ChrisWeigant.com

Outfoxed!

[ Posted Tuesday, April 16th, 2019 – 17:05 UTC ]

Bernie Sanders bearded the Fox in his den last night. He outFoxed them, plain and simple. Rather than shunning Fox News, Bernie accepted an invitation from them to hold a town hall meeting on air. And he not only held his own, at some points he even appeared to have the Fox audience solidly behind him. This defies a whole lot of media storylines, and punditary heads are still exploding in Washington as the impact of Bernie's town hall reverberates.

Voters, according to many pundits, are supposed to be easily pigeonholed into easy-to-discuss categories. These categories are mutually exclusive, meaning any one voter simply cannot occupy multiple pigeonholes simultaneously. Since they're all single-issue voters, once they've aligned on that issue then nothing else matters.

Such oversimplification may be convenient for people attempting to analyze "what voters are thinking," but it doesn't really reflect the real world at all. Most voters are complex people, caring about many different political issues to varying degrees and also caring about politicians' personalities to a varying degree. Some arguments can sway voters, and combinations of issues voters really care deeply about often defy facile "left/right" framing. Maybe you're an evangelical who strongly supports legalized marijuana. Perhaps you're an environmentalist who is anti-abortion. Such combinations don't easily fit in the usual media narratives, obviously.

But getting back to what happened last night, the Democratic Party has officially put Fox News outside the pale. Earlier this year, Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez announced that none of the Democratic debates would happen on Fox, because they are nothing short of a propaganda outlet for the president. Bernie Sanders, however, obviously thinks it is a good idea to appear on Fox in a formal setting, because he believes there are plenty of Fox News viewers who might be persuaded to vote for him. He's probably right about that. Rather than shun Fox, Sanders made an appeal to their viewers, and ultimately it may prove to have been the smarter strategy.

American politics used to be a lot more about the art of convincing people of the superiority of your political party's position. Intelligent discussions were held over the question of how big government should be, how government should go about helping the average guy, and what taxes should pay for. There were ideas on both sides of the divide, and the debates were lively.

Much of that is gone now. This is partly due to the Republicans reducing their entire agenda to cutting taxes on the wealthy and corporations and opposing abortions and immigrants. Oh, and being against anything Democrats propose, in knee-jerk fashion. Where we are now, though, didn't begin with Trump obliterating all other supposed parts of the Republican agenda (remember when they cared about deficits?). The Democratic Party contributed to today's situation as well. For two decades, the party tacked so far to the center (especially on loving Wall Street as much as the Republicans) that the Democratic agenda shrunk to mouthing platitudes every four years to get elected, and then sitting back and doing mostly nothing for the average voters afterwards. Over the past four years, there has been a revival of progressivism in the Democratic Party, but this is nothing more, really, than the party returning to where it had been before they decided to turn hard towards the center. Liberals used to wear T-shirts saying: "I'm from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" to point this out, in fact. Think Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Elizabeth Warren is "radical" or "extreme"? Go back and read just about any speech from Franklin Delano Roosevelt. They're just yanking the party back to its roots, in other words.

When looking at both the 2018 midterms and the upcoming 2020 presidential race, one slogan keeps coming back to me: "It's easy to beat nothing with something." Donald Trump is going to run his campaign exactly how he wants to. And he is pretty obviously convinced that there are a handful of winning issues for him: demonizing and persecuting immigrants, Obamacare is horrible and one day Republicans will come up with a magic "better" plan to fix it (just trust us), and Socialism is bad. Oh, and windmills give you cancer because they make noise.

Just as he did in the midterms, Trump is going to force the Republican Party to run the same sort of campaign. Other Republicans may try a half-hearted effort to run on the economy and tax cuts (as they did in 2018), but most will merely be echoing Trump's hot points.

Democrats, on the other hand, have a plethora of ideas. They've got ideas on all sorts of things. Healthcare, education, unrigging the tax code, encouraging the green economy, improving the minimum wage, regaining America's stature in the world, reforming elections to make it easier for people to vote, fighting for social justice -- all these and many more are planks in the Democratic platform. They've got ideas, and the primary battle will hone and refine these ideas further as they become the only differences between the Democratic candidates.

Any average undecided voter out there is going to be presented with a choice. Republicans will be running on the fear of immigrants and precious little else. From Trump on down, they'll be trying their best to tear down all the Democratic ideas, but that is only going to expose the fact that Republicans don't really have any ideas to match or to counter any of them. They're going to be attempting to fight something with nothing, in other words.

Democrats, and progressives in particular, should not be afraid to air their ideas even on conservative outlets like Fox News. If they had the courage of their convictions, then they'd be confident that the idea would break through the Fox propaganda, if it was a good enough one.

The sad thing about the state of American politics is how many of the so-called "radical ideas" now being proposed by progressives are actually solidly in the mainstream of what voters actually think. Hiking the minimum wage is hugely popular in both blue states and red. Making millionaires and billionaires pay a fair share of their wealth in taxes is also pretty universal. Even, as the audience showed last night, scrapping employer-based health insurance for Medicare For All is a lot more wildly popular than anyone at Fox realized. The people want to see these things. Even many Fox viewers. Voters are not monoliths or easily pigeonholed in their voting motivations.

But convincing voters to vote for you means going to where they are and talking to them. You'll never convince a dedicated Fox News viewer to even consider your ideas or your candidacy if you shun the only news outlet he or she watches. Bernie's not the only Democratic presidential candidate who has appeared on Fox News (others have done interviews, although Sanders held the first 2020 town hall), nor should he be.

All of the candidates in the presidential race are currently running for one goal -- the Democratic nomination. But what that means is that you'll win the opportunity to directly take on Donald Trump. And, to be blunt, if you can't even hold your own against a Fox News moderator on screen, then you may not have what it takes to face Donald Trump across a debate stage.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

121 Comments on “Outfoxed!”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Why do Democrats shun FoxNews?

    Now there is a sign of weakness for you.

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'd like to see Democrats running for president to do less of the Democratic rallies and more venturing out to the constituents they need to reach and persuade.

    I for one am sick of preaching to the choir.

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    All of the candidates in the presidential race are currently running for one goal -- the Democratic nomination. But what that means is that you'll win the opportunity to directly take on Donald Trump. And, to be blunt, if you can't even hold your own against a Fox News moderator on screen, then you may not have what it takes to face Donald Trump across a debate stage.

    Absolutely, positively, unequivocally!!!

  4. [4] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    LizM -

    Didn't see your comments until now, but I bet you're going to like today's column!

    Everyone else:

    Better numbers are in:
    Bernie Sanders: $18.2 million
    Kamala Harris: $12 million
    Beto O'Rourke: $9.1 million
    Pete Buttigieg: $7.1 million
    Elizabeth Warren: $6 million
    Cory Booker: $5 million
    Amy Klobuchar: $4.6 million
    Kirsten Gillibrand: $3 million
    Jay Inslee: $2.3 million
    John Hickenlooper: $2 million
    Andrew Yang: $1.8 million
    Marianne Williamson: $1.6 million
    Tulsi Gabbard: $1.5 million
    Julián Castro: $1.1 million
    John Delaney: $300,000
    Wayne Messam: $43,500

    from:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/paloma/the-trailer/2019/04/16/the-trailer-2020-candidates-lag-far-behind-president-trump-in-the-money-race-but-no-one-s-leaving-the-race-just-yet/5cb4f4251ad2e567949ec1b0/?utm_term=.9a8837d8e054

    -CW

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I do.

  6. [6] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The last four ought to just give up now. I mean, really.

  7. [7] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    If Marianne Williamson and Andrew Yang are pulling in more dollars than you at this point, it's over for you.

  8. [8] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I know, I know … but Biden fans have fully earned the right to be like that.

  9. [9] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: He's probably right about that. Rather than shun Fox, Sanders made an appeal to their viewers, and ultimately it may prove to have been the smarter strategy.

    If Bernie continues to legitimize Fox News and then becomes president some time in the future -- reiterating if -- and Fox News invariably starts cranking out the propaganda hit pieces that do lasting damage to the Sanders' administration, Saint Bernard will never, ever have to wonder why it is that people lend credence to the utter asinine bullshit they'll be spewing about him on the American equivalent of Pravda.

    Is it possible that dancing with the devil even for a few moments comes with an inevitable price? I'd say it's possible.

    Earlier this year, Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez announced that none of the Democratic debates would happen on Fox, because they are nothing short of a propaganda outlet for the president.

