No, Mr. Giuliani, BuzzFeed Should Not Be Sued Or Investigated [Updated]

It often seems that when the Trump team has the high ground on a story, it rushes to bulldoze it to the ground. The controversial interview by Rudy Giuliani on CNN, it a case in point. In response to the rebuke of BuzzFeed by the Special Counsel, Giuliani gave a rambling interview that included a call for BuzzFeed to be investigated or sued. Neither should occur. I have been critical of how the media and legal experts overplayed the BuzzFeed story. However, if BuzzFeed had two officials connected to the Mueller investigation giving this information, it was news. Indeed, aspects of the story are likely to be born out by Michael Cohen in his testimony before Congress. There is ample reason to criticize how the media treated this story but the suggestion that journalists should be investigated or sued for reporting such a story is dangerous and unwarranted. Indeed, Giuliani made news  an by asking “And so what if he talked to him about it?” In fairness to Giuliani (who has been unfairly reported on the context of the statement), he prefaced that statement by saying that he did not know if Trump spoke to Cohen. However, it would be a reckless and problematic act if Trump spoke to a witness about this testimony on his and Trump’s conduct. Such an act would maximize the risk to himself and Cohen.

Giuliani also explained Trump’s repeated references to Michael Cohen’s father-in-law that made most of us cringe. It sounded a lot like trying to intimidate a witness. Giuliani insisted that Cohen’s father-in-law, Fima Shusterman, was involved in criminal conduct and likely has organized crime connections back in Ukraine where he was born. Shusterman reportedly loaned millions to a Chicago cab company owner and was mentioned in the FBI warrants. Giuliani said that that is just part of addressing the credibility of a witness. That explanation however does not address the clearly inappropriate factor of Trump making such points. Had Trump’s lawyers made such objections, there would have been less objection but this was the President of the United States calling for the father-in-law of a federal cooperative witness (who has accused him) to be investigated.

Again, I think that Giuliani has been treated unfairly on his defense of Trump on the issue of whether there was a “deal” in Moscow – a point that I have also made. Where I have a problem is what Giuliani than said about BuzzFeed.

CNN’s Jake Tapper crossed with Giuliani who has continued his record of problematic statements. Tapper set the scene by saying “I want to clear up some questions about this Trump Moscow project, and why Michael Cohen lied to Congress about it and why President Trump misled the American people about it. So just very clearly, did President Trump or anyone on the trump team ever have a conversation with Michael Cohen about his congressional testimony?”

Giuliani objected that “Let me correct the premise of the question. The president didn’t lie to the American people about it.” He later turned to Buzzfeed and said “You’re focusing on this minutia, but the reality is, yesterday BuzzFeed published a story that was scandalous. It was horrible. They should be under — they should be sued, they should be under investigation. They said the president of the United States counseled someone to lie and the special counsel in an extraordinary act–”

Sued for what? Few people seriously believe that BuzzFeed does not have two sources. Moreover, Cohen has already said that he lied before Congress and did so after consultation with the White House. As I have written before, the attacks on the media and threats of lawsuits against the media present a serious threat to the freedom of the press in this country.

The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision decades ago in New York Times v. Sullivan. Ironically, this is precisely the environment in which the opinion was written and Trump is precisely the type of plaintiff that the opinion was meant to deter. The case came out of the highly divisive period of the civil rights movement. The New York Times had run an advertisement referring to abuses of civil rights marchers and the arrest of Martin Luther King Jr. seven times. The Montgomery Public Safety commissioner, L. B. Sullivan, sued for defamation and won under Alabama law. He was awarded $500,000 — a huge judgment for the time. Sullivan’s lawsuit was one of a number of civil actions brought under state laws that targeted Northern media covering the violence against freedom marchers. The judgments represented a viable threat to both media and average citizens in criticizing our politicians.

We can criticize how the BuzzFeed was overplayed by the media, but it was still performing a key role in our constitutional system. What bothers me the most about the statements from the Trump side against the media is that it ignores how much our freedoms have depended on the independence of our free press.

154 thoughts on “No, Mr. Giuliani, BuzzFeed Should Not Be Sued Or Investigated [Updated]”

  1. I think that we can use the term BuzzFeed in place of B—- S—–, or BS. After all. BS is offensive to bulls. BuzzFeed is offensive to planet Earth. All that apCray which came out recently is nuttin but BuzzFeed. Or BS. Instead of Bull S—- it would be ok to say Buzz S—-. It is ok to use pig latin. Buzz itShay.

  2. An Internet rag with a history of plagiarism employs a writer twice proven to be a liar and runs with a story implicating impeachment of the POTUS without seeing the claimed corroborating evidence. What’s next? The FBI getting a FISA warrant based on the tip? Buzzfeed shouldn’t be sued; it should be disbanded. The First Amendment may protect scoundrels but it doesn’t protect frauds.

  3. Rudy has simply lost it. From a respected federal prosecutor to a Trumpette? I don’t know what happened, but he has sunk to such a low in his BS about this president, that it is doubtful he can recover. Once a fool, always rejected. Must be something in the air back there.

    1. So your complaint is with the conduct of the lawyer of the victim of the fraud and not the conduct of the perpetrator of the fraud? Interesting priority system.

  4. At what point do the patently false stories, lies and “fake news” of the press, published in conjunction with the leaks, mis- and disinformation propagated by a rancid FBI, Obama “holdovers” and the “deep state,” become a conspiracy to “overthrow, put down…the Government of the United States,…?”
    ______________________________

    “If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down,…”

    18 U.S. Code § 2384 – Seditious conspiracy

    If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
    _________________

    – The duly elected American government has been in a condition of subversion and sedition since the presidential campaign of 2016.

    – The Obama Coup D’etat in America commenced subversion and sedition operations against the President at that time.
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________

    ‘…they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.”

  5. Hey Jonathan, Buzz Feed is a left wing rag, both so called “Journalists” have filthy pasts in journalism. One of them stated had problem with truth in past

  6. I saw two of the dumb Buzzfeed dorks on tv several times. They cannot talk full sentences. They need to be ignored. But. In this case, they need to be asswhipped.

  7. I believe we would all be better off if the public stopped granting politicians such importance in their lives. The practice provides pols with too much relevance which leads to greater and more hazardous wielding of power.

    For me, probably the most benign class of elected officials are water and sewer district commissioners. They tend to be retired managers in their field and generally are effective and focused solely on marshaling the municipal corporation toward better service for the consumer. Plus, rarely do people who are politically overly-ambitious use something as non-sexy as being a sewer district commissioner as a spring board to more profitable and powerful elected positions.

    1. Enigma,..
      Cohen did file a lawsuit against Buzzfeed, almost exactly a year ago.
      He dropped it a few months later after his circumstances changed, and he had “other priorities”.😉😊

  8. I agree with you that Buzzfeed will not be sued or investigated but the core issue here remains the seriously falling journalistic standards that allows an essentially unverified article like this to be published. There was a time when something like this wouldn’t see the light of day. Now we have the Steele dossier, the Manafort Assange story and numerous other examples of virtually fact free reporting.

