Keep manufacturing outrage based on innuendo, half truths, and outright lies and no one is going to believe you if/when something worthy of outrage actually happens.
He fired Obama's attorneys. Obama fired Bush's, but he somehow did it better or different or something. Another trash hit piece from an increasingly irrelevant MSM who's preferred candidate lost.
No, not this time. The columnist you’re selectively misunderstanding is Charles P. Pierce. He’s been there when there were things worthy of outrage, he’s had the moral courage and clarity of mind to deal with those things even when that wasn’t safe, and he’s earned closer attention than you’ve paid him here. You may not want to hear it, but that’s a very different thing than what you’ve claimed above.
Ok, I'll bite. Replacing US attorneys goes back to at least the Reagan era. Every president since has replaced all, or almost all of the other parties appointments. Reagan, and both Bushs spread out the replacement process somewhat, Clinton, Obama and Trump fired them all at once. Where is the corruption?
I think Mr Pierce has fallen victim to TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). His past good works (of which I cannot judge) mean nothing in this case. He's outraged at something that goes back almost 40 years that all sides have done.
The MSM's candidate lost and they are losing their minds over it. Nazis! Russians! Corruption! Racism! If they shout loud enough, long enough, maybe they can make it true.
Near as I can tell, you’re arguing that because every administration installs their own U.S. attorneys, this administration isn’t corrupt. I think you’ve got it wrong where Pierce’s outrage comes from. He’s not calling the mass firings of U.S. attorneys the crowning achievement of corruption in the Trump Administration, but a manifestation of it. If you were to go back and re-read the piece in a lower gear, my guess is that you’d notice Pierce isn’t one of the countless partisan hacks guilty of what you’re describing. Sure, Pierce can get hard to take when he’s doing partisan smoke blowing, but this ain’t that. Could it be, and I’m only raising this as a possibility to consider, that there may be issues around ignorance, prejudice, racism and corruption in this administration?
FTA: "But the people who said all through the campaign that the rules changed with the elevation of Donald Trump cannot say that the rules are back now that he's president."
Intellectually dishonest. He's supposed to leave the previous administrations prosecutors in place? The appointees that got their jobs because they supported a radically different agenda?
FTA: "In addition, what he did on Friday was precipitous in the extreme and so much so that it seems to have been improvised on the spot>
The author is claiming insider knowledge of the working of the WH? He doesn't know whether there are lists of replacement candidates, but because it hasn't been announced, he goes hysterical.
It has been determined going in that trump is corrupt. Anything he does, regardless of whether it's been done by previous administrations, goes to "prove" it.
He's stupid and reactionary. And at the same time, an evil Machiavellian genius that going to hand over the country to the Russians. Or something.
Could it be, and I’m only raising this as a possibility to consider, that there may be issues around ignorance, prejudice, racism and corruption in this administration?
Raising questions and providing no proof is how the MSM slanders people. Show me proof of ignorance, racism, or corruption. because this piece doesn't. It takes a normal action and piles it on the innuendo that the MSM has been pushing since the RNC nomination.
Could it be that AdelleChattre cheats on his/her taxes? I'm just raising questions.
Be careful. Try any harder to put words in Pierce's mouth and you might pull something. I'll grant you that the journalistic rule around Trump seems to be never to ascribe to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by malice. I'll grant you, also, that there's more smoke blowing than there is fire to be found with Trump coverage. However, you'd have to be crazy to think there's nothing burning.
Tell me you don't think Trump and his government are perfect, because it kinda seems like you're so jaded by lousy news coverage that you won't accept the evidence of your own eyes any more.
No government is perfect. And never will be, because it involves people. Because it is imperfect, I firmly believe that we need as little of it as possible.
I believe my eyes, I just haven't seen ANY evidence of malfeasance. If I've missed it, please show me proof of corruption, Russians, or anything else that the #resist crowd is on about. A different political agenda is in play. No matter how much half the country dislikes it, it's not criminal. It's what the other half of the country lived with for two terms. We will survive, and if Trump is successful, we will thrive.
Smoke is proof of nothing when you have an entrenched power structure armed with matches and an agenda.
Here's how to create smoke. Somebody in a 3-letter agency calls up WaPo and says Trump likes furry porn. WaPo headlines it. NYT says "According to published reports, 17 intelligence agencies agree, Trump is a furry porn lover." CNN/MSNBC interrupts coverage and says Trump is too busy looking as furry porn to run the country. Buzzfeed runs "The trouble with Trumps porn addiction". The CTR and Shareblue brigades post variations of "Trump is a pervert". Late night talk show hosts run monologues on furries. SNL does a skit. 3 days later, on page 57, WaPo runs a one-sentence retraction. No one else does. That gets piled into the innuendo heap.