    Perhaps Mr. Perez is simply aware that Fox News and several employees are currently under investigation for being "nothing short of a propaganda outlet for the president" and other things. Besides all that, it's not difficult to understand why a "mother hen" wouldn't take any unnecessary steps that might legitimize a "fox," is it not? :)

  10. [10] 
    Kick wrote:

    Chris Weigant
    4

    I see you do like numbers. Not all the results are posted yet, but check out the burn rates and cash on hand numbers at the FEC.

    They're sorted by "total receipts" but can be easily sorted by the other parameters by clicking on them. Big fun. ;)

    https://www.fec.gov/data/elections/president/2020/#candidate-financial-totals

  11. [11] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Once again I am ahead of the curve.

    Bernie just went on Fox and I have been commenting here since 2015. :D

  12. [12] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    1

    Why do Democrats shun FoxNews?

    Why do you oppose cursing unless you're the one who's doing it?

    Now there is a sign of weakness for you.

    Are you afraid of the itty bitty words?

  13. [13] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'm afraid that Democrats are too weak and unimaginative to beat Trump.

    There is cursing when necessary and then there is being an idiot.

    Do you understand the difference?

  14. [14] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    2

    I'd like to see Democrats running for president to do less of the Democratic rallies and more venturing out to the constituents they need to reach and persuade.

    Does it bother you that Joe Biden is doing exactly neither of those things at the moment? Why is it that you keep assuming and presuming that political candidates can't multitask? They can. Do you think everyone at a political rally is already persuaded? They're not. Have you never been to multiple different political rallies in order to decide how you'll vote? Maybe it's not a "thing" in Canada. :)

    I for one am sick of preaching to the choir.

    Not everyone at a political rally is part of the choir. Some of them actually leave a rally quite unmoved and go on to attend other rallies in search of a different group. Seriously.

  15. [15] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I see.

  16. [16] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    13

    I'm afraid that Democrats are too weak and unimaginative to beat Trump.

    If I agreed with this ridiculous drivel, then that would be a huge disservice to your icon... so I'll just agree to disagree with that utter asinine bit of spew above.

    There is cursing when necessary and then there is being an idiot.

    Well, you are the one who just undercut your icon along with every other Democratic candidate so no one could accuse you of not understanding the definition of "idiot." Also, if you believe that you're the board arbiter of when cursing is and isn't necessary, then I'd say you're the one who is actually "being an idiot."

    Do you understand the difference?

    I'm not the one who professes to know the difference between when it is okay for me to hurl expletives while I admonish everyone else to stop doing it... that would be you.

    Let me give you a really big hint about when it would be okay for any poster to deem their "cursing necessary" while telling virtually everyone else that theirs isn't: Never. You don't get to decide when it's okay to spew expletives at will while admonishing everyone else that their expletives aren't necessary, and if you believe you actually do, then you seriously need to have that looked at.

    Now shut it with the dumbfuckery about cursing, please. You're just embarrassing yourself, and it's a bad look. :)

  17. [17] 
    Bclancy wrote:

    Personally, I think there is a difference between doing a town hall or debate with Fox, versus going on interviews on Fox. With a town hall or debate, you are likely to get enough time to actually make your case effectively. You have a chance to actually deconstruct the assumptions behind a leading question, debunk the straw men, etc. In a brief interview, you don’t really have time to elaborate, and that’s even assuming your host doesn’t interrupt you constantly(something I recall Bill O’Reilly doing to liberal interviewees).

    I can understand the argument that appearing with or on Fox News legitimizes what is essentially a propaganda mill and conspiracy theory promoter. Similar to the arguments about legitimizing Donald Trump. In the case of Trump I think this argument may have been cogent back when Trump had newly announced his campaign in 2015. But at this point, well... I don’t know how much more legitimate you can get than president of the United States. Similarly, is Fox still the highest rated news channel? If not, I’m sure they are close to it. Ignoring them or refusing to engage with them isn’t going to make them go away at this point. Worse, it could backfire by creating an impression that Democrats are totally unable to respond or engage with their arguments. Yep, we are just totally flummoxed by the brilliant point that the Green New Deal would ban cars and meat. Obviously that isn’t the message we want to send. Nor should we want to send the message that we think we are too morally pure and superior to engage with such lesser beings as Republicans.

    It isn’t an easy thing to determine how much and how to engage with political opponents, especially those who promote ideas we find reprehensible. You don’t want to waste your time with disingenuous questions or trolling, and you don’t want to normalize or enable awful people(for example see similar debates surrounding interviews with Richard Spencer). But you also don’t want to assume that ideological opponents are beyond reach. Sometimes they can be won over. And you don’t want to let them think you have no response to their ideas. I know that when a right wing political pundit/politician/etc. refuses to engage with the arguments of progresives, I tend to assume it’s because they are lazy and disingenuous(why respond to your opponents actual ideas when you can shoot down cheap straw men and your viewers won’t know the difference?), or because they are so egotistical and insecure that they are afraid of being shown up by the competition.

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Rather than shunning Fox News,

    Like all Democrats do.. :D

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why do Democrats shun FoxNews?

    Now there is a sign of weakness for you.

    Exactly..

    And yet, the Left applauds any Democrat who, out of "principle" boycotts Fox News..

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    From all indications, it was Bernie and the Democrats who got out-foxed...

    As was pointed out above, Fox "proved" that Leftist candidates CAN get a fair shake on Fox...

    Now Democrats will look petty and hysterical when they invariably and inevitably attack and denigrate Fox News..

    It wouldn't surprise me to learn that FNC populated the audience with Bernie supporters to purposely give Bernie a warm welcome..

    Now, every time a Tom Perez or a Barack Odumbo lays into FoxNews, FNC can bring up what a great time Bernie had over at their house..

    Throw in a little bit of TRUMP IS PISSED AT FOXNEWS meme and the Left Wingers slurp it all up...

    This will also exacerbate the growing disconnect between the Democrat Party elites and the Bernie Sanders campaign..

    Very shrewd play by TPTB.....

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bernie's clear lane to the Democratic nomination
    https://theweek.com/articles/835216/bernies-clear-lane-democratic-nomination

    This is what scares the shit out of the DNC elders...

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, any day now, we're going to see the Mueller report on Russia/Trump collusion..

    It's going to be interesting to see if Weigantians can refrain from blatant whataboutism that they claim to dislike... :D

    I mean, the entire reason for Mueller as Special Counsel to exist was to determine if Trump or anyone in his campaign colluded with the Russians to win the election..

    It's clear from Barr's unchallenged summary that there is NO EVIDENCE to support that there was collusion..

    Although I expect a lot of Left Wing goodies in the redacted report (it WAS compiled by a bunch of Trump/America hating Hillary sycophants after all) it's going to be interesting to see the lengths ya'all will go to to cover up the fact that President Trump and his campaign were completely and utterly exonerated over Russia Collusion... :D

    It's gonna be interesting to see the disconnect between the ideological constructs and the physical reality.. :D

    Medical personnel will be standing by...

  23. [23] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "if you can't even hold your own against a Fox News moderator on screen, then you may not have what it takes to face Donald Trump across a debate stage."

    Ridiculous. It's easy enough to anticipate their questions. It's not about that. It's a contest to decide who will be the Democratic nominee and GOP voters are not relevant. The GOP's racist fake news channel should have no part either.

    If candidates want to appear on Fox to present their ideas to the Orange Julius cult members, there's nothing stopping them, but cults are pretty impenetrable.

    The Medicare For All question at Bernie's town hall did not backfire on Fox. They'll be using the clips to talk about socialist mobs taking away your healthcare. Same as it ever was.

  24. [24] 
    Kick wrote:

    Anyone who fails to realize the fact that the Russian bots and ops were propping up Bernie in 2016 in more ways than one are missing the big picture. Russia has admitted to backing Trump, and Trump has admitted to wanting to run against the admitted socialist. Can't say I blame him; this issue ain't exactly rocket science.

    If the 2020 election is a referendum on Trump, he more than likely loses in similar fashion as the midterm elections. If the election is an issue of Old Man Trump versus Old Man Socialist, Trump's chance of winning reelection grows exponentially larger. That's why Trump is going to be beating the "hate the browns" and "fear" drums ever louder and screaming "socialism."

