Poll: 43 Percent Of Republicans Agreed That President Trump Should Have The Power To Shutdown News Organizations

It is difficult to gauge the accuracy of such polls and surveys, but there has clearly been an increase in anti-media sentiment as vividly captured at Trump rallies where media like CNN have been subjected to threatening and abusive treatment.

254 thoughts on “Poll: 43 Percent Of Republicans Agreed That President Trump Should Have The Power To Shutdown News Organizations”

  1. There is something deliberately deliberately obfuscated in this poll. First, the real truth is there is no reason for people to trust the MSM. The MSM pumps out fake news every day, all day. They lie about things that truly matter to people, things like the “need” for wars and military spending and mass surveillance. They lie about the real economy. They say little or nothing about our selling weapons and supporting al queada. These “newz” organizations exist to transmit the propaganda of the oligarchy.

    The oligarachy is the biggest censor going. They, this govt. (their servants), and the MSM reporters want Assange jailed and perhaps killed. But Assange isn’t engaged in fake news. He has 100% accuracy to his name. Govt./corporate censorship is ramping up. Anti war libertarians, leftists and even Alex Jones are already being shut down by the major tech/govt. corporatists.

    With this in mind, people should absolutely pull their S*(T together and stand against censorship. The oligarchy is going for broke, right before our eyes. We have been trained to side with them against our selves. Standing up for the human rights of every person is the only way to combat what is already happening– censorship of all ideas, sites and people who question the powerful.

    Question Trump, question the newz, question the MIC, question the bankers. Let everyone speak. We can think for ourselves and I personally do not need or want depraved individuals in the tech industry subverting what I may read!

    1. “Govt./corporate censorship is ramping up. Anti war libertarians, leftists and even Alex Jones are already being shut down by the major tech/govt. corporatists.” Yes Jill. They start by shutting down Alex Jones who is viewed by most people on both left and right as being despicable. But they use Alex Jones expulsion as gateway to widen net and broaden definition of what content is deemed inappropriate. Why has ACLU disappeared to?

      1. Bill Martin – the ACLU has gone totally leftist. They are not even taking token cases to CYA anymore.

        1. Bill and Paul,

          The ACLU is not leftist. They are fake lefties. If you look at who is funding many groups both “left” and “right”, their funders are fairly consistently neocons and neoliberal. Many civil rights groups have been infiltrated by and taken over by willing shills/servants of the oligarchy. There are of course, sincere people in these groups but if you look more closely at them, you can see what is happening. Left wing groups tend to be more censored than right wing, although it is bad in both cases. Sometimes, a lot of pressure or high profile cases can force the ACLU to do what it was created to do, but that’s getting less and less the case.

          The oligarchy is floundering. Their pretexts for empire’s wars and their fake economy are wearing thin. They have only a few mechanisms left to enforce their will on the rest of us. They take over the “press”, think tanks, universities and “humanitarian”/civil liberties groups because they are trying to control what you may know and how you will think. They need to censor hard right now because people just aren’t buying what they’re selling.

          What we all have to do is pull together to defend each other’s rights. We have been taught not to do this for a reason. It’s the only thing that can stop them. Trust me Paul, a real leftist would not tolerate censorship of Assange or Jones, even for a moment. The people for censorship are the neocons and neoliberals, along with their lackies and ordinary people who haven’t thought things through to a logical conclusion. First they came…

  2. When any group in society abuses its power, it is the right of the people through its elected officials to rein it in. The Press isn’t sacrosanct despite its bleating about its “fundamental” right to publish. If it published troop movements during war time, would it still enjoy sacred cow status? What if it sought to delegitimize an elected official because it disagreed with his politics? Or sought to flat out lie to advance an agenda it approved. Still the bulwark of freedom? Or just a petty dictator abusing its rights? We need to understand that no one is above the popular will. Not even an annoying millennial with a cosmetic smile, a microphone and a perspective about a minute old.

    1. Trump can’t live without the press. Putin could live without the press. But not Trump. He needs them more than anything else in this whole wide world. And even if Trump didn’t really, really, truly, truly need the press, he wouldn’t be able to handle so little as two days without being the center of mass-media attention, anyway.

      At some point along the way the kennel full of blawg hounds has to become desensitized at least to the most obvious red-herring stimuli that Professor Jonathan Pavlov Turley strews across the course.

        1. There could be a bit of a Punch and Judy show going on between Trump and his detractors in the media. Only they take turns swinging the frying pan versus being hit upside the head with the frying pan.

          1. Trump envies leaders who have alpha male characteristics regardless of ideology. Late4Yoga, your hysterical thoughts/imagination are great example of the outcome sought by fake news hypsters. They feed you what you want to hear to keep mob insighted. Your buying what fake news sells is all part of lefty loon media political agenda and bu$iness model.

  3. Per Jon Turley Hype Machine: “The free press is one of the fundamental pillars in our constitutional system and has repeatedly made the difference in our history in fighting abuses, corruption, and authoritarian measures. The free press is part of what defines us as a people.” Anybody who actually listens to the president is aware that it is the “fake” press not “free” press that he has waged his attacks on. People get the difference but hypsters like John Turley just love acting like provocateurs and knowingly drop the adjective “fake” which ironically fuels more “fake” hysteria which leads to more “fake” news. We are not stupid John Turley – we see right through your not-so-subtle omission of important adjective “fake”.

    1. I am so veru, very tired
      of Trump and his “fake news” comments. He is the maker of the lies he calls fake nres
      Closing press down, like other dictators. Is this what America wants? I am sick and tired of this unamerican Pres. And his unamerican trash mouth. My he and his cohorts fade into history books. To be known for the idiot’s they are!!!!!
      And

      1. Hey Charlotte maybe try reading first before you bleat out the Leftist talking point. It was a poll result (dubious by definition) about attitudes. Trump never proposed shutting down the press “like other dictators.” By the way, what is truly unAmerican is babbling without understanding.

        1. Trump has expressed some admiration for various authoritarian leaders. Expressions of admiration can be coping mechanisms for envy. Envy’s often just another word for coveting.

        2. Yes Mespo, Charlotte believes what lefty loon media infers incessantly vs. what Trump actually says. Folks like Charlotte do not want to actually listen to Trump because they prefer distorted interpretations by middle men lefty media which fits their predetermined political beliefs. Left media knows what they are doing and easy for them to take advantage of folks like Charlotte to generate advertising dollars and push their lefty political agenda.

