Trump media blacklisting begins

[KennF]

When Obama did it ...

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/citing-space-co.html

... where was the liberal shit storm?

Was there ever a time liberals weren't hypocrites?

I see, again, the benchmark for evaluating the Trump administration is what the Obama administration did/didn't do.

I think it is almost flattering to think that the Obama administration is the ideal, the high bar, or the standard, by which people defending the Trump administration use to defend his actions. It is as if by using the Obama administration standard justifies a current action.

If you didn't agree with it when it was done before, it shouldn't be justifiable now.

 

[TexanStar]

When Obama did it ...

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/citing-space-co.html

... where was the liberal shit storm?

Was there ever a time liberals weren't hypocrites?

The news agencies which didn't get to go expressed more favorable views of Obama than ones who were allowed to stay on (WSJ and Fox News both got to stay on board).

Are you saying there were news agencies more critical of Trump than NYT and CNN who were allowed to join the briefing?

 

[nickinoo]

No point in comparing the media's reaction or the liberal reaction of Obama to Trump. Trump is the unfortunate future, let's concentrate on that.

Maybe Obama was guilty of some of the same mistakes Trump is making, maybe he's not. I don't know. Maybe Trump just makes those mistakes really really obvious. And now everyone can see he's an idiot so of course the media is going to pounce on every stupid word he says.

 

[Mercurygirl]

I see, again, the benchmark for evaluating the Trump administration is what the Obama administration did/didn't do.

I can't believe you just typed that.

This coming from the Left who in the genesis of their soon to be endless butt hurt loser tantrum repeatedly pushed a petty evaluation and comparative narrative by pointing out fucking crowd sizes in photographs of Trump and Obama on their Inauguration Days.

If you didn't agree with it when it was done before, it shouldn't be justifiable now.

If you didn't disagree with it then why are your going ape shit over it now?

Words are fun.

 

[nickinoo]

I can't believe you just typed that.

This coming from the Left who in the genesis of their soon to be endless butt hurt loser tantrum repeatedly pushed a petty evaluation and comparative narrative by pointing out fucking crowds sizes in photographs of Trump and Obama on their Inauguration Days.

Wasn't that to point out that the new president was starting off his position telling a big fat lie?

 

[Mercurygirl]

Wasn't that to point out that the new president was starting off his position telling a big fat lie?

Your timeline is skewed.

Tell me, when has the press ever hoped aboard such a sour grapes partisan attack against a president on his Inauguration Day? Ever entertained a crowd comparative between presidents and pushed so fervently such an irrelevant point?

You do realize Trump ran against Hillary Clinton and not Barack Obama? I understand why you'd want to dump from your revisionist history that corrupt liar Hillary, that two time loser, but Obama was the lame duck. Still is.

The news agencies which didn't get to go expressed more favorable views of Obama than ones who were allowed to stay on (WSJ and Fox News both got to stay on board).

Are you saying there were news agencies more critical of Trump than NYT and CNN who were allowed to join the briefing?

For the record, it was a press gaggle held in Spicer's office and the Trump administration used the same exact excuse the Obama administration did, there wasn't enough room for everyone. Both administrations blocked outlets who they felt were critical of them.

So what's the difference in your mind?

 

[TexanStar]

For the record, it was a press gaggle held in Spicer's office and the Trump administration used the same exact excuse the Obama administration did, there wasn't enough room for everyone. Both administrations blocked outlets who they felt were critical of them.

So what's the difference in your mind?

Trump removed the outlets who were most critical of him (NYT and CNN). If you are interested in criticisms of trump, the most critical voices aren't in that meeting.

Obama retained the outlets who were most critical of him, but removed some that were less critical. If you were interested in criticisms of Obama, the most critical voices were still in that meeting and you could tune into Fox News or read the WSJ to see that criticism.

 

[Industrialsize]

Your timeline is skewed.

Tell me, when has the press ever hoped aboard such a sour grapes partisan attack against a president on his Inauguration Day? Ever entertained a crowd comparative between presidents and pushed so fervently such an irrelevant point?