    While I do realize that there is an argument to be made that Republicans falsely label their main opponent as a "socialist" during every election season -- so much so that it goes largely ignored by the majority as of late -- it should be duly noted and kept in mind that Trump versus Sanders wouldn't exactly be a GOP mislabeling of a Democrat for two reasons:

    * Bernie isn't a Democrat in the same way that Trump isn't a Republican.

    * Bernie has already labeled himself a "socialist" for them. Hard to argue you're not a socialist when you've spent decades defining yourself as being one.

    They are singing Bernie's praises on Russian websites all over the Internet. That will last right up until Bernie either wins the nomination or doesn't. If he wins the nomination, they'll turn on him; if he loses, they'll do exactly what they did last election and attempt to divide the Democratic Party and conquer. Count on it.

    Having said all that, I would nevertheless vote for Bernie Sanders over Donald Trump every day of the week; I'd just have to hold my nose and throw up afterward. ;)

  25. [25] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Kick-10

    At first glance, the DJT burn rate makes you wonder if cash isn't being used as AF One jet fuel. Or mulch at the various Trump golf courses. It's good to be Prez.

    The FEC site isn't especially user friendly. Tons of options, but still not very friendly. I may have to get a green eye shade. Thank God for Open Secrets digestion of the raw data.

    and

    NPR ran a segment on Russia's attempt to isolate their internet from American reprisal attacks which the Russians feel are coming. I think Russian feelings are completely correct. I suspect the Russians can isolate themselves in a pinch - but I'm guessing countermeasures won't be completely effective and may well slow Russian internet speeds to something resembling old AOL dial up. That's bad for Russian business, so US Intel probably thinks it worth doing. Like a fastball aimed at the head.

    Beats nuclear war. Especially since the Putin is reactivating their old Dead Hand doomsday devices. Now THAT development IS SCARY!

  26. [26] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Michale [22]

    It really doesn't matter what the Mueller report says about Trump's alleged "collusion/conspiracy".

    The female nut jobs here have defined the Trump tower mtg with the Russian lawyer and Jr as being de facto collusion, whether Mueller and Barr agree or not.

    When the dust all settles, their story can only be "He's guilty but they let him get away with it", otherwise they have to admit being wrong and/or "lose face", something that wouldn't come easy to them.

  27. [27] 
    neilm wrote:

    Prediction:

    Michale and/or CRS are going to become experts in the governance of South Bend, IN.

    In interesting news, Deutsche Bank just got called on $20B of Russian money laundering. The street learned in the 1980s that Trump was a con man and cut off his funding, but DB went all in on him, while the back story was that they were very "Russian friendly". DB may turn out to be the patsy in this Trump con game, but there might be enough paperwork around to make it uncomfortable for Trump and his family. We'll see.

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale and/or CRS are going to become experts in the governance of South Bend, IN.

    Yea.. Cuz South Bend, IN is the best stepping stone to President Of The United States..

    Buttagig doesn't stand a chance, Neil... Get used to that now...

    In interesting news, Deutsche Bank just got called on $20B of Russian money laundering. The street learned in the 1980s that Trump was a con man and cut off his funding, but DB went all in on him, while the back story was that they were very "Russian friendly". DB may turn out to be the patsy in this Trump con game, but there might be enough paperwork around to make it uncomfortable for Trump and his family.

    Any FACTS to support any of this fantasy social constructs???

    Look who I am asking for FACTS.. The guy who swore up and down that Trump colluded with the Russians to win the election. :D

  29. [29] 
    neilm wrote:

    Look who I am asking for FACTS..

    This is the guy who told us of the red wave in 2018 - har har.

    Since you always cry "fake noos" at any link I post, just Google "Deutsche Bank money laundering" and take your pick :)

  30. [30] 
    Kick wrote:

    neilm
    27

    In interesting news, Deutsche Bank just got called on $20B of Russian money laundering.

    RUH-ROH!

    They would have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for those meddling kids and their dog! ;)

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    This is the guy who told us of the red wave in 2018 - har har.

    Actually, you have that wrong.. Ya'all were talking about the huge Blue Wave that would give the House and Senate to the Dems.. :D

    But what did ya get???

    A meager House win. President Trump had a much better 1st Mid-Term than Odumbo OR Clinton got..

    Funny how that is, eh? :D

    Since you always cry "fake noos" at any link I post, just Google "Deutsche Bank money laundering" and take your pick :)

    Irregardless of whether it's fake news or not, it's still 1000% irrelevant to the question of Russia/Trump Collusion...

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    Irregardless of whether it's fake news or not, it's still 1000% irrelevant to the question of Russia/Trump Collusion...

    Oh, that's right.. There *IS* no question re: Russia/Trump Collusion...

    It never happened..

  33. [33] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    25

    Beats nuclear war.

    Agreed.

    Especially since the Putin is reactivating their old Dead Hand doomsday devices.

    Reactivating Perimeter... the (allegedly) totally automatic launch of nukes without need of human input? What could go wrong?

    Now THAT development IS SCARY!

    Particularly under current circumstances: "They said they think it's Russia. I have President Putin — he just said it's not Russia. I will say this — I don't see any reason why it would be.... I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today."

    Oh, wait. I am being told I meant to say: "How much wood WOULDN'T a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck COULDN'T chuck wood, and it also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, okay?" :)

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    Progressive Socialists Defend the Indefensible Again

    A simple apology would have been the least Democrats could offer after a video surfaced of freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar brushing off the 9/11 attacks as “some people did something.” Yes, Rep. Omar, “some people” (radical Islamists) “did something” (they murdered almost 3,000 innocent citizens in an act of cowardly, cold-blooded hate). And your shoulder shrugging ambivalence about it as if someone accidently ran a stop sign is disgusting. Those weren’t soldiers wearing Kevlar and carrying weapons who were slaughtered. They were office workers, flight attendants, business people, but especially just moms and dads, sons and daughters, husbands and wives, friends and neighbors.

    Instead, Democrats have gone on the offensive, calling Omar’s critics racist and accusing one of their Republican colleagues — an Iraq war veteran who lost an eye in combat — of not doing enough for his country.
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/04/17/progressive_socialists_defend_the_indefensible_again_140070.html

    What *IS* it about Democrats who simply can't help but attack and denigrate this country and patriotic Americans??

  35. [35] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Michale

    Re: "It never happened."

    You've gotta accept the fact that it DID happen, even if it only happened in our blogmates' minds!

    Your refusal to accept that could result in a lot of our friends' wrist blood being spilled. Do you really want that on your conscience?

  36. [36] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Kick (33)-
    "...totally automatic launch of nukes without need of human input. What could go wrong?"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15YgdrhrCM8

    Interesting side note according to TCM. Apparently Stanley Kubrick had put in a pie fight scene in the war room but cut it out at the last minute because he felt it was over the top.

    Stanley Kubrick did not use pie, but at least he considered using it.

  37. [37] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Kick [24]: Couldn't agree more.

    Don't Bernie fans see the trap ahead?

  38. [38] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Your latest piece is a critical one and should provoke a very important discussion about how Democrats - and , most especially, the Democratic nominee for president - can speak to the needs and aspirations of ALL Americans, including those who are inclined to vote again for Trump.

    Democrats must go wherever they can reach voters who disagree with them and make their case. They can't afford to ignore Trump supporters.

    The huge divisions in the country make it mandatory for the next president to begin to bring all sides together if any of the critical issues facing America and the world can be dealt with. If the 2020 campaign is approached like all other campaigns for president, then I think there is little hope for a better future - for America and the rest of us out in the world.

    I look forward to that discussion here, if at all possible ...

  39. [39] 
    Kick wrote:

    DH
    36

    Kubrick, Don!? I don't even have to click the link to discover Slim Pickens.

    Stanley Kubrick did not use pie, but at least he considered using it.

    Kubrick did use pie -- 4,000 custard pies -- in a pie fight scene that was filmed for an entire week and lasted for multiple minutes on film. The British Film Institute apparently allegedly has the "lost" cut footage that didn't make it into the film due to the assassination of President Kennedy near the time of release of the film and the following dialogue:

    “Gentlemen,” rallies Turgidson, holding his wounded leader (Peter Sellers) in his arms, “our beloved president has been infamously struck down by a pie in the prime of his life! Are we going to let that happen? Massive retaliation!”

    https://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/news-bfi/features/rare-images-dr-strangelove-custard-pie-fight

    It was my Dad's favorite film, and if I never hear about again, it'll be too soon. :)

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Bernie Hate is strong...

    https://media2.giphy.com/media/AIfntyFjd05Gg/giphy.gif

    Excellent....

