “ban” on Muslims?

To be clear, Trump’s comments were poorly made. In context it sounds like he meant immigrants — not U.S. citizens – who have no right to come here unless we invite them. And Trump’s plan would likely not be very effective because it assumes government would be capable of accurately classifying immigrants. If the federal government isn’t able to identify jihadists could it accurately identify immigrants’ religions?

Donald Trump said no Muslims should be allowed to enter the U.S. “until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” That isn’t a ban. It is called a moratorium and it is basically the same thing President Carter did with Iranians after the U.S. embassy was taken over in 1979.

You’d think journalists would have sufficient grasp of the language to know the difference.

More importantly, Trump’s proposal has nothing to do with discriminating against people based on their religion, hatred of Muslims or any similar accusation. It is based on a belief the federal government doesn’t have a handle on keeping jihadists from entering the U.S. and murdering Americans.

Trump was not indicting Muslims, he was indicting the Obama administration’s ability to weed out the tiny minority of Muslims who are a threat to Americans. With the recent revelations that immigration officials were not even allowed to look at the social media usage by those seeking to enter the country, who can argue that right now the federal government’s immigrant vetting process is firing on all cylinders?

Why Trump’s advisors haven’t made that clear is a tremendous curiosity.   ©

Greg Smith is a freelance writer and political consultant who lives in Bantam, CT. His blog is found at