    2. Trump doesn’t get to be the one who decides which press is free versus which press is fake. The readers, listeners, viewers and users of media get to decide which media is free versus which media is fake.

      Meanwhile, Mr. Simple Logic, Tab Lockheed, has completely and totally forgotten about Turley’s numerous and previous posts about the perils of allowing the government to regulate Twitter, Facebook, YouTube et al. Stick around for awhile, Tab. Don’t be surprised if tomorrow’s original post from Turley puts the censorship shoe on the other foot.

      1. Here is simple logic for Late4Yoga: President Trump has been attacked 24/7 by left media and has not shut them down 1.5 years into his presidency. His attack on “fake” news is part of his freedom of speech (“fake” is important adjective that you knowingly omitted). Facebook et al are private companies that are starting to arbitrarily determine what is and is not appropriate content – Diamond and Silk for example. This type off slippery slope should be alarming to all free speech advocates (both left and right).

        1. You didn’t read a single word I wrote. Nor did you follow the thread. Consequently, you are a purveyor of fake criticism based upon pigeonholing also known as alter-casting.

          Meanwhile, logic is a tool for building or analyzing arguments. Logic is neither an opinion nor a fact. Nor is it logical to put words in other people’s mouths that those people did not say. Demonstrate your ability to analyze what other people actually posted in their comment. Use that analysis to build your own argument. Stop rehashing prefabricated arguments based upon pigeonholing and alter-casting. Or forfeit your claims upon both logic and original thought.

            1. The logic-chopping simpleton, Tab Lockheed, said, “His attack on “fake” news is part of his freedom of speech (“fake” is important adjective that you knowingly omitted).”

              L4D had previously said, “Trump doesn’t get to be the one who decides which press is free versus which press is fake.”

              For those of you who actually read this blawg, L4D specifically entered the distinction between free press versus fake press in L4D’s comment. Ergo, either Tab Lockheed did not read what L4D wrote or Tab Lockheed knowingly lied when he claimed that L4D knowingly omitted the distinction at issue.

              Besides, the distinction between a free press versus fake news is a false dichotomy, anyhow. Whence the logic chopping of the simpleton, Tab Lockheed. Trump is free to call the news reported by the free press by the name of “fake news.” Trump could even sue the free press for whatever Trump calls “fake news.” But Trump cannot seize the printing presses nor revoke the broadcast licenses of the free press for reporting whatever Trump calls “fake news.”

              Oh! But Trump hasn’t done that. No kidding! Who said that Trump had done that? Nobody. A passel of people taking a poll said that Trump ought to have the power to shut down the free press. And our Pavlovian host duly invited us to debate that risible red herring as though Trump’s complaint against “fake news” could somehow lead to an Enabling Act of the type that followed The Reichstag Fire. Now there’s your fake news for you. Unless, of course, that someday turns out to be what the MAGA cult really, really, truly, truly does want.

              Somebody remind me exactly who it is that keeps on commanding L4D to stop posting “loony left articles” on the Turley blawg? It’s not Turley; that’s for certain. Could it be the logic-chopping simpleton Tab Lockheed?

  4. Just a guess, but 100% of Democrats, Progressives, Leftist, Socialist, Communist, Fascist, believe the MSM should be able to lie and slander at will. As long as it benefits them of course.

    1. Just because you don’t agree with the fact that the day glo bozo is an imbicilic, buffoonish grifter doesn’t make it any less true. Facts are a bitch. So sorry for your loss.

      this is to “I have a ‘hannity was here’ tattoo across my lower back” johnnie

      1. “Facts are a b…”
        *********
        Another case of the real buffoon not knowing the difference between fact and opinion. Guide: just ‘cause you really, really believe your opinion about the President doesn’t make it a fact,

        1. Not so much. The real eye-opener is that I don’t put all the facts that are plainly evident to a twelve-year-old through the prism of “well, he keeps the darkies in line” or some such other manifestation of “the good ole days.” Pro tip: learn about the type of people that you fear and hate–visit a real city; watching the single stop light continuously blinking yellow must be a bore.

          this is to mespo

          1. Marky Mark:
            “Pro tip: learn about the type of people that you fear and hate–visit a real city; watching the single stop light continuously blinking yellow must be a bore.”
            **************************
            I love your notion that living in some claustrophobic, urban hellscape surrounded by human trash somehow embues you with a certain intellectual sophistication absent from the rest of us. While citydwelling cockroaches like you were paying homage to King George, Virginia farmers were writing the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution. Like Jefferson taught:
            “When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.”
            And so we have.

            1. Ah…So, the fast-lane traffic seems overwhelming fierce to you, as for must denizens of the hinterlands. Just stay in the far right lane…I have faith that even you could become competent enough to move to the middle lane–eventually. On the other hand, perhaps it requires a “certain intellectual sophistication” a priori to make it in the big city….Pro tip: Just as in the Bible, there’s a random quote from one of the Founding Fathers for whatever you wish to spout. However, that doesn’t really convince anyone who’s on to that game.

              this is to mespo

              1. You wanna ignore the wisdom of the past with a passing Latin reference and a smug backhanded compliment be my guest. Elitism is amusing for one reason —the spectacular fluttering fall from the precipice that only its adherents see and the look of sheer shock on the faces of the fallen once they return to to the place they were at all along, among the rest of us. Live the fantasy amid the filth.

      2. Marky Mark Mark – pro tip: if you are going to claim that facts are a bitch you should put some facts out there for us to deal with. Talk is cheap.

      1. David Benson owes me nine citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after eleven weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – who do you know doesn’t believe that?

        1. L4D does not believe that Dr. Benson has to cite any of his work on this blawg at any time. L4D cites Annie/Inga/R. Lien/anonymous for the previous sentence.

          1. L4Yoga still enables David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – you do link from time to time although you often fail to read the entire article. Benson comes from an academic background where citing is the name of the game. He knows how the game is played. It has been almost 3 months now, but it was David Benson who made the claim his definition came from the OED and then could or would not back it up. He cannot keep making the claim that other people are Making Stuff Up and not back up his own stuff.