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats must go wherever they can reach voters who disagree with them and make their case. They can't afford to ignore Trump supporters.

    Let alone attack them, denigrate them and vilify them..

    Alas, your words though wise, fall on ears deaf from hate...

    The simple fact is, Democrats won't win in 2020 without Trump supporters...

    And Democrats won't accept Trump supporters..

    It's a recipe for luser-dom... And Democrats are cooking it up willingly..

  42. [42] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale, what are Biden's chances against Trump do you think?

  43. [43] 
    Kick wrote:

    DH
    36

    I meant to add that it was nice "talking" to you about something besides "you know what," even if by happenstance it turned out to be the movie I was forced to watch over and over ad nauseam.

    Also, I would wager the maestro will approve of your endorsement of pie. :)

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    When the dust all settles, their story can only be "He's guilty but they let him get away with it", otherwise they have to admit being wrong and/or "lose face", something that wouldn't come easy to them.

    Well, as I said.. Medical personnel will be standing by.. :D

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale, what are Biden's chances against Trump do you think?

    Depends on how badly he is wounded in the primary by his fellow Democrats..

    Every Democrat running is an Establishment weenie..

    As such, they will never even put a dent in President Trump's armor...

    President Trump is Bronn and any Dem candidate is Ser Vardis Egen...

    And will likely end as badly...

  46. [46] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    There isn't anything any Democrat can say or do to wound Biden in the primary.

    And that goes for Trump in the general, too.

    It will be up to you and your fellow citizens to choose the course of America's future. It is my expectation that Biden will offer the best path forward for all Americans.

  47. [47] 
    Paula wrote:

    Bernie Sanders went on FOX News to raise his profile, try to get an advantage over principled Dems and pander to trumpers.

    He was praised for it by the usual suspects.

    By legitimizing FOX he also put his stamp of approval on every lie, every loon that appears there, every white supremacist host, every repetition of "dem women murder their babies after they're born", every GOP legislator that harasses Dems because they can, every Blotus crime, every kid being caged, everyone losing their healthcare and on and on.

    Furthermore, since it was Saint Bernie who did this, his fans are now invested in it being the right thing to do - which, above all, benefits FOX. It brings back advertisers. It causes Dems to argue the value of reaching the FOX viewer instead of Dems standing firm that this propaganda outlet does nothing but harm to this country.

    But hey, so what right? It's all a game right? No one posting here is going to get beaten up or shot or stuck in a cage so no harm done to anyone that matters, amirite?

    Instead, Berniers can crow that he did some big brave thing and can claim everyone else is chicken! Yeah! And then idiots - Buttigieg and Klobuchar take the bait, hoping they too will attract the-most-important-voter-out-there - white American bigots.

    And to land those voters they will tell all of FOX/GOP's favorite victims: "hey, your pain is worth it if I benefit - that's how moral I am!"

    "And, to be blunt, if you can't even hold your own against a Fox News moderator on screen, then you may not have what it takes to face Donald Trump across a debate stage."

    Wrong. But nice job falling right into the FOX/GOP trap! Nice job letting them set the rules. Giving FOX the power to pick the Dem nominee - why nothing bad can happen with that!

    Legitimizing FOX so that when they slur BS their viewers can believe any nonsense coz BS came on the channel all these Dems are saying isn't legitimate, and legitimized it! So FOX viewers don't have to change a thing! They can sit on their bigoted asses, watch 24/7 Dem-demonizing and tell themselves how accurate it all is. Otherwise why would Dems (or convenience-Dems like Sanders) appear there?

    FOX IS THE WINNER, BS gets a short-term gain, Democratic Party is further damaged, country is further damaged.

  48. [48] 
    Paula wrote:

    If they had the courage of their convictions, then they'd be confident that the idea would break through the Fox propaganda, if it was a good enough one.

    Oh, is that what it takes? Courage of conviction huh? That's the big missing link that all those other Dems just don't have? But Saint Bernie does? His "courage of conviction" will penetrate the FOX News GOP bubble - THANK GOD! BS has found the HOLY GRAIL!

    Welp, guess we can all down tools now. BS went on FOX coz he alone has conviction-courage and all the FOXers are on board! That's all it took!

    I'm sure the polls will soon indicate BS has picked up a significant number of Repubs and we can all breath easy now!

    Of course "courage of conviction" can be applied to other convictions, like "not pandering to nazis for political gain." Like "don't help GOP propaganda outlets for political gain."

    But that mostly protects vulnerable people and who cares about them?

  49. [49] 
    Paula wrote:

    Russell Courtier has been found guilty in the racially-motivated murder of 19-year-old Larnell Bruce outside a Gresham 7-Eleven.

    Courtier, a 40-year-old member of a white supremacist group, drove his Jeep into the African-American man —who was on foot—after a brief altercation outside the 7-Eleven store on East Burnside and 188th. Bruce died from his injures sustained from the attack.

    https://www.portlandmercury.com/blogtown/2019/03/19/26177579/russel-courtier-found-guilty-for-racially-motivated-murder-of-larnell-bruce

    FOX News is a big part of why these kinds of murders happen. FOX News legitimizes white supremacy.

  50. [50] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Buttigieg was interviewed by Chris Wallace of Fox News on March 17, 2009. Good for Bernie on finally catching up. Granted, Mayor Pete did not participate in a town hall meeting, but he did a great one-on-one interview.

  51. [51] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Paula,

    Not all Fox News viewers are bigots. To claim otherwise is just as dishonest as when Michale claims to know the minds and hearts of everyone on this site.

    The biggest fear of the Republican Party is that their support base will discover that Democrats are not the horrible demons they have made us out to be. This became especially evident to me in 2008 after McCain won the Republican Primary.

    During the primary, McCain’s stated positions on a lot of social issues were similar or identical to those held by Barrack Obama. McCain was running as a moderate in a sea of ultra-conservatives, so this was not to be unexpected — but it proved a major obstacle for the GOP’s propaganda efforts. That is why after winning the nomination, McCain flipped on any position that he had held that was even the slightest bit similar to those held by Obama.

    The GOP made a decision that everything the Democrats support must be opposed. Democrats must be portrayed as evil, unpatriotic, and amoral. (Remember how outraged the Republicans became after Gov.Chris Christie thanked Pres. Obama for his response after Hurricane Sandy?). For their dehumanizing portrayal of Democrats to work, it must remain constant. Allowing their base to view anything accomplished by the Democrats as being “good” or “helpful” to them would make the GOP’s attacks on the Dems’ character less effective — or worse, cause their base to recognize what the GOP had been doing all along. If Democrats aren’t evil incarnate, then maybe the legislation that they are proposing isn’t as unAmerican as the Republicans make them out to be.

    This is why going on Fox News is not a terrible idea — It has the potential to cause a chink in the GOP’s propaganda armor. Not all of Fox News viewers are fully supportive of Trump.

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    There isn't anything any Democrat can say or do to wound Biden in the primary.

    You don't think all the handsy accusations didn't wound Biden??

    Those are all just the tip of the ice berg..

    . It is my expectation that Biden will offer the best path forward for all Americans.

    I am sure it is.. :D

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russ,

    Not all Fox News viewers are bigots. To claim otherwise is just as dishonest as when Michale claims to know the minds and hearts of everyone on this site.

    NOW yer getting it!!!!

    BRAVO!!! WELL DONE!!!

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    FOX News is a big part of why these kinds of murders happen. FOX News legitimizes white supremacy.

    You mean there WASN'T any murders like this BEFORE FoxNews!!???

    :eyeroll:

  55. [55] 
    Bclancy wrote:

    Michale:
    “President Trump is Bronn and any Dem candidate is Ser Vardis Egen...”
    You’ve read the books? I was expecting this to be a reference to the television show I hate, but it appears to be a reference to my favorite novel series(I don’t think Ser Vardis is named in the show).

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, as to keep the Notre Dame thread... er.. ahem... Pure and free from politics.....

    We can discuss the Mueller report here???

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    The report — the general outlines of which the Justice Department has briefed the White House on — will reveal that Mueller decided he could not come to a conclusion on the question of obstruction because it was difficult to determine Trump’s intent and because some of his actions could be interpreted innocently, these people said. But it will offer a detailed blow-by-blow of the president’s alleged conduct — analyzing tweets, private threats and other episodes at the center of Mueller’s inquiry, they added.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/attorney-general-plans-news-conference-to-discuss-mueller-report/2019/04/17/f5ca1cc6-6138-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html?utm_term=.cb4443433315

    Which is exactly what I have been saying for 2+ years...

