The denials from Kelly, Dowd, Mattis are pretty explicit and direct. Bob Woodward’s sources are, as always, anonymous so we may never know who’s right. https://t.co/SxY51sLluq
Brit Hume believes Woodward’s book which produced this interesting exchange with David French:
The last group in America indicted by Woodward's account is Never Trumpers, Brit. There are some extremists who say that no one decent should serve in the admin, but virtually ever NTer I know on the right is darn glad for Gen. Mattis and other voices of conviction and sanity. https://t.co/NrGvPDSjn9
@6:59 Wrong. On Election Day, 538 gave Hillary a 71% chance of winning and Trump a 29% chance of winning. A 538 nerd was explaining polls and probabilities to Alisyn Camerata on CNN the other morning.
I am not sure that Camerata understood the math any better than a Trumpkin might, but she was definitely more polite and good-natured.
Douthat is right. So far, aides, Congress and the courts have protected us from the full effects of Trump’s idiocy. However, as he notes, we are not yet through the four years and he has not yet dealt with a major crisis other than those of his own making.
“Hats off to Brit here, who somehow converts a book-length indictment of Trump’s basic fitness to be president into an indictment of the people who spent the entire 2016 campaign warning that Trump was unfit to be president. For sheer degree of difficulty, it’s the finest subject-changing knock on NeverTrumpers I’ve ever seen.”
————
“And yet the lesson, apparently, is that NeverTrumpers are idiots because sporadically they call on people like Mattis or Kelly to resign in protest. Compared to the “fake news!” dismissals that’ll greet the book on Tucker and Hannity tonight, Brit’s spin is next-level. I feel like Ron Burgundy: I’m not even mad. That’s amazing!
Exit question: Can we fault NeverTrumpers for thinking some of these dissatisfied deputies should quit when Rudy Giuliani apparently thinks so too? “If they said it [to Woodward], they should be questioning why they are there. Why don’t they go get another job? That’s the kind of disloyalty that leads to you leaving, not staying and undermining the president.”
Brit Hume says the lesson from Woodward's book is "Thank God for the people around Trump" for literally stealing papers off his desk to prevent catastrophes. "That's a service to the country… without question." pic.twitter.com/4hjHCAp6MG
AJ, Your 7:10 argument was refuted by David French @ 6:58. As French noted, most NeverTrumpers (including French and I) have appreciated the work of folks like Mattis and Kelly who worked to constrain Trump and protect us all from his imbecility.
@ 7:15 As noted @ 7:05 Camerata didn’t understand probabilities and statistics either and wanted the nerd to give her a certain prediction for the 2018 election. The 538 nerd patiently went through his primer on statistics and explained that 29% is not equal to 0%. Poor Camerata’s eyes went as glassy as a Trumpkin, but she giggled and politely went to a commercial break.
“Sure enough, Todd’s “It’s Time for the Press to Stop Complaining—And to Start Fighting Back” is an eye-rolling chuckle-fest starting with the excerpt prominently featured under that laughable title: “A nearly 50-year campaign of vilification, inspired by Fox News’s Roger Ailes, has left many Americans distrustful of media outlets. Now, journalists need to speak up for their work.”
Yep, you got it from just that much info. According to Todd, the late Roger Ailes is personally responsible for the public’s lack of trust in the media. Whinging on for a whopping 30 paragraphs, Todd explains that Ailes and his deplorable Fox News (not founded until 1996, by the way), are to blame for all the media’s ills . . . and even for the election of President Trump. You can’t make this stuff up. Well, I guess you can. Todd did.”
————————–
“So, Todd, a serious “reporter and analyst” is just now, after a “50-year” assault on the news media, getting around to recognizing it? Ace reporting and analyzing there.
The hilarity doesn’t stop there (and no, I’m not going to keep Chandler-izing the excerpts, you get the picture): Todd then explains how and why Ailes is personally and apparently solely responsible for the recent precipitous decline in public trust in media, a decline so stark even the media has to acknowledge it. Todd acknowledges it without any self-reflection.
Some of the wealthiest members of the media are not reporters from mainstream outlets. Figures such as Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge, and the trio of Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and Laura Ingraham have attained wealth and power by exploiting the fears of older white people. They are thriving financially by exploiting the very same free-press umbrella they seem determined to undermine.
Much of the current hand-wringing about this rise in press bashing and delegitimization has been focused on the president, who—as every reporter in America sadly knows—has declared the press the “enemy of the people.” But, like much else in the Trump era, Donald Trump didn’t start this fire; he’s only spread it to a potentially more dangerous place.
Every reporter sadly knows the same misrepresentation of the president’s actual words reporters keep reporting as fact. Trump called “The FAKE NEWS media” not his enemy but “the enemy of the American people” [emphasis not mine]. The only way the media can claim to be among those Trump terms the enemy of the people is if they acknowledge they serve up fake news. Catch-22.
