Ed O’Keefe’s Obsession With Trump Has Gotten So Out of Hand, Even Fellow Reporters Can’t Help But Laugh

 

During Wednesday’s White House briefing, CBS News correspondent Ed O’Keefe asked Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt to provide examples of President Trump being “falsely called racist.” The question came after Trump posted a message honoring Jesse Jackson and remarked that he has been “falsely and consistently called a racist” by critics on the radical left.

Leavitt’s reaction “You’re kidding, right?” drew laughter in the room. And honestly, it’s not hard to see why. For years, major media outlets, including CBS, have repeatedly labeled Trump a racist, often relying on selective quotes and political framing rather than full context.

Take the coverage of the 2017 Charlottesville rally. CBS and other outlets frequently highlighted Trump’s “very fine people on both sides” remark, while omitting the part where he explicitly said he was not referring to neo-Nazis or white supremacists and that they “should be condemned totally.” Leaving out that clarification dramatically changed the meaning of what he said, yet the edited version circulated widely and became a talking point.

In 2019, CBS personalities and reports described Trump’s comments about members of “the Squad” as “racist tweets.” Trump argued that progressive lawmakers criticizing the United States should focus on fixing the serious problems in the countries they came from. Critics saw racism; supporters saw blunt political rhetoric aimed at ideology, not race. Whether one agrees with his tone or not, labeling it automatically as racism short-circuits any serious debate about policy or national loyalty.

Even O’Keefe himself reported at the time on both the backlash and the support Trump received, using the “racist tweets” framing in social media promotion. That context makes his recent question at the briefing feel less like a search for truth and more like selective memory.

The broader issue here is credibility. When media outlets repeatedly apply one of the most serious accusations in public life racism to a political opponent, they carry a responsibility to be precise and fair. If quotes are edited in ways that remove key clarifications, or if political disagreements are reflexively categorized as racial animus, trust erodes. Many Americans, especially conservatives, see this pattern as part of a larger media bias that treats Republican leaders more harshly than their Democratic counterparts.

You can disagree with Trump’s style. You can criticize his wording. But there’s a difference between debating policy or rhetoric and attaching a moral label that implies hatred or bigotry. After years of headlines and on-air commentary using that label, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that he pushes back.

If journalists want to rebuild trust, it starts with context, consistency, and a willingness to apply the same standards across the board. Otherwise, moments like Wednesday’s briefing will continue to raise eyebrows and questions about who’s really ignoring the facts.