    You can't prove obstruction without first proving intent..

    And you can't prove intent if there are other innocent reasons for said actions..

    If only you people would have listened more and hysterical'ed less, you wouldn't be feeling so loss and decimated right now..

    I was only trying to help ya'all avoid this brutal blow of pain and suffering..

    :D

  58. [58] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bret Easton Ellis tells 'spoiled children' liberals to deal with Trump: 'He was elected president. Get over it.'
    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bret-easton-ellis-tells-spoiled-children-liberals-how-to-deal-with-trump-he-was-elected-president-get-over-it

    Looks like a good read... :D

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    When he heard people using words like "Hitlerian" and "apocalypse," he writes, he'd "stare at them while a tiny voice in the back of my head started sighing, You are the biggest fucking baby I've ever fucking heard in my entire fucking life and please you've got to fucking calm the fuck down — I get it, I get it, you don't like fucking Trump but for fuck's sake enough already for fuck's sake."

    One friend told him that the Electoral College — the agreed rules by which Trump won — was "bullshit" and Los Angeles and New York should choose the president. "I don't want any goddam know-nothing rural hicks deciding who the president should be," Ellis quoted him as saying. "I am a proud liberal coastal elite and I think we should pick the president because we know better."

    Ellis found the incident in which White House press secretary Sarah Sanders was refused service in a Virginia restaurant to be especially ominous. "The shunning of others who don't like you had moved past protest and resistance into childlike fascism. ... the differing viewpoints were judged as immoral, racist and misogynist." During the Senate hearings into the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, the Left "had turned into haters, helped by an inordinate amount of encouragement from the mainstream media and now came across as anti-common-sense, anti-rational and anti-American."

    On one level, Ellis concludes, this may have been "simply the year of endless low points for a resistance that was spinning epic fails in venting their anger about Trump," the latest episode in the reality show that is the Trump presidency.

    "Or maybe when you're roiling in childish rage, the first thing you lose is judgment, and then comes common sense. And finally you lose your mind and along with that, your freedom."

    Yunno.. This guy Ellis shouldn't keep it all in.. He should tell us how he REALLY feels.. :D

    Can't argue with the logic, regardless of the emotionalism laden terminology he uses... :D

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Democratic Party is indeed eating itself alive, and it’s doing so using the same tactics Obama honed during his eight years in the Oval Office. Labeling anyone who disagrees with their ideas as racist, bigoted, or simply evil is quickly becoming a tactic that the most radical Democrats are using against a dwindling number of moderate members of their own party.

    Freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., who proudly and accurately calls herself a socialist, has demonstrated the phenomenon perfectly with her entitled proclamation that “I’m the boss.”

    Unlike some moderate Democrats, Ocasio-Cortez is willing to dismantle the U.S. economy in a quixotic crusade to combat climate change.

    In the congresswoman’s view, the reluctance of some Democrats to embrace her radical and unrealistic climate policies renders those mainstream members of her party illegitimate. She’d like them to just step aside to let her and others who share her extremist impulses dictate public policy.

    While he may never admit it, this is the Democratic Party that Obama helped create by framing policy debates as moral crusades. By portraying his opponents as unethical monsters for opposing things like ObamaCare, President Obama set the tone for the uncompromising stance his party has taken in the age of Trump.
    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/charlie-kirk-dem-civil-war-between-left-and-far-left-will-benefit-republicans

    Odumbo laments the Demcorat circular firing squad that he helped create..

    The very definition of irony...

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    Note to Democrats: Americans don’t like your policies

    Let’s start with the obvious:

    Of course Donald Trump’s talk about busing illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities is a political stunt, designed to heartlessly exploit the issue for his political gain.

    And of course pro-sanctuary liberals like Sen. Ed Markey are shameless hypocrites for opposing it, despite their many public claims that illegal immigrants deserve to be treated like legal ones.

    Here’s the real question I have for Democrats — particularly the ones who want to beat Trump in 2020:

    Did you flunk out of fifth grade math? Seriously — what the heck?

    Let me make this easy for our friends on the left side of the aisle: Americans hate sanctuary city policies. When you fight Trump by defending them, you’re supporting a policy that, depending on the poll, between 65 to 80 percent of Americans hate.

    According to an IBD/TIPP Poll last summer, even Hispanics hate it by a 20-point margin.

    “There’s a danger for the Democrats that the whole becomes bigger than the sum of its parts,” he told the Boston Herald yesterday. “It’s not just ‘let’s dump the Electoral College’ or ‘let’s have sanctuary cities.’ You reach a point where voters start thinking, ‘Wow, these people just going way out there on everything.’”

    “I saw it happen in 1972 with McGovern,” Kristol said. “If you recall, he didn’t do too well.”

    And if you don’t recall, Nixon won every single state … except Massachusetts.

    But, hey — maybe Democrats are right about sanctuary cities and the Green New Deal. Maybe it is time to abandon free markets for the sake of a Sanders-style economic socialism. And maybe defending Rep. Ilhan Omar over her description of 9/11 as “some people did something” is, on some metaphysical level, morally right.

    Or you could just be defending an anti-Semitic dope who said something dumb about the worst terrorist act ever committed on American soil, someone who makes your entire party look worse by embracing her.

    Only time will tell. That is, if you’re a Democratic presidential contender. The rest of us can tell today, right now, by looking at the polls.

    It’s that whole “math” thing again. Democrats may want to give it a try. Or they can continue their bruising political battle to become the next president of Massachusetts.
    https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/04/16/note-to-dems-americans-dont-like-your-policies/

    From the bastion of liberalism..... :^D

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    Millennial front-whines report

    My report on millennials bringing their sense of entitlement to the office rings a bell with reader Karen Sweeney. She writes: “I work for a large law firm and my colleagues and I notice how our summer interns have become demanding. They used to come to work on their first day scared and eager to please. Last summer’s interns came in at 9:00 am and would go to Starbucks, come back around 10:00-10:30 and complain about the ‘scut work’ they were assigned.

    “Some even had their parents call to complain for them. And to my dismay, they were accommodated. I find the situation abhorrent and depressing for the future of this country.”
    https://nypost.com/2019/04/16/trump-is-a-master-at-pushing-democrats-buttons/

    "I weep for the future.."
    -Maitre'd, FERRIS BEUHLER'S DAY OFF

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats Are Falling Into the Ilhan Omar Trap
    By rushing to stand with the controversial congresswoman, the 2020 contenders are allowing Trump to transform her into the face of their party.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/trumps-attack-ilhan-omar-trap-democrats/587128/

    Once again, the pure genius of President Trump on display for all to see...

    President Trump didn't make Omar the face of the Democrat Party..

    President Trump made DEMOCRATS make Omar the face of the Democrat Party...

    Scott Adams has delved in very deeply to the marketing and persuasion genius of President Trump..

    This is just one blatant example that even I, a knuckle-dragging ground-pounder can understand..

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    Buttigieg is the Democrats' flavour of the month. Just don't ask what he stands for

    Pete Buttigieg is a man with a lot of ‘gold stars’ on his résumé, but why should anybody actually trust him to be on their side?

    For being the mayor of the fourth-largest city in Indiana, Pete Buttigieg has been shockingly successful in carving out a national political profile. Buttigieg has only just formally announced that he is running for president, but already he is placing near the top of some polls, and being given cover stories in national magazines, touted as a “wonder boy” and the “Democrats’ heartland hope”. But for all the buzz, an important question still hangs over Buttigieg: what, exactly does he stand for?

    Himself, mostly. The New York Times says Buttigieg puts “storytelling first, policy details later”. Media coverage of Buttigieg dwells on what his favorite socks are or his dogs’ personalities. Pete is all about Pete: Buttigieg is frequently evasive about his actual substantive agenda, preferring rhetoric about “freedom”, “democracy” and “security”. His campaign’s branding and graphic design have been hailed as “radical”. As for his actual policies … he’s working on them.