As to the wealth-shaming, let’s hear how destitute Rachel Maddow is, how near poverty Joe and Mika are, what a pauper Todd himself is. The claim that Hannity and Tucker have more power is also questionable because Todd doesn’t explain what he means by “power” or how the host of Meet the Press is less powerful than Laura’s new show on Fox News. If power is counted by viewers, he’s spot-on.
My guess is that the Fox hosts are more credible to larger segments of the American public (as born out in ratings). Again, though, Todd doesn’t reflect on this; he doesn’t wonder what the mainstream media is getting wrong. Instead, he hammers Ailes and Fox News . . . and, implicitly, those of us who no longer (or never did) trust the media.”
David French was busy last night. He also took on the media:
MSM outlets have convinced themselves of two things at once: 1) They cannot fairly cover America without a newsroom that looks like America, but 2) they can cover American without a newsroom that thinks like America. So the ideological monoculture remains: https://t.co/XQUDphK8wN
After the attack today on a Fox affiliate, Chuck Todd and his rhetoric above are being called to account.
.@BrandonToddFOX4 describing scene as man who crashed into FOX4 building ranted to employees. Said man said something about "high treason," ranted about a sheriffs department and held up papers against windows. https://t.co/i1sTvA8lZj
“We’re going to let you in on a little secret: Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is going to be confirmed.
The Resistance still doesn’t believe that, and they think that Twitter hashtags, “Handmaid’s Tale” costumes, and fits of screaming are going to change that. They aren’t.
That didn’t stop a group from Maine — Mainers for Accountable Leadership — from shooting a video targeting Sen. Susan Collins, and it’s a must-watch:
“Andrew Pollack, the outspoken father of one of the students killed in the Parkland mass school shooting, slammed the fellow Parkland father who approached Judge Brett Kavanaugh during a break in Tuesday’s heated Supreme Court confirmation hearing.”
—–
“His tweet came after cameras showed Fred Guttenberg, another father of one of the 17 Parkland victims, quickly approaching Judge Kavanaugh with an extended hand before security ushered him away.
Mr. Guttenberg, whose 14-year-old daughter, Jaime, was also killed in the shooting, tweeted that the judge pulled away because “he did not want to deal with the reality of gun violence.””
—–
“After days of unrest in eastern Germany, German politicians are calling for the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) to be placed under police surveillance. In a move that is seen as precursor to a nationwide surveillance of the party, German authorities placed the youth wing of the AfD in the states of Lower Saxony and Bremen under police observation.
Thomas Oppermann, the vice president of the German parliament, said the German intelligence service BfV should monitor the AfD party for possible links to far-right groups. “The refugee question divides society, and the AfD is riding ever more radically on this wave,” Oppermann told German newspaper Die Welt. “That is why security services should be watching the collaboration between the AfD and neo-Nazis very closely.”
Eastern Germany has been hit by a string of protests after the fatal stabbing of a German by a group of Arab immigrants in the city of Chemnitz. Thousands took to the streets since early last week calling for an end to Chancellor Angel Merkel’s open borders policy.
Politicians from Merkel’s Christian Democratic party (CDU) also called for similar measures against the AfD:
Patrick Sensburg, security spokesperson for the CDU, told [public broadcaster] NDR Info that the AfD needs to be monitored by the domestic intelligence service (BfV). “Surely, most of the AfD members are not right-wing extremists, but there are part of the party structure that should be classified as anti-constitutional,” Sensburg told [the newspaper] Handelsblatt. Armin Schuster, the CDU’s expert on interior policy, had recently called for the AfD to be place under scrutiny by the domestic intelligence service at the state-level. The AfD is “increasingly becoming a case for the domestic intelligence services,” especially as [the AfD] party chief Alexander Gauland “has to distance himself for the faux pas by one of his fellow party member on monthly-basis,” Schuster said. [translated by the author]
Founded in 2013, the AfD emerged as the third-largest party in parliament last year after it won nearly 13 percent of the vote.
German business newspaper Handelsblatt reported the attempts by the established parties to put the AfD on state surveillance:”
——————–
Hey, just like Obama and Dems and their “state surveillers” at the FBI and DoJ did to Trump!
Simple enough Donna. Release the tapes he says he has where people say what he alleges. Of course to do so he’d have to out his second and third hand account witnesses to these alleged conversations.
But they won’t, because none of these anonymous sources have the guts to openly say it, or it was never said to begin with.
If you’re gonna make a play to embarrass the president and make him look bad, at least these folks who view this as a public service could do is own up to it. Show some guts and class for a change. Take credit for their work. Otherwise, it’s just yellow tabloid journalism, which of course in today’s climate means a NY Times best seller because…. Trump.