    A free and thirsty press is essential to our democracy. A partisan, bloodthirsty press is not and, in fact, seriously diminishes our democracy by engaging in speculation and narratives rather than journalism.

    You have to love Buzzfeed’s chutzpah though–after the SC’s office rebukes the report, they demand the SC clarify which aspects of the story they dispute.

    The answer, through WaPo: the story is almost entirely incorrect.

    Enough said.

  9. What’s wrong with investigating and suing the media (except that they employ you)? They haven’t any integrity at all. The odious Warren Court gave them a bon bon in 1967, finding in the various penumbras what amounted to a constitutional right to libel and slander. Lest you think it necessary to political discussion, the precisely contrived effort of an NBC affiliate to ruin the reputation of a private citizen named George Zimmerman (who was facing criminal indictment) was ruled to be protected speech. Not only should the Sullivan case be thrown out. It should be thrown out ex tunc.

    1. Tabby, ‘who’ should sue the media?? Trump..?? Bring it on.

      One might note that during the Democratic convention, in July of 2016, Michael Bloomberg stood before the delegates, on prime time television, to ‘confide’ that everyone in the financial world knows that Trump is a ‘fraud’.

      Trump didn’t dare respond to Bloomberg. Nor did any of Trump’s Lieutenants. Though Trump sent numerous tweets that week attacking Alicia Machado, the former Miss Universe. For some reason Trump was braver with Machado than he was with Bloomberg.

        1. Tabby, everyone knew exactly what Bloomberg meant. He was alluding to the fact that most of the big banks had ‘moved on’ from Donald Trump. Which left Trump dealing almost exclusively with Deutsche Bank; an institution accused of money laundering for Russian billionaires.

          1. What fraud means in the alternative universe does not mean fraud. Truth is not truth. Don’t believe what you see or hear. I have no Russian business, well maybe some, well OK I do, but it does not mean I’m in business with the Russians. This could go on forever in Trump world.

          2. I have provided links to articles citing Goldman Sachs, The Bank of China, and Ladder Capital as lenders to Trump.
            As for the claim of “Trump dealing almost exclusively with Deutsche Bank, I have yet to see compelling evidence that the claim is true.
            Another popular claim is that Trump has to have primarily Russian sources of financing; again, I haven’t seen evidence provided for that claim, either.

                1. TRUMP AND DEUTSCHE BANK

                  EXCERPT FROM FINANCIAL TIMES STORY

                  The link above is inert. Here’s a key passage from story.

                  A couple of decades earlier, before Deutsche began its expansion and while Mr Trump was still making a name for himself in New York real estate, plenty more banks were willing to deal with Mr Trump. Citibank, for example, led deals including the Trump Plaza, the largest casino in Atlantic City at the time, and Trump Shuttle, an east coast airline the developer launched in 1989. Manufacturers Hanover, bought by Chemical Bank in 1991, and Chemical, which bought Chase Manhattan in 1996 and took the name, also took part in several deals, along with Bankers Trust.

                  “He put out good product,” remembers one ex-Deutsche banker. “His buildings were high-quality, he got good rents from retail and he sold condos for high prices.”

                  Steve Witkoff, chairman and chief executive of the Witkoff Group, a luxury condo developer who considers himself a friend of Mr Trump, adds: “I think he is one of the best out there.”

                  But things changed in 1990, when Mr Trump overextended himself in Atlantic City through bank loans and junk bonds, while suffering with the rest of the industry in a New York property downturn. One warning sign was a $100m working-capital loan from Bankers Trust: Mr Trump was using it to service mortgages and pay debt, rather than fund day-to-day operations, according to a person familiar with discussions. Before long, the four lead banks — Citi, Chemical, ManiHani and Bankers Trust — sat down on behalf of 68 other lenders to thrash out a restructuring of $4bn of debt, including $800m of guarantees.

                  Mr Trump lost control of wide swaths of his empire and the banks took “significant” hits on their investments, according to the person familiar with the talks.

                  The experience convinced a lot of banks that lending to Mr Trump was more trouble than it was worth. Neither Citi nor Chase, for example, has lent to Mr Trump since the big debt restructuring of the early 1990s, according to syndicated loan data tracked by Dealogic. Both banks declined to comment on their relationships with Mr Trump.

                  After Mr Vaccaro left in 2010 for Cantor Fitzgerald, via a brief stint at Ranieri Partners, Deutsche’s commercial real estate business was taken over by Jonathan Pollack, now at Blackstone, then Matt Borstein in 2015. But by then, the primary point of contact for Mr Trump was Rosemary Vrablic, his long-time wealth manager who had joined Deutsche’s private banking unit in 2006 from Merrill Lynch.

                  A year later, when the financing was coming due, the Trump Organization swapped out Mr Barrack’s part of the deal and turned again to Deutsche. The bank supplied a $170m loan via its private banking unit, which houses Ms Vrablic’s business, according to filings made with Washington DC’s Office of Tax and Revenue.

                  Loans for the Old Post Office building and Chicago hotel tower are not due until 2024, when Mr Trump would be in the final year of a second term in the White House, if re-elected. The $50m-plus mortgage on the Doral golf course resort in Miami, comes due in 2023.

                  John Cryan, Deutsche’s chief executive since 2015, has been trying to put an end to the bank’s slew of legal and regulatory troubles in the US. Last December the bank struck a $7.2bn settlement with the DoJ for mis-selling residential mortgage-backed securities in the run-up to the crisis; in April it became the first big bank to be penalised for violations of the Volcker ban on proprietary trading.

                  The chief executive assured investors last month that Deutsche had made “significant progress” on its remaining slate of investigations.

                  Maxine Waters, however, a Democratic congresswoman representing Los Angeles, is determined to keep the bank in regulators’ crosshairs. As the ranking member of the House financial services committee, she is demanding a broad range of financial records from Deutsche, to look for links between Moscow and Mr Trump, his close family members, business associates and others he has dealt with in the past. Deutsche has refused to supply the materials requested, saying it must respect “laws and internal policies designed to protect confidential customer information”.

                  In July, after two failed attempts to obtain records from Deutsche, Ms Waters and three Democratic colleagues brought a resolution to the floor of the Capitol building to compel the Treasury Department’s financial crimes enforcement network to turn over documents.

                  The Democrats are seeking documents, records and any suspicious activity reports referencing loans the bank extended involving Bayrock, a developer in several real estate deals including the Trump SoHo hotel, and several Russian banks, including Sberbank, Vnesheconombank Group and VTB Group.