            And I don’t understand why you, who both cites your sources and actually has opinions, would defend him. It is like Bernie helping Hillary out after she screwed him over. Your standards are higher than his, don’t enable him.

            1. I have every reason to believe that Dr. Benson is both older than I am and older than you are. I was raised to respect my elders on the condition that they should do unto others as they would have others do unto them. So what’s your excuse for dissing Dr. Benson, now, Caviler?

              1. L4Yoga enables both David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – I spent about as many years in education as Benson has and I was taught that you earn respect, it isn’t yours by divine right. When I was in graduate school I was known as “the person who asks the questions you are afraid too.” My university is bigger and better than his and we will probably beat his school in every sport we play them this year. And, if I have intuited correctly, Benson was not retired emeritus.

                Benson is going on 3 months owing me that first citation and you should not be co-dependent of him.

      1. David Benson owes me nine citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after eleven weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – having taught Civics, I know from experience it is most likely Democrats who would fail it and do. BTW, do you have a cite for this?

        1. Turley’s original post for this thread is Dr. Benson’s citation for his claim about “Republicans who failed their civics class.” I have reason to believe that the term Republicants is common knowledge that requires no citation.

          1. L4Yoga still enables David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – I happen to think you are wrong. So there. 😉

    1. I hope they were able to place you in a suitable alternative facility, Mr. Benson.
      You seem to have a lot of “inside knowledge” of, and perhaps a fondness for, your old residence St, Elizabeth’s.

      1. Tom Nash, I only recently discovered that it had existed, as it was for a time the residence of the poet and traitor Ezra Pound. ‘Tis thought to have saved his life.

        1. I’ll have to review Pound’s political and mental issues….it’s been at least 40 years since I even heard Pound’s name mentioned.

        2. DB Benson,
          ..I think Mussolini and Hitler were fans of his poetry.
          You’re mention of him motivates me to find a biography of Pound.
          You mentioned your Mom’s Nash Metropolitan. I’ve seen very few of them, but some are still jugging along.
          I was watching a c. 1955 movie the other night…..the police cars were all Nashes….I forget what the full-sized Nash models were called, but I don’t think their engines were that powerful.
          By the mid-1950s, Buick, Olds, Pontiac, and Chrysler ( hemi) cars were making some big leaps in horsepower.
          On the old Highway Patrol, Broderick Crawford drove Buicks for much of the series.
          They called Buick models of the mid-1950s “bankers’ hotrods”, because those staid looking cars were deceptively fast.
          We had a 1956 Buick Century with a 322 c.i. 4 barrel.
          My older brother mostly drove it and tested it out in a number of drag races.
          There were only a few police cars back then, and the cops were pretty casual about it 55-60 years ago.
          On any given weekend night, you could stand on Main St. and see and hear numerous drag races once the signal turned from yellow to green.
          By the time I was old enough to drive, they’d clamped down, and the drag races in town were far less frequent.
          There was, however, a quiet country road that had two white lines painted across it…..a quarter mile apart😉.
          So “running the quarter” out there replaced the Main St. dragging.

          1. The full-sized Nash sedan was known as The Ambassador. Nash, Hudson, Packard and Willys were all kept afloat during The Great Depression by dint of fleet-service contracts with The War Department. The Nash Ambassador was the staff car for US Navy officers below the rank of Admiral. Admirals were given Packards. Oddly enough, the staff car for all US Army Officers was The Hudson Commodore. Go figure.

            Anyhow, those fleet-service contracts with The War Department had the secondary effect of making The Nash Ambassador more affordable for local law enforcement agencies at a time when funding from tax revenue was fairly tight. The real problem with The Nash Ambassador is that the turning radius lock-to-lock was rendered unnecessarily wide due to the front fenders covering the front wheels–which did make The Ambassador attractive to look at. But it was thoroughly impractical for the purpose of parallel parking.

            1. L4Yoga enables both David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – I had a friend who had a Hudson (not sure of the model) but it was wide enough to completely lay down on both front and back seats and the glove compartment was large enough to put a case of beer in. Another friend had the Nash where the seats reclined flat and we used to double-date at the drive-in. Ah, the good ole days. 😉

              1. PC Schulte,
                – I miss the drive-in movie theaters.
                Probably 90-95% of them are gone from the peak years.
                The 6-plex in Scottsdale closed 7-8? years ago….I think that was the last one on the East side…..don’t know if the West side still has the one drive-in.

                1. Tom Nash – back in the olden days, my hometown in Montana had a drive-in which was very well regulated. Seniors and their dates got the back row, juniors next, etc. My problem was I was actually more interested in watching the movie than making out. 😉

            2. Thanks for the info on my namesake cars.
              Given the source, I will check it for accuracy; however, you had nothing to gain in this case by posting inaccurate material…. you only do that ( post “factually challenged” comments) to help you make a point😠 , so it’s probably auto accurate in this case.

  5. It seems the Russians hacked several counties in Florida in 2016. It seems they are preparing to spread their tentacles throughout the Florida midterms. Sens. Nelson and Rubio have specifically warned of this threat. Gov. Rick Scott (running against Nelson) completely looks the other way. What are the Feds doing about this? Nada, so far as anyone can see. Why?
    Since at least the 2000 campaign, there have been issues about the integrity of Florida federal elections. But nothing has been done. Certain people think that so long as the GOP can exploit this for electoral purposes, and so long as they control the Secretary of State’s office and so long as they can rely on a conservative SCOTUS, they can play games with ballots, registration, polling places. Russian hacking, etc. It’s scandalous.
    And where is Jeb Bush in all this? Hiding.

    1. Rick Scott gave the Russians login ID and password to Florida voting system so that they could secure early and important win for Trump on 2016 election night. Trump’s effective and consistent messaging, smart use of television, and good old fashion hit- the-road hard work had nothing to do with him beating stay-at-home candidate HRC. It had to have been the Russians.

  6. As compared to 95% of the left belonging to either one of the the National Socialists Schutz Staffel (Antifada) or the International Socialists (Red Army Factions) or the Progressive Socialists mix of the two? That is exactly how you are viewed from the Center Everything from RInos to DINOs waaayyyy over their to the extreme left and no where near the Center except the space between Carville and Lenin.

    In our country, Representative Constitutional Republic the Center IS The Constitutiom, We are far far more than just one lumped together
    bunch of Conservatives and we are very rarely not independent self governing thinkers.