(CNN)The battle lines have been drawn. On one side, President Donald Trump and his allies and enablers. On the other, Bob Woodward, hundreds of hours of taped interviews and dozens of sources and a book that reads as a comprehensive indictment of Trump’s first 19 months in office.
Trump spent Tuesday attacking Woodward’s “Fear: Trump in the White House” as largely a work of fiction containing “so many lies and phony sources.” (Notably, he didn’t detail the alleged lies. More on that below.) Woodward, meanwhile, is largely letting the reporting in the book speak for itself.
“I stand by my reporting,” Woodward told CNN’s Jamie Gangel. …
_______________________________________
Meanwhile if I were a conspiracy monger who believed in pizza pedophiles, Seth Rich murder conspiracies and Obama tapps, I would be inclined to believe that The Cult has a mole placed high in the Nike organization making marketing decisions that allow Dear Leader to again raise his favorite issue.
Just like the NFL, whose ratings have gone WAY DOWN, Nike is getting absolutely killed with anger and boycotts. I wonder if they had any idea that it would be this way? As far as the NFL is concerned, I just find it hard to watch, and always will, until they stand for the FLAG!
“What we saw late Tuesday was a series of coordinated denials by senior Trump staffers — chief of staff John Kelly and Defense Secretary James Mattis — designed to rebut hugely damaging portrayals of them as both afraid and dismissive of the President. But statements like those are sort of de rigueur in these situations. Broad denials that create straw men, knock them down and then suggest the matter is settled. If Mattis and Kelly didn’t put out statements doing just that, it’s hard to see how they could possibly remain in the administration for even one more day.
But what now? Trump tweeted Wednesday morning that the Woodward book “form[ed] a picture of a person that is literally the exact opposite of the fact.” That is a big claim. Given Woodward’s reputation — as the preeminent chronicler of the modern White House — and his long track record of fair and accurate reporting, the onus is on Trump to prove Woodward made major mistakes. And that means providing specific evidence of mistakes, not just saying the book is riddled with errors.”
” … And it’s also likely that Woodward has the tapes — or transcripts — to back up the claims he makes about how Kelly and Mattis view the President. … “
DJ, I posted the French article this morning with this introduction:
The dilemma:
1. We need for the people to trust the press/media when it reports the truth about Trump.
2. Most conservatives do not trust most of the media because of actual, though overstated, bias in the media. Instead they turn to Fox, Limbaugh, and other dubious sources of information.
3. The ridiculous and false attacks on the press by Trump and his cult make it harder for legitimate criticisms of press bias to be considered.
Here is such an example:
MSM outlets have convinced themselves of two things at once: 1) They cannot fairly cover America without a newsroom that looks like America, but 2) they can cover American without a newsroom that thinks like America. So the ideological monoculture remains: https://t.co/XQUDphK8wN
I actually think the media’s coverage of Trump is the least biased coverage of any major story in my lifetime. There is no need for bias when you simply report the idiotic remarks and lies he said the previous day.
I got positive responses from both conservatives and liberals. At the end of this hilarious disaster, perhaps various groups can work together to rebuild trust in various institutions.
Heated exchange between Rubio and Alex Jones in the Senate hallway — Jones crashes a Rubio interview and touches Rubio's shoulder. Rubio tells Jones not touch him again, says he'll "take care of you myself" rather than calling the police.
“U.S. President Donald Trump will chair a U.N. Security Council meeting on Iran this month to spotlight its “violations of international law” during the annual gathering of world leaders in New York, U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley said on Tuesday.
The United States, which holds the council presidency for September, has unsuccessfully pushed the Security Council to call out Iran. Haley has regularly attacked Iran, accusing it of meddling in the wars in Syria and Yemen.
Haley told reporters Trump was chairing the meeting “to address Iran’s violations of international law and the general instability Iran sows throughout the entire Middle East region.””
1. Doesn’t have to. Why respond to anonymous allegations other than to say they’re false and then move on?
2. Only the usual Flakes and company, you know the bunch not running for re-election because they can’t win. NTers I believe they’re called. Nothing new there.
All the rest are irrelevant until Woodward shows some actual proof.
The point made by French has long been obvious to many of us (though denied by many of my colleagues, unfortunately). An editor (who agrees that newsroom ‘diversity’ is all too often only acceptable if it’s within the realm of the left) sent it to me last night and I replied “yes yes yes.” We’ve had the conversation many times before but seem to be the only ones in our own journalistic circles who “see” it, alas.
With regard to Trump, however, I have to say the national media does not approach coverage of this president fairly. It’s one thing to be tough, another to be out to get someone at any and all turns. By the same token, the media was extremely easy on Obama — so it did not cover his presidency “fairly” either. When it came to Obama, the national media was much too soft and unquestioning — fawning, in fact. (Again, I suspect that all goes back to that ingrained biased that so many/most journalists have, for whatever reason — and that’s another subject; Obama also was the first black president which was, in itself, a big and, in many ways for most of us, a positive news story.)