                  Edited from: “Donald Trump’s Debt To Deutsche Bank”

                  THE FINANCIAL TIMES, 8/20/17

                  1. Thanks for the sumnary….I remember the news in the early 1990s when the Trump Atlantic City property was swamped with debt and insufficient cash flow.
                    As I recall, Trump’s creditors settle for an equity stake in the property, since they had no realistic hope of recovering the bulk of actual money lent.
                    There were at one point junk bondholders as well who took a bath. I don’t think the major bank lenders like Chase and Citibank came out “whole” with their new ownership stakes in the property, but I’d have to review the history.
                    If several major U.S. banks git clobbered on that deal, it’s not surpising that they froze any future lending for Trump projects.
                    Even if a new project seemed viable, the banks’ shareholders would probably scream bloody murder if they saw any further lending to Trump.
                    One of the articles I previously linked did an exhaustive public records search on a number of Trump properties; that publication dug deeper into the question of Trump’s lenders than any others that I have seen.
                    It looked like he has 4-5 major lenders…..I haven’t seen any current info. on Russian banks being among those lenders, but in the past either Donald Jr. or Kushner stated that they could always get financing from Russian banks if they needed it.

              1. Trust me, Mad Maxine won’t go too far. She may be straight outta compton but she’s not mentally incompetent— no matter how crazy she may seem. Banks butter the bread and she takes care of them.

                1. Mr. Kurtz,…
                  Your mention of Compton reminded of a trip I took about 20 years ago.
                  I was leaving the LA area for Phoenix one night, and decided to top off my tank before I left.
                  I took an exit marked ” Someting Street” ….I don’t remember the name on the exit sign….and found myself at a gas station in Compton.
                  I could tell it was a safe city, because the cops always seemed to outnumber all of guys they had down on the ground, or lined up against the wall with their hands pressed against the wall high above them.😉☺😀
                  But I didn’t waste any time gasjng up, and getting a coffee for the road, just in case the odds changed.

    2. Absolutely nothing in your statement which can be fact checked is true. As Turley has correctly stated, New York Times v. Sullivan is the standard applicable to defamation cases where a public official is involved. That opinion was handed down in 1964. Your “penumbra” reference likewise did not become significant in Supreme Court law until it was mentioned in Griswold v. Connecticut; an opinion which was handed down in 1965. So far, no “1967” case and you’re thus 0-fer on every factual assertion you’ve made. From there, it’s quite simple to imagine that the rest of your “contribution” is likewise a similar collection of whimsy and made up sh*t. It looks good on you though. Thanks for playing.

      this is to “well it was at least in the same century, wasn’t it?” absurdity

    3. i think NYT v Sullivan is overly applied. Maybe it is flawed too but it’s too often taken too far.

      Lawyers get licensed and scrutinized like hell. We are actually the only class of people whose very licensing restricts our freedom of speech. Well I guess that applies to the military too but in different ways. But we are private persons who can be and are disciplined for criticizing judges or for saying politically incorrect things. NYT v Sullivan is a precedent which could protect us but no way do the state courts let it. But oh the journalists can say whatever they like including blatant falsehoods

  10. REPUBLICANS ARE ALWAYS AT WAR WITH MEDIA

    Fox News was created by Republicans who felt that mainstream media was inherently biased against conservative policies and principles. The idea was that conservatives had to ‘control the message’. Fox News is now the linchpin of what we call right-wing media, an industry that includes AM Talk Radio, The Drudge Report, Brietbart and now The Sinclair Group of local TV stations.

    Right-wing media is fairly disciplined when it comes to echoing an approved set of talking points developed in concert with the Republican party. But mainstream media and left-wing media feel no obligation to affirm right-wing media’s talking points. This lack of ‘cooperation’ is an endless source of annoyance to Republicans. Every week some mainstream, or left-wing outlet, breaks a story conservatives are forced to deal with.

    The Buzzfeed story, however flawed, put forth at least two ideas severely annoying to Trump defenders. 1) Trump was still negotiating business deals in Russia well into the 2016 primaries. 2) Michael Cohen, however ethically-challenged, has the capacity to seriously damage Trump. What’s more, Michael Cohen is scheduled to appear before Congress at a special hearing on February 7. Thanks to the Buzzfeed story, all of Washington is now awaiting Cohen’s appearance.

    Many observers believe that Cohen’s testimony, on February 7, could be the John Dean moment in Trump’s Watergate. However ethically-challenged, Michael Cohen could drop some bombshells that Mueller’s team might verify through hard evidence. In that event Donald Trump essentially becomes a dead duck of a president. The country then enters a new, uncertain phase where the president is a rogue with ever-dwindling support.

    1. “Thanks to the Buzzfeed story, all of Washington is now awaiting Cohen’s appearance.”
      The date of Cohen’s scheduled testimony has been known for at least a week or two.
      The anticipation of his testimony preceeded the Buzzfeed article.
      The unusual and extremely rare statement from the Special Counsel’s Office appears to discredit the very serious allegations in the Buzzfeed article.
      Trying to credit Buzzfeed with the “discovery” that the Moscow Trump Tower negotiations went on far longer than Cohen had previously testified, or saying thanks to Buzzfeed we now know that Cohen has “the capacity to seriously damage Trump” ( I would say “the potential” to damage Trump) does not make a lot of sense.
      If someone didn’t figure those things out long before the Buzzfeed article, they must have been in a coma.
      And even IF one tries to give that credit to Buzzfeed, that does not let them off the hook if their accusations about Trump instructing Cohen to lie are false.
      Cohen’s testimony should clear up some of the questions about whether Trump gave Cohen “marching orders” to lie, and also provide more details about the negotiations involving the negotiations for the Trump project in Moscow.
      If Cohen does make the claim that Trump told him to lie, and there is solid documention ( texts, emails, Cohen’s tape recordings) to back Cohen’s claim, then Trump is on very thin ice; I think he’ll be impeached, and possibly face criminal charges.
      If Cohen makes that claim ( or other claims incriminating Trump) WITHOUT strong documentation, then Cohen’s history and his lack of credibility will not make the attempts to incriminate Trump convincing.

      1. The Special Counsel’s push-back only challenged the claim that there was sworn testimony and documents to backup the story that Trump suborned perjury. That’s all. The Special Counsel did not state that Trump didn’t try to get witnesses to lie. Nevertheless, Faux News claimed that the Special Counsel’s Office totally refuted Buzz Feed’s story, which isn’t the case.

        1. That gets back to my point….if Cohen makes that claim without documentation, it doesn’t mean a heck if a lot.

          1. Yeah, Tom, that’s why I said all of Washington now awaits Cohen’s testimony to Congress. February 7 could be a red-letter day for Trump.