    While progressives are what? Allowed to be members of The Collective fit only for daily programming. hen

    Pity you think so litte of those people. The one’s that ‘walk away are really quite thoughtful and capable once they throw off the shackles.

    One difference is we don’t use the left’s fictionary such as viewing your propaganda arm as reporters or journalists.

    Nor most of your politicians as part of your ‘classless societies’ ruling class,

    But as for the current conversation NO one should be able to stifle the media. That doesn’t include looney tunes propagandists nor those who intentionlly violate valid national security on the one hand while using it to hide their own short comings with the other.

    Where is the line drawn?

    When it cause harm to the troops sent out to do your bidding. Again, Add up wars and other actions declared or not since 1909 and check out who was in the White House at that time and the death rate of Americas sons an daughters?

    The left is so far ahead of the center in being “War Mongers” it’s not even close. In fact I would call it a landslide.

    And so does the majority of the combat arms … your sons and your daughters. Well maybe not, probably not yours. but certainly those of the nation.

    Republic…. latin… of, for, and by the citizens.

    Democracy…????? The system that was rejected by the founders and one that does not and has not existed since the Articles of Confederation and not even then .

    Where is the line NOT drawn. When national security is being used to cover up wrong doing.

    1. Congrats are in order; you’ve outdone yourself on the wacky/loony scale. I don’t know how you’re able to finagle internet access with the level of close supervision you obviously merit. Well done; I just hope you didn’t trade your dinner desert for internet time, since your facility’s kitchen staff probably reserves its best effort for Friday dinner. Thanks for getting this vital update to us regarding the status of bedlam, yourself and your “ideas” of the day.

      this is to “don’t get caught kyping your meds” mikey

      1. Marky Mark Mark – I do hope you have a secretary who is actually competent at his/her job. Today your spelling sucks. It is dessert not desert and Bedlam not bedlam. Oh, and you misused kyped. You cannot kype something that is already yours.

  7. Politicians and government bureaucrats should not be trying to muzzle the news media. As much as the msm is in the satchel for the liberal democrats, government must keep hands off.

  8. oh come on, turley. You are very smart, intuitive, and generally on-point. But do you really beleive that ANY of these polls are acccurate? Loaded questions, selecting “random” populations that are in truth partisan-slanted, and frequently selecting fringe members of Repulbican Party, to make it appear that they represent the majority, are just a few of the distasteful tricks used by the media. why are you even legitimizing this poll, even though you qualify it with a “if it is accurate-” type disclaimer, in your post? You should instead be writing Bout skewered polls intended to influence voters.

  9. I heard at a restaurant tonight that Trump tweeted recently that “CNN is the enema of the people”.

    1. Let the media start slashing you with all kinds of (lies) then you’d have a different aspic about news media

      1. From Merriam Webster

        Definition of aspic: a clear savory jelly (as of fish or meat stock) used as a garnish or to make a meat, fish, or vegetable mold

    2. Let the media start slashing you with all kinds of (lies) then you’d have a different aspic about news media

  10. Sharyl Attkisson makes a good case here. Must read article…

    from the last two paragraphs:

    “If there really were an insurance policy against Trump, it might include having ex-intel officials getting hired at national news outlets where they’d monitor and influence news organizations, and be invited to give daily spin on controversies surrounding their own actions. Figures such as former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former Comey aide Josh Campbell and others could get hired by CNN; former CIA Director John Brennan and ex-Mueller/Comey aide Chuck Rosenberg could get hired by NBC and MSNBC.

    But all that would never really happen. Or if it did, it’s downright silly to think of it as part of an organized insurance policy.”

    http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/401116-what-would-the-intelligence-communitys-insurance-policy-against-trump#.W2z3IXJwSnM.twitter

      1. Yes and so here’s the key point…these Obama intelligence officials (Clapper, Brennan, Campbell, Rosenberg, etc, have been “invited to give daily spin on controversies surrounding their own actions” by the various major cable news outlets. Forget about testifying before Congress. They are all now paid pundits!

        Repeat: Clapper and Brennan, etc, have been invited on CNN and MSNBC as PAID pundits to comment on, and give their own spin, ON THEIR OWN ACTIONS taken as intelligence chiefs during this whole Russia/Trump ordeal that took place under the Obama administration – and that is currently under investigation.

        Anyone else see an enormous credibility/conflict of interest problem with this?

          1. And what’s your opinion about Clapper and Brennan being paid pundits as all of this is still under investigation?

            1. I don’t see that Rosenberg’s action are involved in the things he is commenting on. Clapper and Brennan are closer to the fire. So I just don’t know which axes they have to grind.

              1. You don’t know “which axes they have to grind”? Okay. So when a recent former intel cabinet official, who may possibly have an axe to grind, or something to hide, is hired by CNN or MSNBC as a paid pundit…to comment on, analyze, and spin THEIR OWN QUESTIONABLE ACTIONS that are currently under investigation, it’s hard to know whether that is a highly questionable thing to do? I’d say it’s pretty clear.

                1. “to comment on, analyze, and spin THEIR OWN QUESTIONABLE ACTIONS that are currently under investigation,”
                  Lots of unknown facts before you rush to judgment.
                  Which actions? Which investigation? The DoJ IG? Huber? They are potentially in a conflict situation depending on what the investigation reveals. Let’s see the investigation. Then, we can judge.

                  1. The point (as Sharyl Atthissons suggests) is that Clapper and Brennan (and others) are implicated in possible impropriety and wrong doing under the Obama administration re the allegations of spying on and unmasking the Trump campaign, etc.

                    Instead of having Brennan, Clapper, and other former Obama admin officials come on CNN or MSNBC shows to simply comment as guests, they have all been hired as PAID PUNDITS to regularly comment on, analyze, spin, and have the opportunity to “shape the narratives” of various “news” stories that they themselves are implicated in for possible wrong doing.

                    You go ahead, but I am not withholding my judgment on this. Clapper and Brennan as paid pundits? It all stinks to high heaven.

