Today's Poll: Should the author of the anonymous Times op-ed resign from the White House?
I prefer Republicans that don't execute a soft coup when they don't get their way, just saying.
But then again "The rule of law applies to thee, but not to me" seems to be the mantra these days.
I don't see where there is anything that runs counter to the rule of law with the op-ed.
But the whole affair is pretty underhanded.
Also, I don't think it's just one Establishment Republican involved. I buy into the theory that Elaine Chao lent her name to the NYT as the "anonymous" author but people I know who know her say she's not that good of a writer. She's married to Mitch McConnell and one of his former aides is an attorney with the Karl Rove firm Crossroads GPS, Steven Law. He might be the actual author.
I don't like conspiracy theories but I also don't think at this high stakes a person, even a cabinet secretary, would take this extraordinary step without consulting others. At some level, then, there is some coordinated effort of like-minded confederates.
That's a dangerous place to be for a democracy.
Even if a lone-wolf effort, there is no doubt Establishment Republicans don't like Trump and want to see him out of office, if not before 2020, by 2020.
They certainly want to burnish their place in the history books as "loyal Americans" who did the patriotic thing to contain Trump's worst impulses. That was clearly the message of the letter. And it was clearly self-serving, which is what partisan hacks do.
Win or lose, it will be interesting to see what McConnell and his associates do after the mid-terms. They will be at the point where they rode out that election cycle, got their tax cut, did damage to the ACA, got some deregulation and two Supreme Court picks. They will have little incentive to stand by Trump after the mid-terms.
But of course, Trump brought this on himself. He hired a lot of Establishment Republicans in his administration. He didn't put much effort into finding like-minded populists/nationalists who would be more knowledgeable at implementing his agenda. He's surrounded himself with a lot of disloyalists. That's on him.
Trump should pull no punches in finding the culprit and any cohorts, & prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. The sedition laws would be a good place to start. Also, as with comey and his fellow conspirators in the fbi and the injustice department, they should be sued for any profits made from books, interviews, etc. Any profits that can be traced to the activities concerning their conspiracy. I believe there are laws against such criminals profiting. Even if they aren't convicted the threshold for civil courts is lower.
The letter could easily be a ruse. The nyt has as much to gain as any persons or entity by goading Trump. Especially since there is some truth to his claims that the nyt would be out of business if not for all of the sensationalism over his presidency and the media clownfest in and around it.
So much for the First Amendment.
Here's a link to a Roger Waters interview from a source you Howard, have been in favour of curbing. So much for the 1st amendment:
Here's another link showing the most recent murders and mayhem perpetrated by Genocidal israel with the support of the propagandized and under informed Americans:
I googled Palestinian protests and found no coverage by our media. Only oversees outlets. A perfect example of unreported fake news.
If you don't like the news source then cross reference with the Guardian or one of the israeli outlets.
If was an actual WH staff member, I certainly wish he/she/they would post more and more of these op-eds. They entertaining and the reactions are priceless.
This could also be a case of the Times pulling an epic level of trolling Trump. With his staff and political appointee choices so far, I'm pretty sure that it is from the inside.
Relevance is in the Fact pointed out that our mainstream media IS corrupted. And that some even could get away with fabricating news while hiding behind the 1st amendment. cnn's refusal to retract bernsteins story this past week, that has been discredited and retracted by all other major outlets is a case in point. Just as a person can't hide behind the 1st amendment when "screaming fire in a theater", the press needs checks and balances like government, religion, businesses, corporations, etc.
It's also as relevant, or more so than all of this high stakes political theatre in that the American people have been propagandized to believe that we should support a country that is the "poster boy" example of a murderous, apartheid, nation. The concrete, real version of the type of vision that the neocons like to create in the minds of our population to goad us into war against countries guilty of far lesser crimes, if any. A little off subject but not far & relevant none the less. Israel and it's American operatives have been infringing on Americans 1st amendment protection by making it illegal to boycott them for their wrongdoing. Just google: israel works to make BDS illegal. Man, talk about a slippery slope!