          2. I regret to inform you, sir, that defendant’s get sentenced every working day in federal court to lengthy prison sentences based on convictions for violations of federal conspiracy statutes. The vast majority of these defendants are convicted based solely on the testimony of their coconspirators. (Or they plead guilty based on the certainty of conviction because of the statements of those coconspirators). Based on the frequent use of such government witnesses, prosecutors often warn the jury that “there are no angels in this conspiracy.”
            Simplified for the gullible rubes, dupes, klan wannabees, pocket-traitors and grifters on the make; if the day glo bozo doesn’t win again, he’s very likely to discover up close and personal the meat-grinder that is a federal criminal conspiracy prosecution. The fact that Cohen is also a criminal means very little in the trenches; to U.S. Attorneys; or to federal petit jurors.

            to tommie

            1. Markypoo,…
              If you are in fact acting as a federal defense lawyer and are representative of the quality of those lawyers, it’s not at all surprising that
              these defendants choose to plead out or get convicted with a clown like you “defending” them.
              So save your “regrets”, and your delusions that you are capable of “informing” anyone of anything.

              1. Haha. Excellent. Hate the game, not the playa. Thanks for playing.

                this is to “I gits so agitated whens I gits confused” tommie

                1. When a dumbass and self-proclaimed lawyer repeatedly plays his little troll games here, it doesn’t cause agitation.
                  It’s more amusing than anything else to see someone like you really extend himself to prove what an ******* he is.😊 Great job.

                  1. I can assure you that there is only one audience which concerns me–and that audience is quite entertained by my contributions here. Thus, your opinion is necessarily not included in the calculations, a fact which is represented by the doctrine of expressio unius est exclusio alterius. So sorry for your condition, and loss.

                    this is to “hannity mentioned trolls last night so now I do too” tommie

        2. Do you really believe that if anyone on Mueller’s team was going to leak info to reporters, they would leak to Buzzfeed? Come on. They have their chosen media peeps they leak to when they want something to get out…and it ain’t gonna be to some Buzzfeed schmuck.

      2. While Cohen’s testimony on February 7th will no doubt be entertaining. Since he’ll be unable to discuss anything related to the Mueller investigation, I don’t think this will get us any closer to Impeachment. However, there are so many Impeachable offenses Trump is entangled in, that Mueller no doubt has evidence of, the question isn’t if, but when.

        1. Enigma, as I noted on the impeachment thread, we’re going to come to a very awkward moment with Trump. A juncture where he ‘should’ be impeached.. but the clock will be running out on his term as president.

          At that point Democrats might prefer to face Trump directly in the next election rather than let Pence become an interim president.

          1. I think the Democrats will be unable to ignore crimes detailed in the Mueller report. The Impeachment process won’t elevate Pence. He has lied himself to back Trump every step of the way. e headed up the transition and was aware of much that was going on. The one thing I find impossible to believe involving Pence is that Flynn lied to him, causing Pence to repeat that lie to the nation. That lie has been repeated and left unchallenged. When that story falls apart, so will Pence.

            1. Enigma, yeah, it gets very complicated. Theoretically Pence should be impeached first. But as I noted, the clock is running out for that whole process to play. I don’t know if it’s realistic.

                1. What’s amazing is the Left’s myopia to the world-wide nationalistic movements occurring in the US, Brazil, Italy, France, Sweden, Hungary, Poland, and the UK. Trump has already won the hearts and minds regardless of his political fate. He’s engendered popular uprisings around the globe and smashed the globalist agenda. Don’t believe it? Ask the godfather of the globalist movement, George Soros, who admitted in an interview with the Financial Times that nationalism is the current “dominant ideology.” https://www.businessinsider.sg/billionaire-george-soros-liberal-agenda-2018-1/

                  In dominating the conversation, Trump’s rendered the Left into blithering idiots advocating ridiculous politically correct positions which don’t resonate with the great majority of people. Trump’s won. Like the dinosaurs you won’t see the comet until it lands .

                  1. and here i was thinking nationalism had been the dominant ideology since the end of the thirty years war and Westphalia!
                    silly me

                  2. Actually, Russia has had a lot to do with the nationalist uprisings in Europe, far more than Trump. I’ll agree with you thaqt Trump has won the hearts and minds of many. Coal-miners, white nationalists, the very rich. One of those groups has made out very well, the others…

            2. He did no such thing. He hardly says anything definitive at all and he’s stood back. That guy is no Dick Cheney. Except that people may underestimate him.

        2. Enigma,..
          -If Cohen is not able to discuss anything related to the Mueller investigation, I think he might be just sitting there in absolute silence.☺

          1. There’s a lot I don’t believe Mueller is investigating including much with The Trump Organization and Trump Foundation (now shut down). Trump ties to different mobs, reviewing his previous testimony before Congress. Payoffs to women (outside of the FEC violations), fraud, previous perjury related to lawsuits, payoffs to foreign governments. That’s off the top of my head.

            1. OK, Enigma…but what is the purpose of Cohen appearing before Congress to testify if he is “unable to discuss anything related to the Mueller investigation”?
              I can see that he might be advised by Lanny Davis (or whichever attorney is nearby as he testifies) not to get unto certain areas.
              But to prohibit “ANYTHING related to the Mueller investigation” from discussion in his testimony?!

          1. Mr. Kurtz – I don’t have a favorite as of yet. I would prefer it not be Biden or Warren, hoping for someone younger. I like Amy Klobachar, I grew up in Minneapolis and read her father’s column. I don’t see her getting traction because she isn’t flashy but very steady. Don’t care for Gilibrand, Harris has been running for President since getting elected to the Senate (I get her e-mails) but is a little packaged, I have liked her in Senate hearings. I like Beto but don’t know enough about him. The process will eliminate many of them long before I get a chance to vote on someone in a Primary.

    2. PH, I’m wondering why the March for Life, that had about 100k participants just a few days ago, got little to no coverage by most cable news outlets. But the Womens March, that had about 10k attendees, got saturation coverage by most media outlets. One might say this disparity in coverage – or lack of coverage entirely, is one example of media that is “inherently biased against conservative policies and principles.” No?

      1. TBob, I don’t what sources you follow. But my sources reported the March For Life and it’s 100,000 attendees.

        Interestingly a minor incident spun-off from the March For Life march. A group of Catholic high school boys, bused-in for the march, happened upon an older Native American man performing a ceromony by chanting to drum beats.

        The boys, wearing MAGA caps, surrounded the Native American and literally got in his face while expressing support for a border wall. The incident was captured on video and made the mainstream media which embarrassed the march.

        Organizers of the march are distressed that their movement is now so closely linked to Republicans. They had naively hoped to keep their cause a bipartisan effort. But more and more the movement is seen as an arm of the Republican party.

            1. The Israelites killed every living thing in Jericho so that they would not be attacked from the rear as they proceeded into the “promised land” in Canaan.

        1. You just made my point about biased coverage.

          “The boys, wearing MAGA caps, surrounded the Native American and literally got in his face…”

          That’s not at all what happened. But it didn’t stop the fake news pile-on that has gone viral. Why did it go viral? Because you just know that “white boys in MAGA hats” gonna be racist white supremacists, right?