                    1. Something has changed. Not sure what exactly. But contrary to conventional wisdom folks seem to think it does not hurt them and perhaps helps them to comment on matters in which they were/are involved, notwithstanding pending legal proceedings. Example number 1 is Trump. He does not keep his mouth shut. Not too far behind is his stalking horse, Rudy. Then, there’s Michael Cohen.
                      I guess people think they can exploit coverage to change the narrative or confuse the public about what they did. Call me old school. It’s foreign to me, but maybe it works. We shall see.

        1. No, I don’t see a credibility problem where you hope, but I see the hardcore 38% who still haven’t caught on to the day glo bozo’s big con. I understand that you likely stand by the “in for a penny, in for a pound” nonsensical whimsy, but to continuously embarrass yourself in public must be a shameful display for the few (if any) who still give two sh*ts about your welfare. Pro tip: It’s now merely pathetic, not steadfast, or whatever you and your fellow delusionals tell each other on reddit.

          this is to “but proper alignment of the deck chairs will always be important” t-hot bob

          1. Marky Mark Mark – what is it that you are a pro at that you feel you are qualified to give pro tips? Enquiring minds want to know!

            1. lam·poon [lam- poon] NOUN

              1. a sharp, often virulent satire directed against an individual or institution; a work of literature, art, or the like, ridiculing severely the character or behavior of a person, society, etc.

              VERB (USED WITH OBJECT)

              2. to mock or ridicule in a lampoon: to lampoon important leaders in the government.

              Mark M. is the best at the above. Whether he could make a living at it remains to be seen. But I would not be surprised if he could.

                  1. L4Yoga still enables David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – he would be living on crickets and roaches. He is better off where he is, taking sloppy seconds from the Federal Public Defender.

  11. EVERY PRESIDENT HAS GOTTEN NEGATIVE MEDIA COVERAGE

    BUT NEGATIVE COVERAGE OF DONALD IS ABSOLUTELY JUSTIFIED!

    Every president in the past 50 years has felt unfairly treated by the media. Both LBJ and Nixon felt the media was undermining our effort in Vietnam. Nixon, in particular, had terrible relations with the media that became irreparable as the Watergate enveloped his presidency. In fact, Nixon’s treatment by the media upset conservatives so much that it inspired the eventual creation of Fox News.

    Gerald Ford wanted to move on from Watergate but said scandal continued drawing regular coverage well into Ford’s first year. Ford was also dogged by the media’s image of him as a clumsy buffoon which became a regular feature of NBC’s Saturday Night Live.

    Jimmy Carter’s small town Southern family drew more coverage than Carter wanted; creating a “Beverly Hillbillies” impression of the Carter White House. Then, at a low-point for Carter, Time Magazine ran a cover shot of him verging on collapse after Carter went jogging on a hot, humid day. That image became symbolic of Carter’s presidency in the minds of too many people.

    Ronald Reagan went through several phases with the media. During the early presidential primaries Reagan was portrayed as too old and too conservative. But that image warmed as Reagan clinched the nomination. Reagan then enjoyed favorable press during his first year as President. Coverage was especially sympathetic after the 1981 assassination attempt. But during the Recession of 82-83, Reagan’s image took a serious hit as the term ‘Reagan Recession’ was used by liberal pundits. That recession, however, gave way to a bullish recovery which boosted Reagan’s image to an all-time high. That high lasted until Reagan was engulfed by the Iran-Contra scandal. Reagan rode that scandal out to rise again. Yet his final image was that of a nice-but-elderly man who needed to retire.

    Bush H.W. Bush’s media image was complicated. As a candidate in 88, Bush was often portrayed as a prissy elitist from old New England money. Which wasn’t completely fair since Bush had been a war hero who succeeded in Texas far from his family’s base. During the Gulf War, and break-up of the Soviet Union, Bush’s image rose to that of an experienced master statesman. Yet during Campaign ’92, Bush was seen as aloof and out of touch with common folk; an image that defeated his reelection bid.

    Bill Clinton’s media image was disastrous before he even took office. During the primary campaign of 92, Time Magazine ran a cover shot of Clinton as a photo-negative with the caption, “Can Bill Clinton Be Trusted?”. Then, during Clinton’s first term, Hillary became a frequent media target when Bill appointed her to lead a an unsuccessful drive to Universal HealthCare. The Clintons were hounded by conspiracy theories that seemed to harden like cement no matter how baseless. Probably no First Couple in the 20th Century had a more negative media image than the Clintons.

    George W. Bush was luckier with the media than most people realize. George W’s early career was somewhat murky. He had gone AWOL while serving in the Air National Guard. Yet the media barely covered that story during Campaign 2000. Bush had also been a heavy drinker as a younger man which he admitted to. Yet the media made no serious effort to cover W’s party years. Later Bush headed a mysterious oil exploration company that never found any oil. Yet that company was eventually purchased by Saudi investors; allowing Bush to escape with a golden parachute. But again that story was barely covered during Campaign 2000. Bush’s luck continued into his presidency. Even The New York Times and Washington Post were relatively uncritical of Bush’s initial invasion of Iraq. Only later, when Iraq ruptured into civil war, did media coverage really turn negative. Negative coverage then worsened after Hurricane Katrina. Bush went out with Great Recession.

    Barrack Obama enjoyed glowing media coverage all through Campaign 2008. But upon taking office, Obama found a less charitable media. His bailout of the auto industry, stimulus package and efforts towards Obamacare were all regarded with deep, deep skepticism. The stimulus was actually a rescue package to the states; many of which faced bankruptcy amid recession pressures. But media coverage of the stimulus implied it was a boondoggle and that narrative stuck. As a legislative bill, Obamacare was dogged by baseless assertions from right-wing media; like ‘Death Panels For Grandma’! Right-wing media essentially waged an 8 year war on Obama. Michelle became the victim of vicious, racist memes. And Donald Trump, of all people, continually stoked rumors that Obama was born in Kenya.

    Therefore this portrayal of Donald Trump as the ‘victim’ of negative media coverage is the ultimate of ironies. Trump is the first president in history to have no prior experience in government. He is rash, ignorant of polices and totally unpredictable. What’s more, Trump has continually undermined his cabinet with contradictory statements. Furthermore Trump has set all-time records for false statements in public.

    Arguably no president in history has been as deserving of bad media coverage as Donald Trump

    1. OK, Peter, we can see how you are able to copy and regurgitate. I provided you with a comparison of JFK and Kennedy to show how the Democratic Party has moved left and suddenly you are silent. Do you know what that silence means? I’ll tell you. You can only copy and regurgitate. Let us hear a bit more.