I was browsing by and couldn't help myself here so I'm just going to throw this out there. The point about "More than one source" has escaped most due to misleading headlines and articles.
Bernstein has nothing to retract. The idea that he does is pure right-wing propaganda. It's nonsense. The fact that you believe it tells me you don't understand how news coverage works. You buy into the nonsense made up by right-wing propagandists because they're staying stuff you want to believe, the facts and truth be damned.
This whole "Bernstein should retract" line is being pushed solely by Rush Limbaugh. Here's a news flash: Limbaugh is an entertainer. His sole purpose in life is to raise your blood pressure so you'll tune in again. Nothing he ever says is true.
Brian, that and the fact that CNN has written a follow-up story calling attention to the one source's contradictions, who has admitted them with regret.
News outlets don't retract stories when it turns out a source lied or otherwise provided incorrect information. They amend the story or write a follow up (depending on the scope of the incorrect information). News outlets retract for their own mistakes not the mistakes of sources. CNN's reporting was solid. Nothing to retract.
This tempest in a teapot is proof of right-wing media's disregard for the truth for the sake of a visceral response from viewers and listeners.
So pick a liar of choice for your story and it's all good? Funny how that works. The seed of untruth is sown and fertilized to take root in the minds of the susceptible. The predictable discord between "sides" is an added benefit. A washington post story talks about the nuance you mention in your last post Howard, here's an excerpt:
CNN’s insistence on the story’s accuracy appears to turn on a subtle point: The network’s reporters faithfully reported what their sources, including Davis, told them at the time, making the story accurate in the moment. Although one of these sources — Davis — has now bolted, another source, who remains unnamed, has stood firm, enabling CNN to stand behind its reporting.
"Enabling CNN to stand behind it's reporting." How convenient. According to the same story bernstein refused to comment when contacted. He now is doing the hillary chicken little routine screaming about how Gen. Kelly should resign. Nice distraction from his questionable reporting. Here's a link to a NY Post story about cnn's bias regarding Trump:
The whole meeting refered to in bernstein's original story was a setup that seems to have been put together so as to show connection between RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, and the Trump campaign. So far 2 years of investigations have shown nothing. The press and it's street minions would be hard pressed to come up with a comparable cash cow. The war they want with Iran will be the next one if they get their way.
And regarding you're laughable ranting about my mindlessly soaking up republican right wing gobbledygoop, and listening to rush limpaw is more shameless distraction. While I often listen to pundits I don't like in order to see what their sheep are being taught, I can't listen to limpaw. He truly grates on my nerves. And while fox news has more of a fix on reality regarding Trump than most of our media, they are otherwise, with a few exceptions as corrupted as the rest. But some of their people deserve credit for being against the wars and revealing some otherwise ignored realities. Like Tucker Carlson. And he's not always right either! LOL
"So pick a liar of choice ... "
That's the difference between. I don't pick liars. I pick truth tellers.
Here's something interesting ... the other day Trump once again engaged in his anti-Firest Amendment rant against "fake news," this time in front of a group of sheriff's, and he turned to him and said, "you all know it's true. You deal with it, too" (not the exact quote -- from memory). They applauded.
Turns out, 10 of them have been subject honest, aggressive local reporting about their misdeeds.
So, yeah, they applauded, because just like Trump, they don't like an independent media that probes and asks questions and reports the truth about what they do.
You play along with that game for the same reason -- the truth hurts.
He doesn't like "reporters" or "news" outlets who are soooo obviously bias in their storytelling. bernstein's constant sniveling and stomping of feet fits right into cnn's biased views. Your fawning over the "progressive" (lol) media as truth tellers would be laughable if it wasn't an egregious dereliction of their duty. It has still done like zero investigation of killary and her conspiracy to undermine our election by cheating Sanders. If an insider hadn't equipped wikileaks with proof there would have been nothing brought to light about it, or her other illegal activities. Where is the hounding of the injustice departments fired employees? Where is the hounding of the fired fbi employees? Where is the hounding of the democrats surrounding wasserman and Brazil? Who also tried to undermine our election by cheating in the debates. Talk about not knowing how reporting is done. Talk about seeing/hearing/believing what you want to see/hear/believe!