So what’s happened? I suspect it’s the influence of the internet that has made it all go sideways and down, sadly. Say what you will about Cronkite, back in the day he kept his feelings and opinions to himself. I mourn the loss of a strong, objective media in this country and doubt will see it return anytime soon. Part of it is the media’s fault — for being unwilling to self-assess and be sufficiently self-critical. Part of it, I think the largest part of it which only feeds the first part, is the nature of the digital revolution.
I don’t know how you fix that. We probably don’t.
Back to Woodward, there’s actually nothing particularly surprising in these reports, right? We’ve all pretty much understood that Trump is a wild card, that he behaves poorly and rashly and is, often, unreasonable and, basically, a hot head. So the scenario actually fits what we already know about Trump, whether it bothers us or not or whether it means he is getting good (or bad) things accomplished during his term or not (I applaud his Supreme Court appointments, for example, but remain wary of his personal stability).
Frankly, the revelations from Woodward so far (remember there’s more to come, the book hasn’t actually come out yet) do not shock or surprise me. Are they really surprising to anyone else? Chaos and dissension within the Trump White House? That seems consistent from everything else we’ve all observed and know about him, right? Again, whether you like that approach or not, and those who voted for him largely do (or have no problem with it).
And while it’s true that the media largely is out to “get” Trump, Trump makes the “getting” all too easy. He’s simply egged them all on and they’ve taken the bait completely.
DJ, I have compared media coverage of Trump to a referee trying to call a basketball game in which one player travels or double dribbles or commits a foul on every play. They are hard on him. But his lies and miscues are so frequent that he actually gets away with more than other presidents.
Ricky, as I said, Trump makes it easy to be “got.” He’s playing right into their hands and they’re behaving likewise at every turn. It’s truly a dysfunctional relationship.
The conservative and anti-Trump Reagan Battalion questions the motive and wisdom of the anonymous op-ed writer:
4/4
Given all of the above, and the fact that this up-ad is damaging enough to drive up Trump’s paranoia, to cause him to distrust everyone, to legitimize conspiracy nuts, but it is not enough (because you‘re anonymous) to remove him from the Presidency, what was your true goal?
If you accept the analysis @8:20 you might conclude that the anonymous author:
a. wanted to support Woodward’s allegations;
b. wanted to help the chances of Democrats in the fall;
c. wanted to increase the chances of impeachment and removal.
Debra, You now know that I am going all out and will spare no expense to win our bet.
Does the so-called “Senior Administration Official” really exist, or is it just the Failing New York Times with another phony source? If the GUTLESS anonymous person does indeed exist, the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!
Many of the complaints from the NYT's anonymous WH coward – not all, but many – are ideological: that Trump deviates from GOP orthodoxy, an ideology he didn't campaign on & that voters didn't ratify. Trump may be a threat but so is this covert coup to impose these policies. pic.twitter.com/4Qf54JJHN9
The irony in the op-ed from the NYT's anonymous WH coward is glaring and massive: s/he accuses Trump of being "anti-democratic" while boasting of membership in an unelected cabal that covertly imposes their own ideology with zero democratic accountability, mandate or transparency
Really exists. Just got off the phone with him or her. He or she sends his or her best, and he or she looks forward to seeing you around the White House tomorrow. https://t.co/KdjuVQYtv4
… Over the course of almost 450 pages, Woodward depicts Obama as an arrogant, aloof and hyper partisan president who manages to either alienate or disappoint everybody he needs to help govern Washington. …
Boehner did try — very hard, in fact — to make a deal with Obama on the debt limit. But it was amateur hour at the White House at every turn. At one point in the negotiations, Obama insisted on dragging every congressional leader to the White House for daily meetings until the crisis was solved. The veteran hill staffers thought this was a clear sign that “the president simply didn’t understand how Congress works and didn’t know how to negotiate.”
“Boehner,” Woodward writes, “hated going down to the White House to listen to what amounted to presidential lectures.” …
___________________________________
Wandering Views 
https://twitter.com/michi83/status/1037095496391770113
LikeLike
LikeLike
Brit Hume believes Woodward’s book which produced this interesting exchange with David French:
LikeLike
This time I’m sure they’re right…… 😁
———————
Or not……
LikeLike
@6:59 Wrong. On Election Day, 538 gave Hillary a 71% chance of winning and Trump a 29% chance of winning. A 538 nerd was explaining polls and probabilities to Alisyn Camerata on CNN the other morning.
I am not sure that Camerata understood the math any better than a Trumpkin might, but she was definitely more polite and good-natured.
LikeLike
Douthat is right. So far, aides, Congress and the courts have protected us from the full effects of Trump’s idiocy. However, as he notes, we are not yet through the four years and he has not yet dealt with a major crisis other than those of his own making.
LikeLike
Poor Ricky,
If Trump is really the idiot you think he is, then you’re an even bigger one, at least according to Brit Hume.
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/04/brit-hume-lesson-woodwards-book-trump-disaster-never-trump-people-wrong/
“Hats off to Brit here, who somehow converts a book-length indictment of Trump’s basic fitness to be president into an indictment of the people who spent the entire 2016 campaign warning that Trump was unfit to be president. For sheer degree of difficulty, it’s the finest subject-changing knock on NeverTrumpers I’ve ever seen.”
————
“And yet the lesson, apparently, is that NeverTrumpers are idiots because sporadically they call on people like Mattis or Kelly to resign in protest. Compared to the “fake news!” dismissals that’ll greet the book on Tucker and Hannity tonight, Brit’s spin is next-level. I feel like Ron Burgundy: I’m not even mad. That’s amazing!
Exit question: Can we fault NeverTrumpers for thinking some of these dissatisfied deputies should quit when Rudy Giuliani apparently thinks so too? “If they said it [to Woodward], they should be questioning why they are there. Why don’t they go get another job? That’s the kind of disloyalty that leads to you leaving, not staying and undermining the president.”
LikeLike
Oh 71.4% instead of 80%?
Way to make my point. Either way, they were WRONG!
Bigly wrong. 🙂
LikeLike
AJ, Your 7:10 argument was refuted by David French @ 6:58. As French noted, most NeverTrumpers (including French and I) have appreciated the work of folks like Mattis and Kelly who worked to constrain Trump and protect us all from his imbecility.
LikeLike
@ 7:15 As noted @ 7:05 Camerata didn’t understand probabilities and statistics either and wanted the nerd to give her a certain prediction for the 2018 election. The 538 nerd patiently went through his primer on statistics and explained that 29% is not equal to 0%. Poor Camerata’s eyes went as glassy as a Trumpkin, but she giggled and politely went to a commercial break.
LikeLike
You mean Brit Hume’s argument……….
LikeLike
Why Chuck Todd is a clown……
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/09/fisking-chuck-todds-its-all-roger-ailes-he-made-the-public-distrust-the-media-article/#more-259168
“Sure enough, Todd’s “It’s Time for the Press to Stop Complaining—And to Start Fighting Back” is an eye-rolling chuckle-fest starting with the excerpt prominently featured under that laughable title: “A nearly 50-year campaign of vilification, inspired by Fox News’s Roger Ailes, has left many Americans distrustful of media outlets. Now, journalists need to speak up for their work.”
Yep, you got it from just that much info. According to Todd, the late Roger Ailes is personally responsible for the public’s lack of trust in the media. Whinging on for a whopping 30 paragraphs, Todd explains that Ailes and his deplorable Fox News (not founded until 1996, by the way), are to blame for all the media’s ills . . . and even for the election of President Trump. You can’t make this stuff up. Well, I guess you can. Todd did.”
————————–
“So, Todd, a serious “reporter and analyst” is just now, after a “50-year” assault on the news media, getting around to recognizing it? Ace reporting and analyzing there.
The hilarity doesn’t stop there (and no, I’m not going to keep Chandler-izing the excerpts, you get the picture): Todd then explains how and why Ailes is personally and apparently solely responsible for the recent precipitous decline in public trust in media, a decline so stark even the media has to acknowledge it. Todd acknowledges it without any self-reflection.
Some of the wealthiest members of the media are not reporters from mainstream outlets. Figures such as Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge, and the trio of Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and Laura Ingraham have attained wealth and power by exploiting the fears of older white people. They are thriving financially by exploiting the very same free-press umbrella they seem determined to undermine.
Much of the current hand-wringing about this rise in press bashing and delegitimization has been focused on the president, who—as every reporter in America sadly knows—has declared the press the “enemy of the people.” But, like much else in the Trump era, Donald Trump didn’t start this fire; he’s only spread it to a potentially more dangerous place.
Every reporter sadly knows the same misrepresentation of the president’s actual words reporters keep reporting as fact. Trump called “The FAKE NEWS media” not his enemy but “the enemy of the American people” [emphasis not mine]. The only way the media can claim to be among those Trump terms the enemy of the people is if they acknowledge they serve up fake news. Catch-22.
As to the wealth-shaming, let’s hear how destitute Rachel Maddow is, how near poverty Joe and Mika are, what a pauper Todd himself is. The claim that Hannity and Tucker have more power is also questionable because Todd doesn’t explain what he means by “power” or how the host of Meet the Press is less powerful than Laura’s new show on Fox News. If power is counted by viewers, he’s spot-on.
My guess is that the Fox hosts are more credible to larger segments of the American public (as born out in ratings). Again, though, Todd doesn’t reflect on this; he doesn’t wonder what the mainstream media is getting wrong. Instead, he hammers Ailes and Fox News . . . and, implicitly, those of us who no longer (or never did) trust the media.”
LikeLike
David French was busy last night. He also took on the media:
LikeLike
https://twitter.com/realdenaldtrump/status/1037214861405642752?s=21
OK. It is a parody, but it had you going for a while, didn’t it?
LikeLike
LikeLike
Sorry Ricky,
I don’t read either of those tabloids, and I certainly wouldn’t be stupid enough to pay for that garbage.
LikeLike
After the attack today on a Fox affiliate, Chuck Todd and his rhetoric above are being called to account.
——————–
https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/1037320834724048896
——————–
Yep, them is the rules. Chuck Todd said so. Goose and gander.
LikeLike
Oh.
The horror…… 🙄
LikeLike
There’s a lot of extreme rhetoric flying around where Kavanaugh is concerned, most all from the left.
But this here?…….
This is weapons grade stuff…… 🙂
https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2018/09/04/youre-voting-to-kill-me-this-anti-kavanaugh-video-targeting-sen-susan-collins-is-threat-tastic/
“We’re going to let you in on a little secret: Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is going to be confirmed.
The Resistance still doesn’t believe that, and they think that Twitter hashtags, “Handmaid’s Tale” costumes, and fits of screaming are going to change that. They aren’t.
That didn’t stop a group from Maine — Mainers for Accountable Leadership — from shooting a video targeting Sen. Susan Collins, and it’s a must-watch:
LikeLike
Opposing the opposition, or another view from a different father.
——————-
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/sep/4/parkland-victims-father-slams-dad-who-approached-b/
“Andrew Pollack, the outspoken father of one of the students killed in the Parkland mass school shooting, slammed the fellow Parkland father who approached Judge Brett Kavanaugh during a break in Tuesday’s heated Supreme Court confirmation hearing.”
—–
“His tweet came after cameras showed Fred Guttenberg, another father of one of the 17 Parkland victims, quickly approaching Judge Kavanaugh with an extended hand before security ushered him away.
Mr. Guttenberg, whose 14-year-old daughter, Jaime, was also killed in the shooting, tweeted that the judge pulled away because “he did not want to deal with the reality of gun violence.””
—–
LikeLike
Denials? We’re shocked? 🙂
Time will sort some of it out, the rest will be believed by whom it will be believed on both sides.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Angela built this.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/09/germany-mulls-putting-right-wing-afd-on-surveillance-as-party-surges-in-polls/#more-258936
“After days of unrest in eastern Germany, German politicians are calling for the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) to be placed under police surveillance. In a move that is seen as precursor to a nationwide surveillance of the party, German authorities placed the youth wing of the AfD in the states of Lower Saxony and Bremen under police observation.
Thomas Oppermann, the vice president of the German parliament, said the German intelligence service BfV should monitor the AfD party for possible links to far-right groups. “The refugee question divides society, and the AfD is riding ever more radically on this wave,” Oppermann told German newspaper Die Welt. “That is why security services should be watching the collaboration between the AfD and neo-Nazis very closely.”
Eastern Germany has been hit by a string of protests after the fatal stabbing of a German by a group of Arab immigrants in the city of Chemnitz. Thousands took to the streets since early last week calling for an end to Chancellor Angel Merkel’s open borders policy.
Politicians from Merkel’s Christian Democratic party (CDU) also called for similar measures against the AfD:
Patrick Sensburg, security spokesperson for the CDU, told [public broadcaster] NDR Info that the AfD needs to be monitored by the domestic intelligence service (BfV). “Surely, most of the AfD members are not right-wing extremists, but there are part of the party structure that should be classified as anti-constitutional,” Sensburg told [the newspaper] Handelsblatt. Armin Schuster, the CDU’s expert on interior policy, had recently called for the AfD to be place under scrutiny by the domestic intelligence service at the state-level. The AfD is “increasingly becoming a case for the domestic intelligence services,” especially as [the AfD] party chief Alexander Gauland “has to distance himself for the faux pas by one of his fellow party member on monthly-basis,” Schuster said. [translated by the author]
Founded in 2013, the AfD emerged as the third-largest party in parliament last year after it won nearly 13 percent of the vote.
German business newspaper Handelsblatt reported the attempts by the established parties to put the AfD on state surveillance:”
——————–
Hey, just like Obama and Dems and their “state surveillers” at the FBI and DoJ did to Trump!
LikeLike
Simple enough Donna. Release the tapes he says he has where people say what he alleges. Of course to do so he’d have to out his second and third hand account witnesses to these alleged conversations.
But they won’t, because none of these anonymous sources have the guts to openly say it, or it was never said to begin with.
If you’re gonna make a play to embarrass the president and make him look bad, at least these folks who view this as a public service could do is own up to it. Show some guts and class for a change. Take credit for their work. Otherwise, it’s just yellow tabloid journalism, which of course in today’s climate means a NY Times best seller because…. Trump.
LikeLike
Ricky, French’s column (@ 7:33) is dead on.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, it should all get very interesting. To be continued …
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/05/politics/donald-trump-bob-woodward/index.html
_________________________________________
(CNN)The battle lines have been drawn. On one side, President Donald Trump and his allies and enablers. On the other, Bob Woodward, hundreds of hours of taped interviews and dozens of sources and a book that reads as a comprehensive indictment of Trump’s first 19 months in office.
Trump spent Tuesday attacking Woodward’s “Fear: Trump in the White House” as largely a work of fiction containing “so many lies and phony sources.” (Notably, he didn’t detail the alleged lies. More on that below.) Woodward, meanwhile, is largely letting the reporting in the book speak for itself.
“I stand by my reporting,” Woodward told CNN’s Jamie Gangel. …
_______________________________________
LikeLiked by 1 person
(From the CNN piece; stay tuned):
1. Can Trump disprove anything of consequence in the book?
2. Will Republicans break ranks?
3. What else does Woodward have?
4.Will the White House message change?
5. Will there be a big resignation or firing?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Meanwhile if I were a conspiracy monger who believed in pizza pedophiles, Seth Rich murder conspiracies and Obama tapps, I would be inclined to believe that The Cult has a mole placed high in the Nike organization making marketing decisions that allow Dear Leader to again raise his favorite issue.
LikeLike
Under point/question 1:
“What we saw late Tuesday was a series of coordinated denials by senior Trump staffers — chief of staff John Kelly and Defense Secretary James Mattis — designed to rebut hugely damaging portrayals of them as both afraid and dismissive of the President. But statements like those are sort of de rigueur in these situations. Broad denials that create straw men, knock them down and then suggest the matter is settled. If Mattis and Kelly didn’t put out statements doing just that, it’s hard to see how they could possibly remain in the administration for even one more day.
But what now? Trump tweeted Wednesday morning that the Woodward book “form[ed] a picture of a person that is literally the exact opposite of the fact.” That is a big claim. Given Woodward’s reputation — as the preeminent chronicler of the modern White House — and his long track record of fair and accurate reporting, the onus is on Trump to prove Woodward made major mistakes. And that means providing specific evidence of mistakes, not just saying the book is riddled with errors.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
” … And it’s also likely that Woodward has the tapes — or transcripts — to back up the claims he makes about how Kelly and Mattis view the President. … “
LikeLike
DJ, I posted the French article this morning with this introduction:
The dilemma:
1. We need for the people to trust the press/media when it reports the truth about Trump.
2. Most conservatives do not trust most of the media because of actual, though overstated, bias in the media. Instead they turn to Fox, Limbaugh, and other dubious sources of information.
3. The ridiculous and false attacks on the press by Trump and his cult make it harder for legitimate criticisms of press bias to be considered.
Here is such an example:
I actually think the media’s coverage of Trump is the least biased coverage of any major story in my lifetime. There is no need for bias when you simply report the idiotic remarks and lies he said the previous day.
I got positive responses from both conservatives and liberals. At the end of this hilarious disaster, perhaps various groups can work together to rebuild trust in various institutions.
LikeLike
Then let’s see and hear them. Simple enough, as I said above. Own it. Name names.
So what is Woodward waiting for?
LikeLike
I say we do it as a pay per view. 🙂
—————-
https://twitter.com/CassandraRules/status/1037351378572730370
LikeLike
Pass the popcorn. 🙂
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-un-usa-iran/trump-to-chair-u-n-security-council-meeting-on-iran-idUSKCN1LK2CF?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=5b8f09cc04d3017c4bccac26&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter
“U.S. President Donald Trump will chair a U.N. Security Council meeting on Iran this month to spotlight its “violations of international law” during the annual gathering of world leaders in New York, U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley said on Tuesday.
The United States, which holds the council presidency for September, has unsuccessfully pushed the Security Council to call out Iran. Haley has regularly attacked Iran, accusing it of meddling in the wars in Syria and Yemen.
Haley told reporters Trump was chairing the meeting “to address Iran’s violations of international law and the general instability Iran sows throughout the entire Middle East region.””
LikeLike
DJ,
As to CNN’s questions….
1. Doesn’t have to. Why respond to anonymous allegations other than to say they’re false and then move on?
2. Only the usual Flakes and company, you know the bunch not running for re-election because they can’t win. NTers I believe they’re called. Nothing new there.
All the rest are irrelevant until Woodward shows some actual proof.
LikeLike
The point made by French has long been obvious to many of us (though denied by many of my colleagues, unfortunately). An editor (who agrees that newsroom ‘diversity’ is all too often only acceptable if it’s within the realm of the left) sent it to me last night and I replied “yes yes yes.” We’ve had the conversation many times before but seem to be the only ones in our own journalistic circles who “see” it, alas.