      1. Allan, you said the Republicans moved left!

        And if you think I copied this from somewhere, that source allowed a few typos.

        1. Peter, I showed you how the Democratic Party moved left by comparing JFK to Trump. Suddenly you were silent. It is quite obvious when we compare JFK,~50 years ago, to today and when we look at the lefts stand on immigration a decade ago. Let us hear you defend your statements. You are always running somewhere else. I will repeat my earlier response in full below.

          Let us hear your response.

          1. Peter, I await your response. This shows the leftist shift of the Democratic Party

            We were talking about history and history involves long timelines. 50 years is enough time to see how the Democratic Party has moved further toward the left and to also demonstrate how the Republican Party as a whole has moved in that direction as well.

            Look at the stance taken by JFK on all the major issues:

            Taxes: Both Kennedy and Trump markedly reduced personal and business taxes. Both believed the way to raise revenues was to increase business activities by reducing taxes. Both relied on growth. Today the Democratic Party has repudiated conservative economic policies that worked in JFK’s time and are working today. Neither JFK nor Trump sold America short. JFK believed every dollar taxed was one dollar less for growth.

            Foreign policy:

            JFK was naive when he first came to office and could have started WW3 but he was strong against Russia and had a relatively strong foreign policy. Like Trump, he recognized America’s strength and its leadership position. He didn’t bow to foreign despots something Trump would never do.

            Immigration:

            Like most Democratic leaders he didn’t push for open borders. Even Chuck Schumer called for border control prior to Obama’s Presidency. Trump believes like Kennedy that a nation has borders that must be controlled.

            Space

            Kennedy pushed exploration and pushed us to catch up to the Soviets. Trump is calling for a space force.

            Peter, learn your history.

            1. Allen, when Kennedy took office, the highest income brackets were paying tax rates of up to 90%. The government had spent most of the 1950’s paying off World War II and the Korean War. That was the responsible thing for the government to do. However, by the early 1960’s, enough debt had been paid-down that the highest income tax was reduced to about 70%.

              When Trump pushed through his tax cut last fall, the highest personal income tax rate was only 39%. That was dramatically lower than when Kennedy took office. A 39% tax is more than generous for high-level executives and millionaires. They didn’t need a tax cut. We need to pay down the debt and deficit!

              1. That 70% bracket was loaded with deductions that drastically lowered what was actually paid. The point is that Kennedy believed in some of the economic principles espoused by Coolidge, Reagan, and Trump. Since that time many new taxes have been added so that the actual tax burden for the wealthy might be greater than it was during Kennedy administration.

                I take note how incomplete a comparison you made with regard to economic policy and you didn’t touch on how many on the left, Nancy Pelosi, in particular, want to increase the taxes and some are looking towards the socialist route. All you did was produce the pat statement of the tax rate being higher without understanding what tax rates mean and how the tax environment affects them. You neglected tax avoidance when the rate was 70% and how new taxes have replaced the higher rates.

                Additionally, I note that after the typical empty pat response you didn’t deal with foreign policy, immigration or space. Let’s hear about those three and talk some more about the economics in greater detail.

                I await a real discussion. The left has moved further left.

                1. Democrats don’t push for open borders, Allen. That’s an absolutely stupid talking point. The border is only a 3 hour drive from L.A. No one in California wants criminals crossing the border at will.

                  The border fence was begun under Clinton and upgraded under Bush. During the Obama years border apprehensions were down dramatically. Obama benefitted from the Clinton-Bush fence. And one should note that Hispanic immigration activists were always happy with Obama.

                  Again, that ‘Open Border’ s**t is a bogus talking point.

                  1. Peter,,,,.
                    – Thre “sanctuary city” and the “open borders” issues are inter-related.
                    I.E., if a person or a politcal group is, ostensibly at least, for tight control of our borders, and then turns around and supports sanctuary cities, that’s like saying “control the borders, but if they slip the net don’t bother enforcing the laws”.
                    So even IF those Californians support strong border protection,some of those same Californians pretend that “everything stops at the border” with respect to enforcement of immigration laws.

                    1. Tom, those terms are linked by right wing media. One can want secure borders without breaking up families.

                      Just last week an undocumented immigrant from Mexico was deported from Tampa with her 5 year old daughter, an American citizen.

                      The case was interesting for many reasons. This woman had lived in the U.S. for 20 years having entered as a teen. She had fled an abusive single father and no longer had any family in Mexico. But now she was being deported there with her 5 year old.

                      Sadly this woman leaves their 16 year old daughter with her husband back in Tampa. He, however, travels in his job. So now their 16 year will be on her own a lot.

                      Oh, I should mention, her husband is a discharged soldier who did tours of Iraq and Afghanistan. He thought veterans would get consideration with regards to undocumented spouses.

                      Ironically our husband-father voted for Trump! Which is now a serious issued between he and his deported wife.

                    2. “Just last week an undocumented immigrant from Mexico was deported from Tampa with her 5 year old daughter, an American citizen.”

                      Peter, blame the Democrats. If I remember correctly Trump was willing to let in ~1.8 million DACA but the Democrats preferred to politicize DACA like they politicize all minorities when convenient. In any event just last week an illegal alien in the sanctuary city of Philidelphia raped a 5-year-old girl. You don’t seem to care a hoot about American citizens and the Democratic Party doesn’t seem to give a hoot about DACA except for political advantages.

                      START CARING FOR AMERICAN CITIZENS DUMP THE DEMOCRATS.

                    3. Peter,..
                      When I have time, I’ll give you some examples of the other side of this ( lax or non-existent) enforcenemt of immigration laws).

                  2. Peter Hill – what the Democrats seem to have right now is taking down the ICE, Open Borders and raising taxes. That is their winning national platform.

                    1. Right, and what the GOP has is its own stormtroopers, building a wall and lowering taxes for the wealthy. There’s a winner.