Wow cops are human and susceptible to human frailties? Now there's a revelation! That article is a bona fide "gotcha!" Thanks for the laugh. Honestly.
Daniel, you must enlighten me on this "killary" comment as I am unfamiliar with it :/ Could you explain it for me along with these illegal activities please?
Killary is in reference to the murderous and illegal wars hillary has been instrumental in perpetrating. As a US Senator (with exceptional political power) and later as secretary of state she/it has been war drums MAJORETTE in the murderous march of our illegal, unethical, and inhuman wars. That's just a start Brian. There's plenty of easily accessible information available for those willing to look. Here's a start:
"He doesn't like "reporters" or "news" outlets" who report the news honestly and accurately about his administration.
I fixed that sentence for you Daniel to better fit reality.
Everything you know about your complaints about Hillary you know because outlets like the Times and Post reported them. The Times, in particular, was all over these stories.
Progressive media -- I don't read the Nation. I read straight down the middle, fair, unbiased outlets like the Washington Post and New York Times. If you don't see it that way, the bias is with you, not them. Oh, and I also rely a lot on The American Conservative, National Review, and Reason (nothing "progressive" there) ... all of which pretty much report on the current administration is the same fashion.
Yeah, we need to start calling Trump, Killerrump. More weapons sent to the Ukraine, illegal bombing of Syria, wanting to assassinate a foreign leader, ramping up CIA drone attacks in Niger, secret military operations in Niger, backing murderous Saudi Arabia in Yemen, failure to pull out of Afghanistan, backing land grabs by Isreal ... yeah, he's so much better for the cause of peace in the world. I've yet to see a whit of difference in interventionist foreign policy from Hillary/Obama/Bush.
Fine double standards you have going for yourself, there, Daniel.
Daniel, I was actually being quite facetious as the majority of Hillary issues have been thoroughly debunked and just remain weak talking points.
Brian, being facetious would indicate wit or light hearted jest. Your misplaced attempt at humor is not only witless, it's indicative of the self importance you attach to your undereducated opinion. There's nothing funny about war. And the wars we have waged over the last 30 years have been more of a genocide than war. Since the opposition was virtually nonexistent. And as far as debunked regarding killary's crimes. You are certainly joking, or a joke. The people who should have prosecuted her are being weeded out of the positions they held because of the lowlife traitorous way they queered our justice system. And particularly in regards to her/it. Her comeuppance may still be at hand.
Howard here's another link to a guy who tells many truths:
Watch "Owned: Chuck Todd’s Conspiracy Tweet - Epic Fail" on YouTube
This shows much of your media friends witless applause and laughter toward the self gorgeous george bush and his witless attempts at humor. Very telling.
While I don't see near as much difference as I'd like between he and the previous warmonger presidents you mention. And he is certainly not, to this point the president I hoped he might be. Killary would have had us making a carbon copy of Libya ( a failed state thanks to her and barack) in Syria. Also, she would have had us bombing the $#/+ out of Iran.
Also, please give me a Presidential candidate I can be proud to back. I backed Trump as the only alternative to the status quo. I backed obama for the same reason. The war pig's power is matched only by their underhandedness and conniving. I almost included cunning but they they really aren't. But the they don't have to be when they have control of the narrative (media).
"undereducated opinion" You put a smile on my face with that one.
In terms of comeuppance, I still have yet to see any actual real not made up charges on Hillary appear out of thin air after years of hot headed talk. I'd actually like to see Trump sit in front of congress for as long as she did without grabbing a box of crayons and drawing pictures of himself and Kim Jong-un strolling hand-in-hand though a field of daisies and locking lips at the end. It has only proven to be a talking point thus far and nothing more. I get giddy every time someone says "But but Hillary?!?!" just over that one simple fact and several many more.
The reason Trump won is because he ran against Hillary. There were many reasons for that. Think about it!
You continue to prove up.