    Buttigieg represents the apex of a kind of “politics of demographics”. Why is the mayor of a small city suddenly on the national political radar? It’s not as if Buttigieg’s tenure in office has been especially noteworthy – his signature policies were technocratic improvements like improving sewer technology along with some fairly middle-of-the road, even conservative, development initiatives. Buttigieg is not attracting attention for anything he has done, but for who he is. He’s a man who checks all the right boxes.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/16/pete-buttigieg-democrats-flavour-month

    As I said..

    Buttagig's popularity is for one thing and one thing only... He checks the right boxes...

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, I think it's very very clear...

    Things are going well for Democrats... :D

  66. [66] 
    Michale wrote:

    You’ve read the books? I was expecting this to be a reference to the television show I hate, but it appears to be a reference to my favorite novel series(I don’t think Ser Vardis is named in the show).

    I am reading the books.. Guess which part I am up to?? :D

    I want to be well grounded in the entire story before I binge-watch Season 8.....

    Not a fan of the show?? It seems to be very well grounded faithfully to the books.. At least the early chapters...

    But I am more of a casual fan, not the die-hard fight-words fan as I am of Star Trek... ..

    For example, STAR TREK DISCOVERY, whilst a decent sci-fi show, totally destroys Trek canon.. THAT gets my blood boiling...

  67. [67] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Russ[51],

    That was extremely well said.

    How does anyone expect to narrow the political divide if everyone stays in their own corners.

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russ,

    The GOP made a decision that everything the Democrats support must be opposed. Democrats must be portrayed as evil, unpatriotic, and amoral.

    And how is that any different than the decision that Democrats made to do the EXACT same thing to President Trump??

    Why do you have a problem when the GOP does it but are completely OK with the Democrats doing it??

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    And so it begins....

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:
  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    NO REDACTIONS WERE MADE BASED ON EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE...

    Compare that to Odumbo invoking EP left and right to thwart transparency....

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    On another note..

    Ann Coulter is now a Bernie Bro.... :D

    This is gonna get really wild...

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again..

    NO FACTS OR EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ANY AMERICAN COLLUDED WITH RUSSIA...

    You people LOST....

    Time to move on...

  74. [74] 
    Michale wrote:

    “Accordingly, the public report I am releasing today contains redactions only for the four categories that I previously outlined, and no material has been redacted based on executive privilege.”
    -AG Barr

    A full unequivocal and solid win for President Trump...

  75. [75] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Michale [73]

    You can't say "No Collusion", cause everybody knows 1), Trump "Colluded" with them (on public TV, no less), when he asked them to hack Hillary's emails, and 2), Jr "Colluded" with the Commie lawyer at Trump Tower to get "dirt" on Hillary.

    The nut jobs here will ALWAYS claim that to be "de facto Collusion", and they will ALWAYS insist that it's beside the point that all of that was perfectly legal.

    (Que, Kick's recitation of the election rules for the 7th time.)

    That way, they can claim some sort of "moral victory", which lets them off the hook on the wrist-slashing thing, all as I've been predicting for 2 + yrs.

    (Oh oh, there it is again - that gawdam "smug" thing.)

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    CRS,

    Well, I can't speak to all that...

    I can say though, with complete and utter fact to back it up...

    Anyone who clings to the Russia Collusion myth is simply laying bare their deluded thinking or their partisan agenda..

  77. [77] 
    Paula wrote:

    [51] Listen:

    This is why going on Fox News is not a terrible idea — It has the potential to cause a chink in the GOP’s propaganda armor. Not all of Fox News viewers are fully supportive of Trump.

    That's not the point. There are bigger issues involved. You are at the bottom-most level, focusing on the fact that a sliver of FOX viewers aren't bigots. Fine. There's all kinds of avenues available to them to come into the light.

    But meanwhile, day-in, day-out the network pumps out incendiary garbage in conjunction with other units in the rightwing machine and that garbage celebrates bigotry, deliberately misleads its viewers and incites violence.

    So it becomes a matter of the greater harm/good. Defending going on FOX as a means of reaching the handful of alleged non-bigots is taking the position that reaching them is the MOST IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION. It says attempts to "reach" the FOX indulger is more important than protecting non-FOXers.

    The number of people who don't watch FOX greatly outnumbers those who do. The numbers of people harmed by FOX greatly outnumbers those who watch it. The amount of harm already done by this propaganda outlet, totaled over the years since it's blighted inception, is incalculable. Not just to individuals - but to our country and to the world.

  78. [78] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Paula,

    How do you propose to deal with the political divide in your country in ways that will actually reduce that political divide"

    We all know that uou are against Democrats having anything to do with the most watched news network so what is the solution?

  79. [79] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The number of people who don't watch FOX greatly outnumbers those who do.

    Are you sure about that, Paula. I've seen reports about viewership that says otherwise.

  80. [80] 
    Michale wrote:

    The number of people who don't watch FOX greatly outnumbers those who do.

    The facts say otherwise..

  81. [81] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    even redacted, the mueller report is a fascinating read.

  82. [82] 
    Michale wrote:

    even redacted, the mueller report is a fascinating read.

    Does it completely and unequivocally state for the record that there are no facts or evidence to support Russia Collusion with Trump or the Trump campaign??

  83. [83] 
    Paula wrote:

    Quick note: as the Mueller Report is being dissected, among the many damning items coming to light:

    Buried roughly in the middle of the Mueller report: Evidence that the Trump White House was receiving highly sensitive information about the U.S. targets of the FBI’s investigation into Russian election interference very early on, with Republican “Gang of Eight” member Sen. Richard Burr leaking all five major Trump-linked targets of the investigation to the White House almost immediately after receiving an FBI briefing on those targets.

    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/18/1851285/-Sen-Richard-Burr-leaked-major-Trump-linked-targets-of-FBI-s-Russia-probe-to-Trump-s-White-House

    GOP has been aiding and abetting the criminal POTUS all along, as has been alleged.

  84. [84] 
    Michale wrote:

    Buried roughly in the middle of the Mueller report: Evidence that the Trump White House was receiving highly sensitive information about the U.S. targets of the FBI’s investigation into Russian election interference very early on, with Republican “Gang of Eight” member Sen. Richard Burr leaking all five major Trump-linked targets of the investigation to the White House almost immediately after receiving an FBI briefing on those targets.

    Can you quote the ACTUAL report text that says that??

    I'de believe THAT before I believe Daily KOS...

  85. [85] 
    Michale wrote:

    GOP has been aiding and abetting the criminal POTUS all along, as has been alleged.

    And yet, with the Mueller report, President Trump has been completely utterly and unequivocally exonerated...

    So, this would seem to give lie to your claim as to "criminal POTUS"...

  86. [86] 
    Paula wrote:

    As reporters continue to work through the report it gets more and more damning.

  87. [87] 
    Michale wrote:

    As reporters continue to work through the report it gets more and more damning.

    I am absolutely certain that, in your mind, it does...

    But then again, in your mind, Russia Collusion is still a thing...

    So......

  88. [88] 
    Paula wrote:

    [78] Liz: No time for this question today - too caught up in Mueller Report release.

  89. [89] 
    Michale wrote:

    Interesting headlines..

    VIDEO NBC Admits: Barr Summary ‘Tracks Very Closely’ With Mueller Report

    Who would have thunked it!?? Oh.. Wait.. :D

    Disappointed NBC: Mueller Report ‘Falling With A Thud’ for Democrats

    As I said.. Democrats are demoralized.. They put all their eggs in the COLLUSION basket and are now whining they are all cracked..

    'Why? WHY?': Nicolle Wallace Completely Loses It After Barr Presser

    "The sport ends. The massacre begins.."
    Grand Primus T'Ceal, THE FINAL FRONTIER

    PANIC! CNN Is in Need of a Safe Space After a Delusional FREAK OUT Over Barr Presser

    The SKY IS FALLING!!! The SKY IS FALLING!!! :D

    Barr HAMMERS the Liberal Media for Their ‘Relentless Speculation’ Trump Was Guilty

    Gods, it's a good day to be an American.. :D

    After Media Cry ‘Cover-Up’, WashPost Reports Light Redactions By Barr

    Even WaPoop is conceding defeat...

    Deranged De Niro ‘Still Has Hopes for Collusion,’ Calls Barr’s Memo ‘Pathetic’

    As I said.. The hopelessly delusional still hold onto the fantasy of Russia Collusion

    DeNiro's a moron...

    Matthews, Friends: There Was Still Collusion! And Wikileaks Caused Hillary to Lose Pennsylvania!

    The freak-out continues...