          Wrong.

          Watch the whole video and see for yourself what “actually” happened.

          1. TBob, if the boys were there ‘marching for life’, what compelled them to chant for a border wall? The issues are completely unrelated. And, as I pointed out, the March For Life was embarrassed. They don’t want to be seen as closely linked to Trump. And they certainly don’t want to be seen as advocates of a border wall (which many Christians oppose). So however you spin the coverage, it was an unwanted distraction for the march.

            1. They are kids, that’s why. There is video out there clearly showing that Nathan Phillips, the Native American man, approached the students and got in the boys face, not the other way around. And there is video showing that the boys in MAGA hats were being harassed and taunted by other groups of what looks to be mostly adults.

            2. The March for Life had VP Pence speak to the group. He represents the Trump administration, right? So to suggest that the March for Life doesn’t want to be seen as closely linked to Trump is just plain false.

              1. TBob, sure Pence addressed them. But again, the Anti-Abortion movement aspires to be bipartisan. Boys with MAGA hats chanting for a wall is not a distraction they want.

                1. “Boys with MAGA hats chanting for a wall…”

                  I posted the article for you to read, PH. Why? Because context matters.

                  From the article:

                  “Again, all the evidence suggests that Phillips got it backward.

                  He also claimed that he heard chants of “build the wall.” While I cannot rule out the possibility that some of the kids indeed chanted this—those who were wearing MAGA hats are presumably Trump supporters—I did not hear a single utterance of the phrase in the nearly two hours of video footage I watched. Admittedly, the kids do a lot of chanting and it’s not always possible to tell what they are saying. Their stated explanation is that they engaged in a series of school sports chants: That’s what one student told a local news reporter. His account largely tracks with the video.”

                2. hey PH – Resist the confirmation bias! You can do it.

                  You said, “But again, the Anti-Abortion movement aspires to be bipartisan.”

                  You are trying to create controversy where it doesn’t exist. Let’s talk about the real controversy:

                  Did you check out the anti-Semitism and Jew hatred being embraced by the leaders of the Womens March? It’s a so-called movement that aspires to be for ALL women (who think like they do, of course, which means they exclude conservative women, and those who believe in Israel’s right to exist….)

                  Did you read Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz’s article on why she has distanced herself from and condemned the Womens March leadership?

                  https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2019/01/18/debbie-wasserman-schultz-linda-sarsour-tamika-mallory-farrakhan-column/2602396002/

                  1. Well if the SPLC is “Distancing itself” from the Womens’ March, then maybe it’s not so bad after all!

                3. oh it very much is bipartisan trust me probably half those Catholics are Democrats.

                  I am not a pro life activist and that is not my issue at this time, but I know a lot of people who are or were into it. Plenty of them are 90% with Democrats.

                  I pretty much don’t see it as worth marching about anymore because it’s a waste of time. This is a supremely NON democratic issue, in the sense that nobody gets to VOTE about it because the SCOTUS says we can’t vote about it. end of story. moving on now!

                  Hey: at least in Ireland they had a referendum!

            3. you don’t like their free speech then don’t listen
              who cares if they want to build a wall or stare at an old dude who beat drum nearby? he did his thing and they did theirs. that’s America!

              you guys are powderpuff complainers

          2. You omitted mention of the tomahawk chopping motions they made, and simulated Indian war whooping (like 1950’s westerns used to have), along with the chanting of “build the wall”. The tomahawk chopping motions and war whooping were intended to be offensive to the Native Americans.

            Oh, and by the way, the Indians got between these fine, Kentuckian Catholic high school Neanderthals because they were taunting and abusing black Israelites. The man with the drum was chanting a Native American peace prayer. He was attempting to stave off a racial confrontation. You clearly see the cretin in the MAGA hat getting into his face. When is he expected to lunch at the White House with his hero?

            There are more videos of these events on various outlets, but you won’t see them because Faux News won’t carry them.

            1. natacha:

              “The tomahawk chopping motions and war whooping were intended to be offensive to the Native Americans.”
              ************************

              Aside from the fact that “Spouting Bull” precipitated the confrontation, I see no reason why Indians would be offended with chopping motions and war whoops. They invented them massacring settlers and other Indians. The atrocities worked both ways during the Indian Wars:

              https://www.nytimes.com/1870/07/08/archives/the-indians-sad-accounts-from-the-westmassacre-of-minersthe-bodies.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=4315565DEF30778635C540D32039D75C&gwt=pay

              1. “Spouting Bull” as you call him, got between the Kentuckian white trash who were harassing black Israelites, hoping to defuse a racial incident. That man regularly goes to Washington to pray for Native Americans who died in service to the United States. Both the Native Americans and black Israelites were there, marching for their causes, as were the Neaderthals, who decided to bother other groups.

                It just points to the hypocrisy of the “right to life” movement, and especially those schools that require their little darlings to participate in such events as part of their religion grade. That school the cretin attends is in an affluent area and not very diverse. BTW: I am a cradle Catholic, attended 12 years of Catholic school, still sing in the choir, so I do know whereof I speak. Catholics are some of the worst hypcrites there are. One thing I did learn is the difference between faith and action. This is a perfect example.

                1. what is a black israelite? a Falasha? i have no clue what that talk is about.

                  Also i wonder Ms what is your religious background if you hate Catholics so much? Don’t be shy!

                  1. I don’t hate Catholics. I am a Catholic. I just recognize and call out hypocrisy when I see it. I, too, attended a non-diverse Catholic high school whose students did not practice what was preached.

                    1. Ok well I see a lot of hypocrisy in the Church but in this story pretty much none. Not sure why the drum beater approached the boys nor am I sure why them saying build the wall is of any particular interest nor why staring at the old dude is even newsworthy.

                    2. and what the devil is a black israelite if not a falasha? clue me in on this. oh wait let me see. google says it’s some bizarre American cult, in so many words. ok what has that got to do with anything, again? just spinning irrelevancies to liven up the other verbal mush?

                2. “BTW: I am a cradle Catholic, attended 12 years of Catholic school, still sing in the choir, so I do know whereof I speak. Catholics are some of the worst hypcrites there are.”
                  ************************************
                  Put yourself in the middle of a fight, then expect to get hit. Why he is the self-appointed guru of peace, no one knows but his incessant drum bagging makes him the culprit regardless of motives. Kids will be kids but adults are supposed to know better than to call them Kentucky “white trash.” The African Hebrews of Jerusalem cult has some strange ideas. For example, they believe blacks were enslaved on orders from God as punishment for some failure of religious propitiations. So ridicule might not be so inappropriate. As for your religious proclivities, it might be good to know that the RCC prescribes that “human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.” (Catholic Catechism) So by singing in the choir and parading around as a “member” while rejecting the dogma and denigrating the “Right to Life” movement makes you a non-believer at best or, at worst, the exact epithet you just labeled onto all Catholics..

                  1. He put himself in the middle of what could have been a fight, instigated by the Neanderthals posing as Christians. How were the Kentuckians “respecting” the lives of the people they were mocking?

                    I don’t reject dogma. In fact, those Kentuckians are the ones rejecting dogma. What could be more ironic than that scenario: white Catholic school boys at a march for life trying to pick a fight with black folks, but got interceded by a Native American man chanting a peace prayer?

                    But, like a true Trumpian, you know how to attack and think you are turning tables on a discussion. The MAGA-wearing Catholic high schoolers are racist ignoramuses who showed their true colors by the war whooping and tomahawk chops. Yes, they are white trash. If I get the chance, I’m going to tell my Fr. Pat just that.

                    1. if you had ever been to a Notre Dame football game, you would have seen or heard that exact chopping and chant.

                      I have seen it quite a lot at those games back myself and probably it is something of a Catholic school boy cultural thing

                      you don’t seem like the kind who enjoys football however. yes, I played football in high school many decades ago and we did exactly the same thing.

                    2. “But, like a true Trumpian, you know how to attack and think you are turning tables on a discussion.”
                      *******************
                      I’m not attacking. I’m observing in an entertaining way. As for “turning the tables,” I’ve always loved that idiom. Never knew what it meant until I read a English book on idioms and found this: Anglican Bishop Robert Sanderson preached in 1648: “Whosoever thou art that dost another wrong, do but turn the tables: imagine thy neighbour were now playing thy game, and thou his.”

                      So it refers to board games. And since I’m bored now, I’ll bid you adieu. But think about how it looks for you to sing in choir and then argue against your fellow parishioners.

                  2. You know the only people who even use the expression “white trash” are usually people who have class conscious affectations and insecurities, due to their own humble origins, that make them want to psychologically distance themselves from poor and working class white people.

                    That is to say, as one of my friends taught me, they are “lace curtain Irish”

                    I came from a privileged and highly educated background and my parents never used the “N word” and they did not tolerate the expression “white trash” either because it is specifically used to denigrate poor and working class whites– and that is nothing that a good person should do!

                    1. “You know the only people who even use the expression “white trash” are usually people who have class conscious affectations and insecurities, due to their own humble origins …”
                      *******************

                      That’s my experience, too.

            2. out here in the midwest you still have indian mascots. there is a state named “indiana” in case you forgot and the state “illinois” is named after a tribe. so guess what nutcaca: we ain’t changing these names to suit YOU!

              We have many reservations in the midwest and are good neighbors with our tribal friends and have never had a problem unless it came from the mass media, which definitely is NOT owned by Native Americans!

              Stay where you are and I suspect it’s far far away from flyover

        2. *To better understand what happened, here is a pretty good article —->

          https://reason.com/blog/2019/01/20/covington-catholic-nathan-phillips-video

          From the article:

          “But the rest of the video—nearly two hours of additional footage showing what happened before and after the encounter—adds important context that strongly contradicts the media’s narrative.”

          Far from engaging in racially motivated harassment, the group of mostly white, MAGA-hat-wearing male teenagers remained relatively calm and restrained despite being subjected to incessant racist, homophobic, and bigoted verbal abuse by members of the bizarre religious sect Black Hebrew Israelites, who were lurking nearby. The BHI has existed since the late 19th century, and is best describes as a black nationalist cult movement; its members believe they are descendants of the ancient Israelites, and often express condemnation of white people, Christians, and gays. DC-area Black Hebrews are known to spout particularly vile bigotry.

          Phillips put himself between the teens and the black nationalists, chanting and drumming as he marched straight into the middle of the group of young people. What followed was several minutes of confusion: The teens couldn’t quite decide whether Phillips was on their side or not, but tentatively joined in his chanting. It’s not at all clear this was intended as an act of mockery rather than solidarity.

          One student did not get out of Phillips way as he marched, and gave the man a hard stare and a smile that many have described as creepy. This moment received the most media coverage: The teen has been called the product of a “hate factory” and likened to a school shooter, segregation-era racist, and member of the Klu Klux Klan. I have no idea what he was thinking, but portraying this as an example of obvious, racially-motivated hate is a stretch. Maybe he simply had no idea why this man was drumming in his face, and couldn’t quite figure out the best response? It bears repeating that Phillips approached him, not the other way around.

          And that’s all there is to it. Phillips walked away after several minutes, the Black Hebrew Israelites continued to insult the crowd, and nothing else happened.”

          1. More from the article…

            “You can judge for yourself. Here is video footage of the full incident, from the perspective of the black nationalists. Phillips enters the picture around the 1:12 mark, but if you skip to that part, you miss an hour of the Black Hebrew Israelites hurling obscenities at the students. They call them crackers, faggots, and pedophiles. At the 1:20 mark (which comes after the Phillips incident) they call one of the few black students the n-word and tell him that his friends are going to murder him and steal his organs. At the 1:25 mark, they complain that “you give faggots rights,” which prompted booing from the students. Throughout the video they threaten the kids with violence, and attempt to goad them into attacking first. The students resisted these taunts admirably: They laughed at the hecklers, and they perform a few of their school’s sports cheers.

            It was at this moment that Phillips, who had attended a nearby peace protest led by indigenous peoples, decided to intervene. He would later tell The Detroit Free Press that the teenagers “were in the process of attacking these four black individuals” and he decided to attempt to de-escalate the situation. He seems profoundly mistaken: The video footage taken by the black nationalists shows no evidence the white teenagers had any intention of attacking. Nevertheless, Phillips characterized the kids as “beasts” and the hate-group members as “their prey”:

            “There was that moment when I realized I’ve put myself between beast and prey,” Phillips said. “These young men were beastly and these old black individuals was their prey, and I stood in between them and so they needed their pounds of flesh and they were looking at me for that.”

            1. And one more excerpt from the article:

              “Again, all the evidence suggests that Phillips got it backward.

              He also claimed that he heard chants of “build the wall.” While I cannot rule out the possibility that some of the kids indeed chanted this—those who were wearing MAGA hats are presumably Trump supporters—I did not hear a single utterance of the phrase in the nearly two hours of video footage I watched. Admittedly, the kids do a lot of chanting and it’s not always possible to tell what they are saying. Their stated explanation is that they engaged in a series of school sports chants: That’s what one student told a local news reporter. His account largely tracks with the video.

              “We are an all-male school that loves to get hyped up,” said this student. “And as we have done for years prior, we decided to do some cheers to pass time. In the midst of our cheers, we were approached by a group of adults led by Nathan Phillips, with Phillips beating his drum. They forced their way to the center of our group. We initially thought this was a cultural display since he was beating along to our cheers and so we clapped to the beat.” According to this student, the smiling student was grinning because he was enjoying the music, but eventually became confused, along with everyone else. (Indeed, multiple people can be heard to shout, “what is going on?”)

              It would be impossible to definitively state that none of the young men did anything wrong, offensive, or problematic, at some point, and maybe the smiling student was attempting to intimidate Phillips. But there’s shockingly little evidence of wrongdoing, unless donning a Trump hat and standing in a group of other people doing the same is now an act of harassment or violence. Phillips’ account, meanwhile, is at best flawed, and arguably deliberately misleading.

              Unless other information emerges, the school’s best move would be to have a conversation with the boys about the incident, perhaps discuss some strategies for remaining on perfect behavior at highly charged political rallies—where everybody is recording everything on a cell phone—and let that be the end of it.

              The boys are undoubtedly owed an apology from the numerous people who joined this social media pile-on. This is shaping up to be one of the biggest major media misfires in quite some time.”

              1. And to add….not only does it appear that the Native American activist – the “adult” in the scenario — is lying in his reports to various news outlets about what happened, he now has multiple GoFundMe sites up and running and collecting donations for him — you know, because he’s an innocent “victim” of alleged ‘taunting’ by Catholic school boys??

                At the same time, the social media mob is viciously attacking the high school boys and attempting to literally destroy them. They are teenage boys! Their crime? Wearing MAGA hats. It’s unbelievable.

                Please watch the video and see what actually happened here.

                I am sickened by this.

                1. I’m a product of Catholic education and I thoroughly appreciate it. If I have to pick sides, I pick their side. Stick together!

                  some ignorant people may not know this, but certain tribes in the midwest were massively converted to Catholicism, and continue to practice it, and when other tribes got resettled a long time ago, they stayed. Hence the abundance of Indian casinos in Michigan, Illinois, Indiana.

                  https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2017/11/23/the-resilience-of-native-american-catholicism/

          2. thanks i wasnt clear on how the black hebrew israelites were part of the picture

            it’s interesting, maybe people never heard of British Israelism or Christian Identity, who have been called hate groups, why not call the black version a hate group too?

            not that the expression “hate group” accomplishes anything much useful in any context. it doesn’t.

            I would call them both bizarre cults. that is to say, both the C.I. people and the BHI people who are their reciprocal.

            the March for Life in DC: sounds like quite a strange event. Glad I missed it!

          1. Mr. Kurtz,..
            My dog will sit and stare at me like that.
            I’ve seen a lot of the Star Trek episodes, so I’ve attempted a canine mind meld, patterned after Spock’s techniques.
            No luck so far.

            1. tony soprano to richie aprile: “stop it with the manson eyes! I told you no selling coke on my garbage routes!”

  11. Prof. Turley – I just don’t think your reference for the defamation standard holds water here. (I’m not a lawyer but a commonsense, intelligent woman). There appears to be a conspiracy by a variety of news agencies to consistently and repeatedly, make false statements or lies about many aspects of the present administration, knowing that retractions are meaningless and a pile-on effect can be effective in creating a smear/defamation. READ Sharyll Atkinsson’s Book about how the media smears people, especially conservatives.

    The list of false claims/smears recently is rabid and extensive and has caused great damage to both individuals (Flynn, B. Kavanaugh, C. Page, etc) and institutions. Because the press has made so many mistakes and has NEVER revealed the sources (and I know we want to protect the sources but not if they have a conspiracy to harm the USA) and continues with the multitude of unsubstantiated lies and deceit, I think the defamation angle changes.

    For example, Buzz Feed created a story based on substantial lies, misinformation, and substandard reporting. Buzz Feed prints it because they know that they won’t be held to a standard other news agencies are held to. AND THEY KNOW that their potentially defamatory and unverified story will be picked up and reported on (24/7) by the rest of the press, who can report it as IF it is true and not harm their so-called (but very dubious) journalistic standards because they are just saying IF. BUT if 50% of the people who hear the lies (24/7) believe it, they will have defamed the administration — which is actually their intent. And the example of a conspiracy. So how about we just call this what we know it is – a conspiracy to defame. I’m open to Guiliani’s lawsuit because I’m tired of the lies and smear machine.

    1. For the sake of entertainment, I watch Faux News, and the most amazing thing to me is their success in getting people like you and Karen S to not only believe the drivel they put out, but that so believing shows that you are reasonable and intelligent.

      One of their major themes is that they are truthful and that “mainstream media”–i.e., any media that is not pro-Trump, is biased, lying, unfair or otherwise not entitled to consideration. That’s the most concerning thing, because that’s exactly how Hitler got otherwise – reasonable Germans to hate Jews.

      You say the Buzz Feed story is all lies. That’s not what the Special Counsel’s statement said—it only challenged the attribution of documents and sworn testimony. However, Faux News said the story was refuted. That is a lie.

      Other themes: anyone who is not pro-Trump is leftist, Democrat, or some other label they use as a signal that they have bad intentions. Here are some inconvenient truths: MOST Americans did not vote for Trump, most disapprove of him and his positions on most things, and have so felt for more than 2 years now.

      Another theme : Trump’s border wall equals border security, and because Democrats in Congress, elected overwhelmingly by voters last November, oppose the wall, they oppose border security, and therefore, want open borders so that South American invaders will vote for them. Democrats want smart border security, which includes modern techniques that are more cost-effective and real-world effective, based on informed judgment from experts. Trump pushes solely for a wall because he promised his base “a big, beautiful wall”, that Mexico would pay for. We all know the latter part was always a lie, which leaves the matter of the wall.

      Here’s the inconvenient truth about that argument : Ann Coulter told
      Trump on air that if he didn’t deliver the wall, he’d lose his base, which in fact, is all he has for support. So, Trump is holding 800K federal workers hostage to save face with his base. Well, that’s not going to work, either, and since that’s all he has left, the standoff won’t end soon. On Faux News, they’re going to keep harping about how it’s all the fault of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, but that’s not true. Americans overwhelmingly do not want a wall, but Trump’s ego and support are on the line. You won’t hear that on Faux News, and won’t believe facts to the contrary because you are a disciple who believes herself to be reasonable and intelligent, which is the scary part.

      1. If Cohen testifies before Congess that Trump instructed him to lie, and there isn’t documention to back up that allegation, how much do you think Cohen’s testimony about Trump telling him to commit perjury is worth?

        1. In a rare move, Mueller’s office denies BuzzFeed report that Trump told Cohen to lie about Moscow project – The Washington Post
          If Natacha ever gets over her bizarre obsession with Fox News, she should look at other sources.

              1. Yes, I did read it.
                If you want to say that it says whatever you claim it says, go ahead and stick with that fantasy. Tom, will post as anonymous, though

                1. “Tom, will post as anonymous, though”

                  And who gives a rat’s a$$, Tommy. Post as Mr. Magoo. No one cares.

                  1. Brilliant contribution, as usual.
                    I make that note for clarification as to who posted it, you nitwit.
                    Not everyone is swimming in a sea of anonymouses like you.

      2. FYI to Natacha – feel free to address my assertions but please take your political diatribes elsewhere. I understand that you hate the President and that’s fine, but the question is whether or not a media that has consistently lied is conspiring to defraud those who are easily persuaded by emotion and headlines. As you illustrate, they are right – it’s all too easy.

        1. Spoken as a true Trumpian disciple. Heavy on counter criticism, light on facts. They even have you showing signs of paranoia –conspiracy, lies? That’s how Hitler did it. I’ve heard fake “Judge ” Jeanine say similar things. What is your proof of a “conspiracy”? I’m demanding facts, not opinions.

          1. “They even have you showing signs of paranoia”, says Natacha, who then immediately starts sounding the alarm about “Nazis”.
            Talk about ironic.

      3. Natacha wrote, “That’s the most concerning thing, because that’s exactly how Hitler got otherwise – reasonable Germans to hate Jews.”

        That is concerning. Who, right now, in your estimation, is fomenting hatred toward Jews and Israel? Hint: it’s not Trump.

        1. Hitler coined the phrase “lugepresse”, which literally means “fake news”. He got the German people not to trust radio and newspapers because they wrote about the atrocities committed by his regime and the Nazi hate-based anti-Semitism, calling them liars and fake news. That was up until he closed them down and newspapers and radio were taken over by Nazis. There were millions of Jews in Germany and Poland who lived peacefully with their Gentile neighbors and conducted successful businesses and lives until Hitler came along. He silenced his critics by convincing Germans that news media could not be trusted. After he took over radio and newspapers, all the German people heard was Nazi propaganda. It started with convincing people that the majority of news media were liars when they reported negative facts and opinions about Nazis and after Nazis got control, the message morphed into Jews being responsible for all of Germany’s problems, including WWI. Next, Krystallnacht, ghettos and concentration camps. That is the parallel here. Faux News, Limbaugh, Coulter and Drudge all accuse “mainstream media” of lying, being unfair and being biased against Trump, and people like you buy it.

          I remain amazed at the amount of lying Trump does and how people like you not only don’t find it troublesome, but make excuses. Why doesn’t the lie about Mexico paying for the wall bother you? Why should American taxpayers pay for the wall Trump promised his base that Mexico pay for? Why should Congress appropriate money for a wall when most experts say it is not the best use of resources and when Americans overwhelmingly voted Democratic in November and overwhelmingly do not want a wall? Why it is the wall or nothing? Because Trump’s ego is on the line. Ann Coulter told him that if he didn’t deliver on the wall, he’d lose his base, so he’s holding federal workers hostage. Yet, that not only doesn’t bother Trump supporters, you defend him and attack Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, who have a mandate from the American people to stand firm. If they give in, then Trump will shut down the government any time he doesn’t get his way, and that cannot be allowed. On camera, in front of the American people, Trump said he’d own the shut down, and yet Trump supporters still don’t blame him. Faux News attacks Trump opponents and uses phraseology like “us vs. them”, or “liberals”, “the left” or “Democrats”. Well, that’s actually most Americans. Trump supporters are the minority. The point is that this same kind of tactic employed by Hitler–attack any media that doesn’t agree with you as “fake”.

          1. “That is the parallel here”.😉😏😊😂
            We need people like Natacha to draw those comparisons where they exist, and especially where they don’t exist.

            1. Because we are all supposed to cringe when Nitwit mentions Hitler, much like the MSM labeled the Covington Catholic Boys “racists” only to learn they were pulling Diane Feinstein’s “dogma runs strong in you” anti-religious bigotry.

              When words had meaning…all those were the days

            1. Buildings on local base still look like swastika – CBS News 8 – San Diego, CA News Station – KFMB Channel 8
              I hope this link opens up to the article about Swastika-shaped buildings at the Navy base.
              I heard that retired Navy guys in the area like Olly are being called up, to be retrained for U-Boat duty.
              The signs are all around you, Natacha! 😏☺😀

          2. I don’t know if Hitler had a lying press or not but we sure do!

            Who cares about Hitler 80 years ago and on another Continent.
            Deal with the present, Ms! Stop invoking Hitler all the time it’s so lame.

      4. natacha:

        I find Fox News has an agenda in its commentary shows and makes no bones about it. The MSM has an agenda across the board and tries to hide it under a very sheer veneer of objectivity. I prefer a shill to a liar.

      5. I knew that Trump’s generous offer to help DACA and TPS migrants would be spurned by Democratic plotters like you who just want to use them to score points. Shame on you!

        and we natives want the wall whether rootless cosmpolites agree or not!

      6. Coulter is a clever lady! But Coulter is wrong on the point. He won’t lose the base because the base has nowhere to go. Both parties have been lame about border enforcement and mass migration issues. Republicans pander to business labor demand that wants it.,And Democrats see the migrant offspring as their future growth plan.

        But that base is a lot bigger than pollsters say, because, people lie about how they want the wall. A lot of people want the wall and will never admit it.

    2. Congratulations! Unlike most of the other gullible rubes, dupes, klan wannabees, pocket-traitors and grifters on the make who drool here, you have actually made a statement in your screed which is quite clearly true. Congrats again.

      this is to “that’s right, I may be google-eyed but I’m most definitely not a lawyer” sbg

  12. Becoming President is just volunteering to be a mole in a whack-a-mole game. It doesn’t matter if one is a great leader or a dysfunctional lunatic — all are bashed with the same vigor.

  13. The daggers are out for citizens of the united states. Most of what passes for a free press is neither free nor press. We have tightly controlled access to information in our society. Much of the US press agrees with Trump that the “right” kind of journalist, such as Assange, should be arrested and imprisoned for exposing war crimes of this empire. The press only gets upset when one of the courtier/transmission beltway class might be in danger of repercussions.

    Meanwhile my library has informed me that they are thrilled to announce “Newsguard”. Newsguard will take away their patron’s need for critical thought! Newsguard will tell them what is or is not trustworthy information.

    Clearly, the govt/corporate state has decided that the best way to control citizens is to make certain we aren’t allowed to know anything we shouldn’t know and if something does slip in, snuff it out. In this way what passes for being a liberal today is in complete agreement with Donald Trump. You’ll know what you’re told to know. If you are an independent press person, you’ll be saying what you’re told to say or you’ll end up like Assange. That’s the world’s greatest democracy!

    1. This is definitely the land of the not-so-free, in spite of what most people believe.

      Thanks for the heads-up about Newsguard, Jill.

      1. Easy to prove that statement is true by referring to the still in force, still active, still sexist, still operating system of conscription (taken against one’s will) SSS.org which requires men over the age of 18 to involuntarily volunteer for what is called selective service. Meaning only the best are selected. It is nonetheless except for the true volunteers nothing more than incarceration.

Leave a Reply