You do realize Trump ran against Hillary Clinton and not Barack Obama? I understand why you'd want to dump from your revisionist history that corrupt liar Hillary, that two time loser, but Obama was the lame duck. Still is.

He brings all criticism on himself. His crowd is always "the biggest"(when they aren't). Everything he is going to do will happen"so quickly your head will spin, believe me." "Largest electoral victory in history"(it was number 48)They're lined up for six blocks trying to get into CPAC(when there was no line as it was not open to the public and required tickets.) "I have a secret plan to defeat ISIS in 30 days"(30 days have come and gone) I could go on and on and on........

 

[nickinoo]

Your timeline is skewed.
Tell me, when has the press ever hoped aboard such a sour grapes partisan attack against a president on his Inauguration Day? Ever entertained a crowd comparative between presidents and pushed so fervently such an irrelevant point?

You do realize Trump ran against Hillary Clinton and not Barack Obama? I understand why you'd want to dump from your revisionist history that corrupt liar Hillary, that two time loser, but Obama was the lame duck. Still is.

I'm sure the press were and are against Trump. But they still exposed him as a liar. You may think it was a little white lie but it was a lie that was very obvious, and made him look like a mad man.

I have little interest in Clinton or Obama because they are not the president.

 

[Mercurygirl]

Trump removed the outlets who were most critical of him (NYT and CNN). If you are interested in criticisms of trump, the most critical voices aren't in that meeting.

Obama retained the outlets who were most critical of him, but removed some that were less critical. If you were interested in criticisms of Obama, the most critical voices were still in that meeting and you could tune into Fox News or read the WSJ to see that criticism.

But the fact remains that Trump also included outlets that have been critical of him. You also don't know if the Obama administration felt that the outlets they blocked were the most critical or not. You're simply assuming.

Nothing you said changes anything as both have the right, yes right, to block anyone they please and did so.

The only difference is Obama gets a pass because he's the liberal mainstream media's darling who can do no wrong and Trump is Hitler (<--- using the mainstream media narrative there).

 

[Industrialsize]

But the fact remains that Trump also included outlets that have been critical of him. You also don't know if the Obama administration felt that the outlets they blocked were the most critical or not. You're simply assuming.

Nothing you said changes anything as both have the right, yes right, to block anyone they please and did so.

The only difference is Obama gets a pass because he's the liberal mainstream media's darling who can do no wrong and Trump is Hitler (<--- using the mainstream media narrative there).

No, the difference is that Trump has declared the press the enemy of the people.

 

[Mercurygirl]

He brings all criticism on himself. His crowd is always "the biggest"(when they aren't). Everything he is going to do will happen"so quickly your head will spin, believe me." "Largest electoral victory in history"(it was number 48)They're lined up for six blocks trying to get into CPAC(when there was no line as it was not open to the public and required tickets.) "I have a secret plan to defeat ISIS in 30 days"(30 days have come and gone) I could go on and on and on........

He never stated what 30 days and if he'd attacked in the first 30 days you of all people would have lost your fucking mind.

Seriously, you created a entire thread over the death of one soldier in the first 6 days of his administration. I can only imagine that you'd have opened up 20 new threads if he'd gone after ISIS so early.

 

[marinera]

Trump said he had a plan to defeat ISIS, but couldn't reveal it (well, it was a secret plan...)

Later on said:
"I'm going to convene my top generals and give them a simple instruction. They will have 30 days to submit to the Oval Office a plan for soundly and quickly defeating ISIS."


So he had no plan. 30 days have passed, and no plas as far as we know. Probably Generals have the plan now, but they keep it secret. You'll have to wait untill Trump falls to have proof that Generals' plan is exactly like first Trump plan. No plan.

 

[Industrialsize]

He never stated what 30 days and if he'd attacked in the first 30 days you of all people would have lost your fucking mind.