    Muddying the Waters: ABC Reporter Misleads Viewers on AG Barr’s Testimony

    Why stick with the facts when a lie will do...

    Kamala Harris Consoles Seth Meyers Over Mueller Report: ‘We Are Not Crazy’

    No matter how many times they deny it.. The facts say otherwise....

    Tin-Foil Hats Time! CNN Lefties Imply Barr Lied About Mueller Report Conclusions

    Delusional Part 2

    Irony Alert! CNN Brings on Dan Rather to Bash Trump as a Liar, Promote Transparency

    You just HAVE to know yer in sad shape when you gotta call in Dan Rather for his credibility chops..

    https://www.newsbusters.org/issues-events-groups/mueller-report?page=0%2C0

  90. [90] 
    Michale wrote:

    I swear...

    Democrats must be over-indulging in the milk of the poppy....

    :D

  91. [91] 
    Paula wrote:

    Speaking of "courage of convictions" I wonder what Bernie's convictions are about criminal POTUS' working with foreign countries to get elected as well as massive obstructions of justice and etc.

    Looking forward to Bernie's weighing in.

  92. [92] 
    Paula wrote:

    Good rundown of initial responses by experts to the report: https://www.justsecurity.org/63665/the-redacted-mueller-report-first-takes-from-the-experts/

  93. [93] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    79

    Are you sure about that, Paula. I've seen reports about viewership that says otherwise.

    Although Fox News has been the highest rated "cable" news for awhile, they're not remotely the most watched news by any stretch, and MSNBC beat Fox average viewership in the final quarter of 2018.

    ABC, NBC, and CBS all blow the average nightly viewership of Fox out of the water.

    AVERAGE NIGHTLY
    VIEWERS-MILLIONS

    ABC - 8.0
    NBC - 7.5
    CBS - 5.6
    FOX - 2.5

    FACT: Fox News primetime viewers amount to less than 1% of the United States population.

    https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/how-many-people-actually-watch-fox-news-in-america.html/

  94. [94] 
    Paula wrote:

    Apparently there IS a pee tape, fwiw.

  95. [95] 
    Paula wrote:

    [93] Kick: Thanks! I knew the rough numbers but didn't want to take the time to track them down, etc. And when I get time to think about it I do want to respond to Liz' question about how to tackle the political divide. But this Mueller Report is just too amazing -

  96. [96] 
    Paula wrote:

    Another tidbit from the report, noted without comment:

    ...in February 2016, the IRA directed its operatives to "[u]se any opportunity to criticize Hillary [Clinton] and the rest (except Sanders and Trump - we support them)."

  97. [97] 
    Paula wrote:

    Charles Pierce says:

    The results are in the report released by Robert Mueller and his investigators on Thursday. It is a document that shows clearly that every guardian of the republic—especially including the people themselves—surrendered it to an international criminal cabal without firing hardly a shot. Also in that report is a challenge: there is one last chance to avert the threat, and it lies with the United States Congress, and with the people who elected its members. Mueller has dropped it all in the country's lap. He did what he could.

    Subpoena them all. Put them under oath and on television. Begin impeachment inquiries on Monday. (You can have the weekend. I'm generous.) Fumigate the entire government because, what we have now, and what Mueller illustrated, is the political equivalent of a plague cell. Fumigate it. Burn its furnishings. This administration is candida auris, the anti-bacterial superbug that The New York Times tells us is running amuck in hospitals...

    There is no question that the president* is in deep contravention of his oath of office. He has not faithfully executed his office. He has not preserved, protected, or defended the Constitution of the United States. There is hardly a single one of the 400-odd pages on which cannot be found a violation of the constitutional oath...

    Mueller's diagnosis is clear and uncompromising. He has given us all the bad news at once and left the choice of treatment up to the patient. And, whether we have the stomach for it or not, it's time to take the painful cure.

    https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a27198446/mueller-report-congress-impeachment/

  98. [98] 
    Kick wrote:

    Barr lied. Mueller's report makes clear that he adhered to the DOJ directive that a sitting POTUS could not be indicted. Following that directive, Mueller wasn't going to make any indictments or a determination of guilt regarding the POTUS but rather shelve it for later or leave it to Congress as outlined in the United States Constitution.

    Mueller's report makes clear he was only going to "rule out," and as already established, he did rule out regarding the very narrow confines of "coordination" or "conspiracy" with the "Russian government." While anyone reading the report can see the facts plainly outlined by Mueller, and they really are damning with regards to conspiracy, Mueller chose to take a conservative approach in his decisions. For whatever reason, Mueller made the determination that "beyond a reasonable doubt" wasn't a bar he could reach with regard to the very narrow confines he was tasked.

    Having said all that, Mueller didn't rule out and was not tasked with ruling out any "conspiracy" or "coordination" with the Russian cutout WikiLeaks or any other entity, and due to the multiple redactions, it would not surprise me in the least if that issue is still under investigation. The myriad of spin-off cases are alive and well.

    Trump answers 37 of OSC/Mueller's written questions by responding to the effect, "I don't remember," so that officially lays to rest the state of Trump's "excellent" memory. I would wager he does remember the answer to many of the questions and has simply lied in his responses, a not at all uncommon thing to do when you've committed criminal offenses where answering the questions truthfully would prove your guilt.

    So to recap:

    1. Mueller put the ball regarding indictments for criminal issues in many other courts. For instance, Trump is "Individual 1" in SDNY. POTUS can still be indicted in several matters after his presidency is over, anyone not POTUS can still be indicted at any time, and there are multiple spin-off cases still pending in courts all over America as witnessed by the redactions. Based on the redactions (what I've read so far), I would not want to be:

    - Paul Manafort (looks like they are not done with charging him, we'll see)
    - Roger Stone
    - Eric Prince
    - Donald Trump, Jr.

    2. Mueller actually did put the ball in Congress's court regarding Obstruction of Justice. Remember: Mueller was only going to clear Trump and not charge him based on the DOJ directive regarding not indicting a sitting POTUS. Mueller couldn't clear Trump for quite obvious reasons.

    Obstruction of Justice: Congress, the ball is in in your court.

    EDVA, SDNY, EDNY, DC, etc., etc., etc.: Multiple balls are in your courts. :)

  99. [99] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Kick & Paula,

    You've forgotten to mention all the people who watch none of the above. The number of people who don't watch FOX greatly outnumbers those who do for sure.

  100. [100] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "Apparently there IS a pee tape"

    Watch Bill Maher's show from last week, specifically the interview with Seth Abramson.

  101. [101] 
    Kick wrote:

    Paula
    95

    Thanks!

    You're welcome. I have no idea why everyone thinks Fox News has this huge viewership... probably their spew. They are only #1 in "cable news, but MSNBC is overtaking them, and Fox is the only conservative news network... so obviously their viewership is captive, while the other two cable news networks viewers combine to easily beat that of Fox. In other words, those who aren't conservative viewers are split between the other cable networks.

    The Big 3 networks blow them all out of the water. ABC News has 3 times the viewership of Fox every single day.

    <iI knew the rough numbers but didn't want to take the time to track them down, etc. And when I get time to think about it I do want to respond to Liz' question about how to tackle the political divide. But this Mueller Report is just too amazing -

    It's awesome and very damning. Trump was correct when he said "I'm f***ed." :)

  102. [102] 
    Kick wrote:

    *ACCIDENTALLY POSTED BEFORE I FINISHED*
    *CONTINUED*

    I knew the rough numbers but didn't want to take the time to track them down, etc. And when I get time to think about it I do want to respond to Liz' question about how to tackle the political divide. But this Mueller Report is just too amazing -

    It's awesome and very damning. Trump was correct when he said "I'm f***ed." :)

    Many of those redactions are ongoing cases in EDVA, DC, SDNY, etc. Anyone not POTUS can still be indicted. Mueller's report makes clear he was never going to indict Trump and abide by DOJ directives.

    I'm still reading the report and enjoying reading your posts too. Keep them coming. :)

  103. [103] 
    Kick wrote:

    John
    99

    You've forgotten to mention all the people who watch none of the above. The number of people who don't watch FOX greatly outnumbers those who do for sure.

    But John, I did say:

    FACT: Fox News primetime viewers amount to less than 1% of the United States population.

    And that means 99% of the population of the United States does not watch Fox News! So I did sort of mention them... mostly. ;)

  104. [104] 
    Bclancy wrote:

    Michale(66)
    “Not a fan of the show?? It seems to be very well grounded faithfully to the books.. At least the early chapters...”

