[QUOTE=Jordax;52517068]Drama apparently sells, since I don't recall leftist news outlets being ever so melodramatic either ever before Trump clinched the presidency. [/QUOTE]
two things:
1: if you're calling the mainstream media like CNN, WaPo, or NYT leftist, hahahahahaha
2: Donald Trump is melodramatic as fuck. I don't see how you can state otherwise since he manufactured drama on the weekly as a reality TV star
I can hardly call the coverage of Trump melodramatic when given the implications of both his election and presidency. Some people might have numbed to those implications over time due to the saturation of his presence in the media, and some discounted them from the start in a show of limp-wristed centrist optimism, but those implications are still very concerning. Trump is a big enough problem himself, but he also indicates an even more concerning trend in the ideological makeup of the American people, which is something that scares me a lot more and shows no signs of improving.
wonder if all the "he's the leaker" talks from scaramucci convinced him to go with it
[QUOTE=Blazyd;52517017]In cases where a top position is vacated, the deputy secretary to that position fills in. For example, Spicer was out and his deputy secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders stepped in. And when Comey got fired, McCabe stepped in because he was the deputy secretary. That way a top position is never actually vacant.
Kinda like how if something happens to the president, the vice president takes the spot.[/QUOTE]
Normally yes, but
[media]https://twitter.com/shaneharris/status/891055372953366528[/media]
in other other news, the secretary of homeland security is now empty
Hire me!!!
[QUOTE=Blazyd;52517017]In cases where a top position is vacated, the deputy secretary to that position fills in. For example, Spicer was out and his deputy secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders stepped in. And when Comey got fired, McCabe stepped in because he was the deputy secretary. That way a top position is never actually vacant.
Kinda like how if something happens to the president, the vice president takes the spot.[/QUOTE]
not always, almost all of the deputy secretaries are vacant (he hasn't found asskissers for these spots yet) and career officials don't always have the authority to fully fill the empty roles, which is again why him not nominating certain heads is still rediculous
[QUOTE=Lambeth;52517153]if you're calling the mainstream media like CNN, WaPo, or NYT leftist, hahahahahaha[/QUOTE]
Depends what you mean by leftist, because there is a slight liberal bias and some of their reporting does show misinformation. For example all 3 are guilty of spreading misinformation about either guns or our gun laws. CNN referred to the SKS as a "Chinese AK-47" and NYT called a semi-automatic rifle an "Assault Rifle" (unfortunately this is not a NYT exclusive thing, this sort of misinformation is widespread).
what exactly is the long con here? he can't seriously have done this just because Scaramucci told him to?
Priebus and Sessions were both caught up in the Russia scandal. maybe it's a plan between them and Trump to make them look less like co-conspirators? "if they were part of a conspiracy, why would i fire them and give them reason to rat me out?" that's the only real reason i can think of, unless Reince really was a leaker.
HAHAHA
is what I want to feel right now but the situation is just too depressing.
the onion is great at responding to stuff like this
[media]https://twitter.com/TheOnion/status/891090665563672576[/media]
[QUOTE=Solomon;52516954]I dont know much about Kelly. Is he a good guy?[/QUOTE]
hes a military man, spent his life in the marines, has 3 sons who served (one died in afghanistan). under obama he was in charge if the us southern command dealing with operations and relations with south american countries.
he is highly praised by trump for his service history and because hes a supporter of a stronger border (though through better tech and more hands on deck) and supports donny's wonder wall.
which is all fine and dandy but he seems like a clinical man. part of his operations was gitmo and hes one of the main reasons why obama wasn't able to shut it down during his 8 years. hes a staunch supporter of gitmo and is highly against shutting it down.
thats the only dirt i can find on him, the border has apparently been more secure since hes been in charge.
Trump's just going to surround himself with a team of sycophants and yes men who will feed him the vision of reality he wants isn't he? Going to be weird to see how someone can run a country when they're so obviously lying to themselves and everyone else.
[QUOTE=Swiket;52517360][media]https://www.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/156829591267328000[/media][/QUOTE]
I don't mean to shill but there's a subreddit dedicated to tweets like this if anyone is interested.
[url]https://www.reddit.com/r/TrumpCriticizesTrump/[/url]
[QUOTE=Jordax;52517018]Apparently, there were insiders who knew that it was coming a few days ago.
Loading Tweet...
[URL]https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/889979646892064768[/URL]
We live in a timeline where Infowars of all sites manages to bag White House scoops. What a time to be alive.[/QUOTE]
It's not that incredible. All it means is that someone in the WH likes Roger Stone and leaked the information, because I guess leaks are okay when it gives Infowars the scoops. This doesn't legitimize them at all.
[QUOTE=Jordax;52517068]Drama apparently sells, since I don't recall leftist news outlets being ever so melodramatic either ever before Trump clinched the presidency. [/QUOTE]
Wow you don't remember news outlets ever responding to the president that said that the press was the enemy of the people over and over again? I wonder why. I really wonder :thinking:
[QUOTE=Jordax;52517068]I mean, for fuckssake, there are people on this very forum who now believe that Buzzfeed off all things is also a valid source. [/QUOTE]
You just cited Infowars which has a much worse track than Buzzfeed or Buzzfeed News. Pot, kettle, black.
[QUOTE=Jordax;52517068]There are mainstream news outlets who are going ''DEMOCRACY DIES IN DARKNESS'' while not even pretending anymore that they are not impartial. [/QUOTE]
I don't even know what this is supposed to mean. Are you mad that WaPo is a well-respected bastion of journalism and the only thing you can give them shit for is a slogan on their website?
[QUOTE=Jordax;52517068]It's just that the entire mainstream media has been in a utter death spiral quality-wise over the last few years to the point that even Infowars can come over as remotely trustworthy to some people. [/QUOTE]
No it hasn't. The quality hasn't changed all that much really. It's just that the media is critical of Trump and your side so you think its worse. The fact that people see Infowars, a conspiracy/pseudoscience channel wherein the creator said the whole thing was an act in court, as trustworthy isn't a strike against the media, it's a strike against stupid people who like having their biases confirmed.
[QUOTE=Jordax;52517068]It is not like the media is having a lot of standards left these days. Outrage sells better, no matter what side of the political aisle it is on.[/QUOTE]
There are plenty of outlets that hold themselves to very rigorous standards, you just don't like them because what they say hurts your feelings
[QUOTE=Cone;52517315]what exactly is the long con here? he can't seriously have done this just because Scaramucci told him to?
Priebus and Sessions were both caught up in the Russia scandal. maybe it's a plan between them and Trump to make them look less like co-conspirators? "if they were part of a conspiracy, why would i fire them and give them reason to rat me out?" that's the only real reason i can think of, unless Reince really was a leaker.[/QUOTE]
Well seeing as Trump's very impressionable and easily swayed there's a good chance that that's exactly why he let Priebus go. It wouldn't be a huge surprise to find out that Trump's very paranoid so anything that undermines his trust in the members of his administration are likely to result in action since he has zero self control.
As for why Trump did this, Priebus is the fly in Trump's ointment. His represented a compromise with the Republican establishment that he was probably convinced was necessary to begin working in earnest with Congress to achieve his legislative goals. Nothing indicates that their relationship was anything more than necessary as business required it, and the combination of Scaramucci and the utter failure by the Republicans in the Senate to repeal the ACA was what finally convinced him to cut him loose.
The fact that this was delivered via tweet and not by way of an official statement or press conference seems to indicate that it was done off the cuff, and I wonder if the DHS was even informed of beforehand. I can't imagine they were.
[QUOTE=Cone;52517315]what exactly is the long con here? he can't seriously have done this just because Scaramucci told him to?
Priebus and Sessions were both caught up in the Russia scandal. maybe it's a plan between them and Trump to make them look less like co-conspirators? "if they were part of a conspiracy, why would i fire them and give them reason to rat me out?" that's the only real reason i can think of, unless Reince really was a leaker.[/QUOTE]
If they honestly suspected Reince of being "the leaker", then I wouldn't be surprised if their end-game was to simply keep firing/replacing people until the leaks stopped.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