The media is deranged, and every piece that starts with unproven assumptions and does nothing but pass on more innuendos isn't journalism. except perhaps of the yellow sort.
I hope there are enough real journalists left that they can be a watchdog on the government. That should be their damn job. But all we've had for the last 8 years is cheerleaders. Now they are sad, angry, and lashing out in their grief that Obama didn't get that 3rd term after all. Their implosion is amusing to watch, in a sad sort of way.
All that can be true and you don't have to gouge your eyes out to avoid seeing Trump and his administration as they are, warts and all.
Next you'll be saying Paul Ryan's not a Social Darwinist until you see something notarized telling you so.
Pierce, on the other hand, will not use that name without reminding us that he's "the zombie-eyed granny starver from the Koch Bros. subsidiary formerly known as Minnesota." You can call that yellow journalism if you like, but there's salient truth in it.
I'm as disgusted by what passes for journalism in the Times and the Post and fill-in-the-blank as you are, but even I don't pretend there's nothing crooked happening at the highest levels of our national politics.
Maybe you're the townsfolk, sick to death of the child crying wolf all the time, perfectly happy to pretend not to hear him being gobbled up. Because c'mon, at some point, the Trump Administration's antics cease being explainable by stupidity alone.
Let me suggest another lens to view the administrations antics through.
Imagine a president trying to implement a sea change in a whole raft of policies. Against his doing so is the entire Democratic leadership, half the Republican leadership, the entirety of the traditional media, an entrenched bureaucracy, and half the country, all of whom seem to want to see him fail. Any mistake, misstep or perceived weakness is poured into the echo chamber and amplified.
Those opposed to the changes, particularly those in the media need to start asking themselves "What if he succeeds?"
Indeed. One wonders whether there is enough Russian blood to slake the thirst of the bezerkers in today's Democratic Party.
Still, the way you put it it's as if you're talking about somebody other than the most powerful man in the world, the President of the Confederate States of America.
The scenario you describe is familiar enough from the last presidency. We shall see, before this is over, what comes of electing the less effective evil. Someone who would say anything, promise anything, makiing crazy shit up as he went along, to get elected. My guess is that it's not going to be all sunshine and rainbows.
Edit: Me, I'm still waiting for President Obama, as he promised, to put on some comfortable shoes and walk the picket line with American autoworkers. Meanwhile, I have my knitting to keep busy with.
I'm still waiting on quite a few things Obama promised. Hell, I'm still waiting on things Reagan promised. You may have time to do a lot of knitting while Obama is looking to find the right pair of shoes. Long enough to knit a complete wardrobe.
Keep manufacturing outrage based on innuendo, half truths, and outright lies and no one is going to believe you if/when something worthy of outrage actually happens.
He fired Obama's attorneys. Obama fired Bush's, but he somehow did it better or different or something. Another trash hit piece from an increasingly irrelevant MSM who's preferred candidate lost.
No, not this time. The columnist you’re selectively misunderstanding is Charles P. Pierce. He’s been there when there were things worthy of outrage, he’s had the moral courage and clarity of mind to deal with those things even when that wasn’t safe, and he’s earned closer attention than you’ve paid him here. You may not want to hear it, but that’s a very different thing than what you’ve claimed above.
Ok, I'll bite. Replacing US attorneys goes back to at least the Reagan era. Every president since has replaced all, or almost all of the other parties appointments. Reagan, and both Bushs spread out the replacement process somewhat, Clinton, Obama and Trump fired them all at once. Where is the corruption?
I think Mr Pierce has fallen victim to TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). His past good works (of which I cannot judge) mean nothing in this case. He's outraged at something that goes back almost 40 years that all sides have done.
The MSM's candidate lost and they are losing their minds over it. Nazis! Russians! Corruption! Racism! If they shout loud enough, long enough, maybe they can make it true.
Near as I can tell, you’re arguing that because every administration installs their own U.S. attorneys, this administration isn’t corrupt. I think you’ve got it wrong where Pierce’s outrage comes from. He’s not calling the mass firings of U.S. attorneys the crowning achievement of corruption in the Trump Administration, but a manifestation of it. If you were to go back and re-read the piece in a lower gear, my guess is that you’d notice Pierce isn’t one of the countless partisan hacks guilty of what you’re describing. Sure, Pierce can get hard to take when he’s doing partisan smoke blowing, but this ain’t that. Could it be, and I’m only raising this as a possibility to consider, that there may be issues around ignorance, prejudice, racism and corruption in this administration?
Intellectually dishonest. He's supposed to leave the previous administrations prosecutors in place? The appointees that got their jobs because they supported a radically different agenda?
The author is claiming insider knowledge of the working of the WH? He doesn't know whether there are lists of replacement candidates, but because it hasn't been announced, he goes hysterical.