                    2. Peter,…
                      Based on what you described of those cases, there should be a
                      proceduce to grant exceptions in some cases, where there might be a technical violation of immigration law, but overriding circumstances in a particular case.
                      These are good “headline stories”, far more likely to be covered than some of the things I’ll cover.
                      I don’t know what you have personally observed over the years in your community re the effects of large waves of immigration, both legal and illegal.
                      I can tell you the impact in the communties in Eastern Washington State that I’ve seen over the years.
                      I’m not trying to trash these communities, which vary in size from a few thousand to c.75,000.
                      The Mexican American population in the community that I grew up in was probably was probable 6-8 % of the total population.
                      They were most likely to be American citizens, or legally residing there as residents.
                      The crime rate did not seem to be disproportionately high within that community.
                      The migrant agricultural workers probably had a higher % crime rate, but they were mostly there seasonally, and generally had no reason for staying in the U.S. once there was no longer work for them.
                      That 6-8% of the population that was Mexican American a couple of generations ago had roughly tripled in size over 20% today.
                      It’s no longer true that the crime rate with that community is not disproportionately high.
                      Events like drive-by shootings…. some fatal, some inflicting injuries . …..some wildly spraying bullets………were unheard of c.30 years ago.
                      I wouldn’t say that they are common now, but if there are a few events per year like this in a smaller community, it tends to draw attention.
                      Less lethal events, like melees involving dozens of scores of opposing gang member going at it with clubs, boards, fists, feet, chains etc. in a big parking lot, also tend to draw attention.
                      A friend of mine in a nearby community that was experiencing the same kinds of changes and problems simply moved his young family to another community in the 1990s.
                      And he said that when he’d read the paper in his previous community, the arrest and court reports would be mostly names like………then he rattled off about a dozen common Mexican surnames.
                      That got his attention, as did a sharply rising crime rate in his previous community.
                      It is extremely rare to see any kind of a breakdown of what percentage of the Mexican community is there legalluly, and what percentage is there illegally in these communities.
                      And of course there is no distinction from the media which of the arrested or convicted are there legally or illegally.
                      It does not appear that LEOs or the courts are that interested in making a distinction either.
                      There would be, or should be, an opportunity for deportation in some cases, but in a situation where there is de facto apathy in this area, you’re not likely to see de jury enforcement.
                      What I’ve pointed out is not likely to appear in travel brochures or Chamber of Commerce publication.
                      I’m telling you the changes that I have actually seen, not referring to more-favored issues covered by the media.
                      Are you claiming that enforcement and distinguishing legal from illegal residents in any different in California, especially in sanctuary cities?

                  3. “Democrats don’t push for open borders, Allen. That’s an absolutely stupid talking point.”

                    Peter, this demonstrates how out of touch you are with reality. The Democratic Party has done little to control the violence that it creates sympathizing with ANTIFA and BLM. Just today or yesterday a man offered $500 to kill an ICE agent. One could say he is just a kook but all we have to do is listen to Maxine Waters to know that this type of action is being promoted by members of the Democratic Party. I realize that many in the Democratic Party would like Maxine Waters to go away but they cannot be vehement enough because too many believe that would alienate the party from minorities and far leftists. Democrats have lost control over the far left of their party and we are seeing the results of what Democrats have reaped.

                    A decade ago Charles Schumer was calling for a more secure border and there are videos showing this. Today he is doing quite the opposite and that is also supported by video. Democrats have called for open borders, refuse to build a wall, refuse to fund border control, want to dismantle ICE, want to provide illegal aliens the right to vote and are using taxpayer funds to support illegal aliens when they use our safety nets. That money disappears so that legal citizens are denied funding they have been promised

                    I haven’t even mentioned sanctuary cities where illegal citizens that have committed crimes are given special advantages so that they are not arrested by ICE. The mayor of Philadelphia performed a dance on video while he sang out of tune about Philadelphia being a sanctuary city. Just a short while after I believe a 5-year-old girl was raped by one of those released illegal aliens that he was so proud of. That is the new picture of the Democratic Party, raped 5-year-old girls among others.

                    I think anyone can recognize who is providing the stupid talking points and who is not able to prove what he says.

                    I await how you answer the problems listed above regarding immigration and then how you handle the economic changes of the Democratic Party since JFK, You addressed his tax decrease very poorly using an overused talking point that has underused knowledge behind it. I await your responses to the total tax situation instead of a singular number almost meaningless in the comparisons.

                    Finally, you haven’t even touched on foreign policy and space.

                    JFK’s policies demonstrated more similarity to Trump than to his own party of today. His party has moved so far to the left that JFK would probably fit on the rightmost half of the Republican Party of today.

                    I hope to continue this debate with you, Peter. I hope not to hear silence. I don’t wish for the destruction of our two party system but I also don’t wish the Democratic Party to become the Socialist Party. If one remembers the theme of Marx, first socialism then communism. Communism is an idea that cannot work. Stalin tried and look at what he did to the people of his nation in that awful attempt.

                  1. PC Schulte,…
                    Having trouble scrolling back, so I’ll comment here.
                    You mentioned the bikers earning $150,000 a year.
                    My brother in Texas knows two “white collar bikers” who decided to ride to Sturgis for the big annual event there.
                    They were guys in their early 60s and really pumped for the 1200-1400 ride to Sturgis.
                    They were exhausted by the time they got there, but rested up and enjoyed the festival.
                    They changed plans, decided to fly back and have their bikes shipped home😊.
                    I’d guess that there’s a booming business for motorcycle shipping services from Sturgis to all over the U.S, , for people who abandoned the plans to ride home.
                    About 10 years ago I was driving across Nevada on I-80, from Reno to near the Utah border.
                    I saw hudreds of bikers on that trip, some in groups of 20-30.
                    I didn’t figure it out until I stopped in a little town for coffee to go ….there were “Welcome Sturgis Bikers” sign here and there.. The few motels and restaurants in the town probably did a good business with the next town being so far away.
                    It’d be a likely place for the tired bikers to pack it in for the day.

                    1. Tom Nash – I have not been to Sturgis for the rally, but I have been to Sturgis. I understand the eye-candy is of the highest quality. 🙂

                  2. A flat tax or a consumption tax or both but we need a balanced budget amendment and severe restraints on federal spending returning a lot of power to the states and people.

              2. No one stopping you. Write a check and send to the IRS. Write two checks. One for you an one for the frog in your pocket. As for me I’m still tying to recover from that 30% loss of value of the dollar and the one down to point zero two COLA Obama gave us.