Seriously, you created a entire thread over the death of one soldier in the first 6 days of his administration. I can only imagine that you'd have opened up 20 new threads if he'd gone after ISIS so early.

yeah I created that thread because the death of that soldier is on Mr Trump as he decided to push a combat mission that had already been determined as likely to fail. No preparation, no ground support, Mr Trump couldn't be bothered to go to the situation room. The point of the mission was to capture an Al Qaeda operative. The mission failed as he was not there. Instead 30 civilians and one soldier were killed for nothing. And now he makes it worse by having his press secretary tell us that the mission was a success because it's purpose was only to collect intelligence. That's a lie and disrespectful to a dead soldier and a newly created gold star family. Shameful.

 

[KennF]

Maybe Obama was guilty of some of the same mistakes Trump is making, maybe he's not. I don't know.

Obama, as every president before him, has a love/hate relationship with the media.

I can't believe you just typed that.

This coming from the Left who in the genesis of their soon to be endless butt hurt loser tantrum repeatedly pushed a petty evaluation and comparative narrative by pointing out fucking crowd sizes in photographs of Trump and Obama on their Inauguration Days.



If you didn't disagree with it then why are your going ape shit over it now?

Words are fun.

You are surprised I wrote that? Wow.

Nice evasion, though. Or at least an attempt at one.

I didn't support it when Obama did it.
I support even less the degree to which Trump has attacked the media.

The media has used Mr. Trump for ratings for years. The media has been played the fool in return.

BUT, that doesn't excuse his actions. The fact that you are using what happened in the, now defunct, Obama administration as a defense of the, current, Trump administration's action doesn't speak highly of the action.

By that standard, we continue the downward spiral of governmental inaction.

I expect the media to play for ratings. I would expect the President to rise above it.

 

[KennF]

Oh... and I also never said that Obama should get away with something because Bush got away with it, nor that Bush should get away with it because of Clinton, and so on and so on...

I disagreed with, and spoke out when I felt Obama exceeded the bounds of the Presidency.
I've had arguments with my husband when I felt the political machinations and mechanisms being used were just wrong.

 

[nickinoo]

I would expect the President to rise above it.

Exactly. Acting like a child about everything is drawing more attention to him, making the media react and making life even worse for him.

 

[b.c.]

yeah I created that thread because the death of that soldier is on Mr Trump as he decided to push a combat mission that had already been determined as likely to fail. No preparation, no ground support, Mr Trump couldn't be bothered to go to the situation room. The point of the mission was to capture an Al Qaeda operative. The mission failed as he was not there. Instead 30 civilians and one soldier were killed for nothing. And now he makes it worse by having his press secretary tell us that the mission was a success because it's purpose was only to collect intelligence. That's a lie and disrespectful to a dead soldier and a newly created gold star family. Shameful.

Yemen SEAL Raid Has Yielded No Significant Intelligence: Officials - NBC News

 

[Klingsor]

Historically, a bunch of Europeans who declared they discovered lands people had been living on for generations, conquered the continent by way of enslavement and the murder of it's indigenous people, stole their land, and called it home. Sound familiar?

Just to be clear: You're saying that also happened in the U.S.?

 

[Industrialsize]

The Associated Press is learning how to cover Trump. From today:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. government, citing unspecified threats, is barring passengers on nonstop, U.S.-bound flights from eight mostly Middle Eastern and North African countries from bringing laptops, tablets, electronic games and other devices on board in carry-on bags.

Passengers flying to the United States from 10 airports will be allowed only cellphones and smartphones in the passenger cabins, senior Trump administration officials said. Larger electronic items must be checked.

The rules took effect early Tuesday morning and airlines will have until 3 a.m. EDT Saturday to implement them or face being barred from flying to the United States, the officials said.


They said the decision was prompted by "evaluated intelligence" about ongoing potential threats to airplanes bound for the United States. The officials would not discuss the timing of the intelligence or if any particular terror group is thought to be planning an attack.

The Trump administration officials briefed reporters on condition that they not be identified publicly. That was despite President Donald Trump's repeated insistence that anonymous sources should not be trusted.

The last sentence is my favorite.