It has been determined going in that trump is corrupt. Anything he does, regardless of whether it's been done by previous administrations, goes to "prove" it.
He's stupid and reactionary. And at the same time, an evil Machiavellian genius that going to hand over the country to the Russians. Or something.
Raising questions and providing no proof is how the MSM slanders people. Show me proof of ignorance, racism, or corruption. because this piece doesn't. It takes a normal action and piles it on the innuendo that the MSM has been pushing since the RNC nomination.
Could it be that AdelleChattre cheats on his/her taxes? I'm just raising questions.
See how that works?
Be careful. Try any harder to put words in Pierce's mouth and you might pull something. I'll grant you that the journalistic rule around Trump seems to be never to ascribe to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by malice. I'll grant you, also, that there's more smoke blowing than there is fire to be found with Trump coverage. However, you'd have to be crazy to think there's nothing burning.
Tell me you don't think Trump and his government are perfect, because it kinda seems like you're so jaded by lousy news coverage that you won't accept the evidence of your own eyes any more.
No government is perfect. And never will be, because it involves people. Because it is imperfect, I firmly believe that we need as little of it as possible.
I believe my eyes, I just haven't seen ANY evidence of malfeasance. If I've missed it, please show me proof of corruption, Russians, or anything else that the #resist crowd is on about. A different political agenda is in play. No matter how much half the country dislikes it, it's not criminal. It's what the other half of the country lived with for two terms. We will survive, and if Trump is successful, we will thrive.
Smoke is proof of nothing when you have an entrenched power structure armed with matches and an agenda.
Here's how to create smoke. Somebody in a 3-letter agency calls up WaPo and says Trump likes furry porn. WaPo headlines it. NYT says "According to published reports, 17 intelligence agencies agree, Trump is a furry porn lover." CNN/MSNBC interrupts coverage and says Trump is too busy looking as furry porn to run the country. Buzzfeed runs "The trouble with Trumps porn addiction". The CTR and Shareblue brigades post variations of "Trump is a pervert". Late night talk show hosts run monologues on furries. SNL does a skit. 3 days later, on page 57, WaPo runs a one-sentence retraction. No one else does. That gets piled into the innuendo heap.
The media is deranged, and every piece that starts with unproven assumptions and does nothing but pass on more innuendos isn't journalism. except perhaps of the yellow sort.
I hope there are enough real journalists left that they can be a watchdog on the government. That should be their damn job. But all we've had for the last 8 years is cheerleaders. Now they are sad, angry, and lashing out in their grief that Obama didn't get that 3rd term after all. Their implosion is amusing to watch, in a sad sort of way.
All that can be true and you don't have to gouge your eyes out to avoid seeing Trump and his administration as they are, warts and all.
Next you'll be saying Paul Ryan's not a Social Darwinist until you see something notarized telling you so.
Pierce, on the other hand, will not use that name without reminding us that he's "the zombie-eyed granny starver from the Koch Bros. subsidiary formerly known as Minnesota." You can call that yellow journalism if you like, but there's salient truth in it.
I'm as disgusted by what passes for journalism in the Times and the Post and fill-in-the-blank as you are, but even I don't pretend there's nothing crooked happening at the highest levels of our national politics.
Maybe you're the townsfolk, sick to death of the child crying wolf all the time, perfectly happy to pretend not to hear him being gobbled up. Because c'mon, at some point, the Trump Administration's antics cease being explainable by stupidity alone.
Let me suggest another lens to view the administrations antics through.
Imagine a president trying to implement a sea change in a whole raft of policies. Against his doing so is the entire Democratic leadership, half the Republican leadership, the entirety of the traditional media, an entrenched bureaucracy, and half the country, all of whom seem to want to see him fail. Any mistake, misstep or perceived weakness is poured into the echo chamber and amplified.
Those opposed to the changes, particularly those in the media need to start asking themselves "What if he succeeds?"
Indeed. One wonders whether there is enough Russian blood to slake the thirst of the bezerkers in today's Democratic Party.
Still, the way you put it it's as if you're talking about somebody other than the most powerful man in the world, the President of the Confederate States of America.
The scenario you describe is familiar enough from the last presidency. We shall see, before this is over, what comes of electing the less effective evil. Someone who would say anything, promise anything, makiing crazy shit up as he went along, to get elected. My guess is that it's not going to be all sunshine and rainbows.
Edit: Me, I'm still waiting for President Obama, as he promised, to put on some comfortable shoes and walk the picket line with American autoworkers. Meanwhile, I have my knitting to keep busy with.
I'm still waiting on quite a few things Obama promised. Hell, I'm still waiting on things Reagan promised. You may have time to do a lot of knitting while Obama is looking to find the right pair of shoes. Long enough to knit a complete wardrobe.