                1. Michael, feel free to share with us the income bracket you are in.

                  I remember when Joe The Plumber griped to Obama about taxes. Then when we learned that Joe was a non-union plumber making just $30,000 per year.

                2. Michael Aarethun – I am wondering why I did not get a raise in my SS under Obama. He ran the greatest economy evaaaah! right?

    2. Peter,…
      The press had a “near-crush” on JFK……I’d say that he had an extraordinarily friendly and protective press.
      About 2-3 months before he was killed, Huntley and Brinkley did an extented interview of JFK at the White House.
      I’ve seen the outakes related to that interview…..haven’t checked online to see if they are still there.
      Kennedy gave an answer to a question about Vietnam, maybe a 2 minute response.
      During a break, JFK rethought his original answer, thought he could have answered it better, and asked for a “do over”, which H&Brinkley readily agreed to.
      Chronkite chided JFK when he asked him for a do over.
      But overall, JFK had an unusually compliant and admiring press.
      Kinda like Trump has.😌😏😀😂

      1. Tom, just because I’m the ‘liberal’ on this thread, doesn’t mean I’m obligated to defend JFK.

        From all the reading I have done, it seems that JFK’s real career was that of a Playboy! In that regard Kennedy was not unlike Donald Trump. I don’t think JFK could have possibly withstood the post-Watergate media.

        One should also note that JFK suffered a host of health issues that the public was never fully aware of. That was explored in “Death Of A President”, 1967, by William Manchester, a distinguished academic who knew JFK. According to Manchester, JFK was taking cocktails of drugs every day to deal with the various conditions he suffered. For that one reason alone, JFK’s entourage removed his body from Dallas before the local Coroner could examine it.

        Nevertheless JFK was a youthful president and a charming, articulate speaker. Kennedy was also the first president of his generation; a significant point often lost on Kennedy critics. And Kennedy’s election essentially marked a point where Irish Americans finally joined the American mainstream; a breakout moment for Catholics as well.

        Finally one should note that the alternative to Kennedy was Nixon who may have actually won the 1960 race. But if we had to chose between both again, with hindsight being 20-20, Kennedy would probably win by a bigger margin.

        1. Peter,…
          I wasn’t expecting you to defend JFK….I was just pointing out an exception to your comment that all presidents have had problems with a negative press.
          Kennedy did win the election….the alleged vote-rigging in Chicago could not have tipped the election to JFK.
          Even if it happened….who knows…and even if it took Illinois away from Nixon, JFK was over 270 without Illinois.
          Richard Reeves book in the early 1990s gave one of the most detailed reviews of JFK’s health issues.
          Fortunately😉, he had a Dr. Feelgood injecting a concoction of speed and who-knows-what to counteract the fatigue, etc. that accompanied his medical conditions.
          ( That MD, Dr. Max Rosenblum? Rosenbaum? has an extensive list of famous clients….mostly in the entertainment field. I think I’ve seen at least two dozen celebrities he “treated”).
          I didn’t read Manchester’s book, but I don’t think that in 1967 he had anywhere near the information on JFK’s health that Reeves had 25 years later.
          They ER MDs at Parkland already knew JFK was an Addisonian….they were stunned when JFK’s entourage ( his personal MD may have been there at that point) immediately advised a massive injection of cortizone…that confirmed the Addison’s Disease.
          They wanted him out of Dallas not so much to cover up JFK ‘s medical issues, but because LBJ was at the airport, he wouldn’t leave without Jackie, she wouldn’t leave without JFK’s body.
          And the JFK entourage, some of whom knew JFK for decades, didn’t have positive feelings about Dallas.
          There was a tense standoff, armed Secret Service agents may have already had firearms drawn, and they ended up cursing and pushing the Dallas officials out of ths doorway they were blocking.
          They had a choice of moving, or getting run over by a heavy coffin and a large group of really pissed-off men.

          1. Should be HAD an extensive list of famous clients, not “has”…he’s long gone, and I think they yanked his license, or took away his ability to prescribe, in the 1970s.

          2. Tom, Richard Reeves was a syndicated columnist I used to read.

            Jackie and Bobby Kennedy actually granted hours of interviews to William Manchester because they expected him to write a glowing, Camelot-like narrative. But when they found out he included the bad, Bobby tried to stop the book. And that created a buzz which actually gave the book invaluable promotion. “Death Of A President” went on to win the National Book Award and sold 1 million copies.

            But I might look for Reeves book now just for the fun of it. Thanks for the tip.

            1. Peter,
              The title is President Kennedy, Profile of Power by Richard Reeves. 1993
              It had the most comprehensive summary of JFK’s health issues I’d seen up until then, and maybe since.
              I checked it out of the local library……in October 1993, I was on the road a few hundred miles out of town when I started going into a full-blown Addisonian crisis at motel I was at.
              I called a taxi, went to the ER room in this small town.
              The gal who was on duty as the ER room MD got this concerned look on her face like “what the hell do I do”😀.
              I’d seen that look before and doctors don’t encounter it that often, so that’s understandable.
              She called another MD who was making rounds, and she also bailed.
              She must have been making a bunch of phone calls, because she found an MD ( also female) about 15 miles away who was confident and competent enough to take the case.
              3 MDs, 3 women doctors, so I asked when she got there if they allowed men MDs to practise at that hospital😊😉.
              Anyway, she didn’t know about the Reeves book that I mentioned to her , so when I got to my destination about 900 miles away I bought the book and sent it to her with a thank you note.

          3. Tom, Peter is very biased and hasn’t been able to defend his position saying that the Democrats haven’t moved left. His latest claim is that Democrats don’t want open borders and want to keep our illegal aliens. I think his latest proof goes something like this, ‘LA is 3 hours from the border so we certainly want our borders controlled’. Maybe I got him wrong and may he just has problems expressing himself without capital letters or citations that are meaningless. Who knows. I can’t believe how close to set concrete his mind is.

  12. 43% of 24% of Americans agree Trump should have the power. 10.3%. This seems like the typical idiot’s portion of the Bell Curve of national intelligence.

    1. Acromion,…
      There’s one poll out there that demonstrated that 10 out of every 8 Trump voters were ignorant, racist deplorables.

  13. The sad part is you consider it plausible. Mean while conservative voices are being removed from social media. Which side is actively silencing apposing views?

Leave a Reply

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks
%d bloggers like this: