President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

I was on Highway 17 in eastern North Carolina on Christmas Eve, and some dipshit was set up along the road selling Trump t-shirts, caps, flags, etc. out of the back of his truck.
1. It's kinda funny because there is no way that stuff was officially licensed, so the grifter in chief would lose his mind if he realized people sell stuff and he doesn't get a cut.
2. It's super frightening the cult of personality he has created to have followers who'd want that crap for Christmas.

 

Christmas Eve news dump (don't think this is a d_b). How can anyone who has covered politics this long be this "naive?"
The Christmas Eve Confessions of Chuck Todd - PressThink

 

That is such a good take-down of Chuck Todd and the smug take that "We're the insiders, and we understand what's happening in Washington far better than you the viewers, who are loudly crying "Lies! They're lying, not spreading falsehoods or disseminating, use the word! Call them out for it!". He continues to book both sides when one side consistently spreads lies and propaganda, because the whole "Meet the Press" model is based putting up the two parties to debate.

The final two 'graphs:

"So what will they do now? My answer: they have no earthly idea. This is what I mean by an epistemological crisis. Chuck Todd has essentially said that on the right there is an incentive structure that compels Republican office holders to use their time on Meet the Press for the spread of disinformation. So do you keep inviting them on the air to do just that? If so, then you are breaking faith with the audience and creating a massive problem in real time fact-checking. If not, then you just broke the show in half.

There is simply nothing in the playbook at Meet the Press that tells the producers what to do in this situation. As I have tried to show, they didn’t arrive here through acts of naiveté, but by willful blindness, malpractice among the experts in charge, an insider’s mentality, a listening breakdown, a failure of imagination, and sheer disbelief that the world could have changed so much upon people paid so well to understand it."

 

Good read on Todd, thank you HanSenSE.
I always thought he should be lower in MSNBC's batting order, but he does appear to have a capacity for self-reflection that other hosts on the network don't.
Specifically referring to Nicolle Wallace and Joy Reid.

 

I love Rachel for her fierce intelligence and refusal to play it safe. The down side to her approach and the ever increasing need to "be first, not necessarily right" is that sometimes she goes too far too fast and outruns the facts. It happened some here, mostly, I think because she badly wanted it to be true, and again with Trump's overhyped "Tax return" fragment.

 

I have not had a chance to read the entire piece but shouldn't these hosts just call their guests out for blatant lies? It isn't as if we don't know what to expect from them...the talking points are distributed to all. Just call them liars and have your evidence at the ready. It doesn't seem that complicated. If you have a Gym Jordan on your show call him on his BS and when he starts into a sweaty scream cut him off and call him a liar.

 

I can't read the piece as it's behind a paywall. But how exactly did the Steele dossier fall apart? Hasn't much of it been corroborated? And wasn't it always known to have been an initial intelligence report but never reported as a final product? I can't remember the actual term but wasn't this typical for a starting point report?

 

"Raw intelligence" is the term, and as a term of art it means "I'm going to give you everything I have, with the understanding that it has not gone through the full process of fact-checking, vetting, and verification of the truth of all the information contained. Some allegations may not be accurate, and I am not claiming that everything I am giving you is factually correct. Indeed, I am *telling you directly* that some parts may be completely wrong. You should use your own process to verify this information."

 

Learned a new word today. Woohoo.

 

Of course they should. But then they may not have access and their ratings may take a hit.

Frankly, after Kellyanne said her “alternate facts” bullshit, no self-respecting journalist should have had her on any show or even quote her until whatever she says is verified and vetted. But ratings and hype are more important than truth, or a reasonable closeness to it, for the TV gossips.

At this point, the mainstream media folks shouldn’t have any Republican on unless they show that they can be truthful with their statements.

 

Maddow is as smart as they come. Which is to say, too smart to be hosting a pedantic newshour

 

I had forgotten about Jade Helm. Republicans, man.