As the United States celebrated the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the animal who led ISIS for 9 years, and was responsible for the gruesome and grisly deaths of thousands of innocent people, including Americans, some in the mainstream media were not so amused. From the moment that Baghdadi’s death became public, liberal pundits tried to throw cold water on the news, downplaying the significance of eliminating the leader of the world’s foremost terror organization, so evil that even Al Qaeda was reportedly shocked at their viciousness.

But the Washington Post really took the cake. Some fellow who writes for them named Joby Warrick wrote an obituary titled “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State, dies at 48.”

I thought it was a joke at first. Nobody would write such a headline, right? But someone did. And it must have been approved by an editor. And published. This article is about one of the worst people in the world, an animal who has ruined countless lives, and is responsible for countless more deaths. And yet the Washington Post felt that the headline most suitable for writing about such a person was one where they fail to mention anything about him that matters? It’s unfathomable, and yet completely true.

The Washington Post’s motto is ‘Democracy Dies in Darkness’. It is meant to convey the role of journalists of bringing stories to light, allowing the citizens of a country to be aware of what is happening in their country, good or bad, and take action if necessary. But there is another way democracy dies – by obfuscation. When “journalists” write stories that tell people nothing that they should know, focusing instead on pointless, irrelevant information, the citizens don’t ever know what actually matters. Instead they are overloaded with information that hides and obscures the basic facts that matter – in this case, that evil scum posing as a human was killed.

When President Trump rails against the mainstream media as being “enemies of the people” he has a point. While I don’t condone that type of speech because I think it is a little too far over the line, there is a kernel of truth in there. When men and women calling themselves journalists write in papers that call themselves the bearers of truth and the carriers of the torch that dispels the darkness of authoritarianism, information that is far from the truth, or truthful but purposely missing the main point completely, that is a tremendous disservice to the American people.

Enemies of the people? Maybe not. But are they the first line of defense against a dictator taking over this country? Certainly not. Truth is a commodity, and one that they use as they wish. Democracy dies in obfuscation.