With regard to Trump, however, I have to say the national media does not approach coverage of this president fairly. It’s one thing to be tough, another to be out to get someone at any and all turns. By the same token, the media was extremely easy on Obama — so it did not cover his presidency “fairly” either. When it came to Obama, the national media was much too soft and unquestioning — fawning, in fact. (Again, I suspect that all goes back to that ingrained biased that so many/most journalists have, for whatever reason — and that’s another subject; Obama also was the first black president which was, in itself, a big and, in many ways for most of us, a positive news story.)
So what’s happened? I suspect it’s the influence of the internet that has made it all go sideways and down, sadly. Say what you will about Cronkite, back in the day he kept his feelings and opinions to himself. I mourn the loss of a strong, objective media in this country and doubt will see it return anytime soon. Part of it is the media’s fault — for being unwilling to self-assess and be sufficiently self-critical. Part of it, I think the largest part of it which only feeds the first part, is the nature of the digital revolution.
I don’t know how you fix that. We probably don’t.
Back to Woodward, there’s actually nothing particularly surprising in these reports, right? We’ve all pretty much understood that Trump is a wild card, that he behaves poorly and rashly and is, often, unreasonable and, basically, a hot head. So the scenario actually fits what we already know about Trump, whether it bothers us or not or whether it means he is getting good (or bad) things accomplished during his term or not (I applaud his Supreme Court appointments, for example, but remain wary of his personal stability).
Frankly, the revelations from Woodward so far (remember there’s more to come, the book hasn’t actually come out yet) do not shock or surprise me. Are they really surprising to anyone else? Chaos and dissension within the Trump White House? That seems consistent from everything else we’ve all observed and know about him, right? Again, whether you like that approach or not, and those who voted for him largely do (or have no problem with it).
LikeLike
And while it’s true that the media largely is out to “get” Trump, Trump makes the “getting” all too easy. He’s simply egged them all on and they’ve taken the bait completely.
LikeLike
“Chaos and dissension within the Trump White House? That seems consistent from everything else we’ve all observed and know about him, right? ”
Or so the narrative goes…. again all from anonymous sources.
See the problem?
I could believe some of this, I really could see it, especially the Sessions thing. 😲
If it came from a reputable source. But we don’t know that it does.
LikeLike
DJ, I have compared media coverage of Trump to a referee trying to call a basketball game in which one player travels or double dribbles or commits a foul on every play. They are hard on him. But his lies and miscues are so frequent that he actually gets away with more than other presidents.
I agree that the coverage of Obama was fawning.
LikeLike
Ricky, as I said, Trump makes it easy to be “got.” He’s playing right into their hands and they’re behaving likewise at every turn. It’s truly a dysfunctional relationship.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A military officer will not dishonor the office of the presidency–no matter who serves in it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
This is getting more bizarre by the minute:
LikeLike
LikeLiked by 2 people
LikeLike
Things continue to get more bizarre.
Dear Leader responds to the anonymous NYTimes op-ed piece written by a senior Administration official.
Douthat joked that the author was Pence.
LikeLike
The conservative and anti-Trump Reagan Battalion questions the motive and wisdom of the anonymous op-ed writer:
LikeLike
The latest parlor game
https://twitter.com/ajreeves/status/1037434301455978496
LikeLiked by 1 person
If you accept the analysis @8:20 you might conclude that the anonymous author:
a. wanted to support Woodward’s allegations;
b. wanted to help the chances of Democrats in the fall;
c. wanted to increase the chances of impeachment and removal.
Debra, You now know that I am going all out and will spare no expense to win our bet.
LikeLike
Inspector Clouseau is going after the “traitor”:
LikeLike
Everyone is having fun:
LikeLike
haha
LikeLike
Treasonous sounds about right.
——————–
LikeLike
Stating the obvious….
But that’s not how cowards operate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLike
Hey, remember the book Woodward wrote about Obama? Obama didn’t like it much.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/new-woodward-book-shows-how-obama-made-it-worse
_________________________________
… Over the course of almost 450 pages, Woodward depicts Obama as an arrogant, aloof and hyper partisan president who manages to either alienate or disappoint everybody he needs to help govern Washington. …
Boehner did try — very hard, in fact — to make a deal with Obama on the debt limit. But it was amateur hour at the White House at every turn. At one point in the negotiations, Obama insisted on dragging every congressional leader to the White House for daily meetings until the crisis was solved. The veteran hill staffers thought this was a clear sign that “the president simply didn’t understand how Congress works and didn’t know how to negotiate.”
“Boehner,” Woodward writes, “hated going down to the White House to listen to what amounted to presidential lectures.” …
___________________________________
LikeLike