    *laughs bitterly”
    Yes, they did just fine at adapting AGoT(season 1), and even parts of books 2 and 3 are well adapted in the first 3-4 seasons. Since you’re only on AGOT, thinking the show did a faithful adaptation is perfectly reasonable. It’s when you hit AFFC(“A Feast for Crows”, Book 4) that the show veers off the rails. I was a huge fan of the show through the end of season 6(it was what prompted me to read the books in the first place), but the way certain plot lines played out in S6 made me re-appraise the whole show and realize that the plot didn’t make sense from about season 5(i.e. Sansa marrying Ramsay “for revenge”). Plus themes and character arcs are super important to me, and the show writers kind of missed the point of the book series. Martin created a dark world full of injustice, but he is still at heart an idealist and romantic. Often the bad sleep well and the good people fail and are destroyed, but ideals like justice and compassion are still worth striving for even when you fail.

    Anyway, this couldn’t be any more off topic if it tried, and I could discuss AGOT until the sun rises in the West and sets in East(and until the seas go dry and the mountains blow in the wind like leaves), but if you have the time and inclination, I can link you to a collection of essays detailing the problems I have with the show. Perhaps it’s better for you to put that off though anyway since there are book spoilers in them. And of course if you enjoy the show I wouldn’t want to ruin your enjoyment.

    I can’t resist asking though, which point-of-view character’s chapters have you been enjoying most? I love Ned in AGOT, but I am excited for you to get to A Clash of Kings. You will get the pleasure of meeting my fave, Stannis the Mannis. He actually isn’t evil in the books. And Sansa’s POV gets much more interesting.

  105. [105] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    At one time I believed that there could not possibly EVER be a political disaster that that could rival the 2016 presidential election in the level of trauma inflicted upon Democratics, but I can now see that I was wrong - Mueller has single-handedly exceeded that by a factor of ten.

    Thankfully I'm not one of those "smug" types, or I'd definitely holler SORRY FUMDUCKERS, BUT I TOLD YA SO!!!

  106. [106] 
    Paula wrote:

    [99] John:

    You've forgotten to mention all the people who watch none of the above. The number of people who don't watch FOX greatly outnumbers those who do for sure.

    FOX is important because it is the nexus for rightwing propaganda on TV. It is the outlet "conservative" politicians, pundits, reporters etc. take their cues from. It is part of a larger machine that relays and amplifies conservative talking points. Blotus gets lead around by the nose by FOX.

    It is consistently dishonest and incendiary. It should be shunned by Dems BECAUSE it's dishonest and incendiary and a bad faith actor - because Dems need to show disapproval of FOX tactics.

  107. [107] 
    Kick wrote:

    OSC Mueller handed off:

    12 criminal cases
    14 as yet unknown

    26 total spin-off cases

    Now do you believe me about the spin-off cases? :)

  108. [108] 
    Bclancy wrote:

    CRS(105)
    So true. As I write this I can hardly see through the tears in my eyes. I am bleeding from deep scratches because I dug my own nails into my face in the fit of angst I am having over the Mueller report. It’s not at all just another case of someone projecting hysteria into their political opponents to make themselves feel superior. Ugh I’m starting to feel sick from the Tide Pod I drank just now while in the throes of my Mueller-induced conniption fit, gotta go now.

  109. [109] 
    Paula wrote:

    Ezra Klein tweets:

    The argument Trump’s defenders are making is a damning indictment of a president who considers the presidency as a tool of personal advancement.

    A foreign government illegally interfered in America’s presidential election on Trump’s behalf, and rather than treating that incursion as an attack on America’s political institutions, Trump treated it transactionally, as a gift to him personally.

    Rather than defend America from Russia’s attack on the political system, he defends himself from the investigations into Russia’s attacks.

    Rather than see Russia’s hacks as a threat to the legitimacy of America’s elections, he sees the investigation as a threat to the legitimacy of his own election. Rather than defend the rule of law, he subverts it.

    The most generous read of the Mueller report’s findings does not exonerate Trump. It says he betrayed the laws he swore to uphold to protect his reputation, and only the insubordination of his staff restrained him from more egregious acts of criminality.

  110. [110] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    It's not the Mueller report that should be worrying y'all or tearing your eyes out over.

    No, it's the next presidential election that should keep you awake at night.

  111. [111] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Kick and Paula,

    Actually, I was talking about cable news networks - the 24 hour news networks.

    Fox News beats CNN and MSNBC by a lot.

    That is why Democrats who are confident about Democratic policy should never shun Fox News or Fox News debates.

  112. [112] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    111

    Fox News beats CNN and MSNBC by a lot.

    If it was your intent to either lie or misinform, then you've succeeded. Fox News does not beat CNN and MSNBC by a lot. As I factually stated, MSNBC's average viewership was higher than that of Fox News very recently. The viewership of Fox News has been steadily declining for years while MSNBC's audience is doing exactly the opposite.

    MSNBC averaged 1.56 million total viewers during the "sales day" (6 a.m. to 2 a.m.) between Dec. 17-21, making it the top cable news network in the key 25-54 age demographic.

    Fox News averaged 1.54 million total viewers while CNN averaged 975,000.

    In prime time (8 p.m. to 11 p.m.), MSNBC continued to lead Fox News and CNN in total viewers and among that key age group for the fourth week in a row.

    MSNBC prime time last week averaged 2.58 million total viewers, compared to Fox's 2.24 million and CNN’s 1.398 million. Of those viewers, 471,000 were between the ages of 25 and 54 for MSNBC. Fox saw 355,000 viewers in that demographic, while CNN saw 415,000 viewers.

    https://thehill.com/media/422929-msnbc-beats-fox-in-key-ratings-for-first-time-in-17-years

    While it's true that Fox News had lead the cable news ratings for multiple years, that was the past. Their average age of viewer is about 69 years old, and they are literally dying and not being replaced. Those are the facts.

    That is why Democrats who are confident about Democratic policy should never shun Fox News or Fox News debates.

    That's your opinion based on an incorrect statement, Elizabeth. I reiterate: Fox News primetime viewers amount to less than 1% of the United States population.

    If it is your intention to join the ranks of those posters who frequently post falsehoods and outright fabrications in order to make a point, I'd say you're off to a great start. :)

  113. [113] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:
  114. [114] 
    Kick wrote:

    That is behind a paywall, and I can't even see what it says. I got a quick glimpse of some bars, and those are way off. If it says "Fox News beats CNN and MSNBC by a lot," then it's indeed fake news.

    Seriously. I'm being straight up with you here: The viewership of Fox News is less than 1% of the population of the United States. They have about 2.5 million viewers on average and MSNBC beat them in December 2018 and is holding their own. Having said all that, every single one of these cable news stations has viewership less than 1% of the United States population.

    ABC, NBC, and CBS are smoking all of them. :)

  115. [115] 
    Paula wrote:

    [110] Liz: Quite possible to do both at the same time. Also, what happens with Mueller report will impact 2020 election, amazingly enough!

  116. [116] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Kick … it's not behind a pay wall, I just clicked on it.

    Let's save this for another time.

  117. [117] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM

    If you think I'm clicking on that link, you're crazy! ;)

    Consider it saved for later. :)

  118. [118] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Heh.

  119. [119] 
    Michale wrote:

    I can’t resist asking though, which point-of-view character’s chapters have you been enjoying most? I love Ned in AGOT, but I am excited for you to get to A Clash of Kings. You will get the pleasure of meeting my fave, Stannis the Mannis. He actually isn’t evil in the books. And Sansa’s POV gets much more interesting.

    That's my one beef with the show.. They kept killing off the characters I liked.. :^/

    I was (and still am, what with reading the novels) a huge Eddard Stark fan..

    Which is funny because I have never been a huge fan of Sean Bean, at least as far as his characters go...

    From his stint as the psycho terrorist, Sean Miller, in PATRIOT GAMES to his portrayal of the weak willed Boromir in the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy, Bean always seems to play bad guys...

    But his EDDARD STARK is momentous... :D

    I am now a huge Tyrion fan...

    ******SPOILER******* ***SPOILER****
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

    But rumor has it that he is to die in Season 8.. :D

    "Never love anything, Kiddo. You just end up losing it.."
    -Penny Robinson, LOST IN SPACE

    :D

    I am looking forward to getting to where things go off the rails.. Books are ALWAYS better than their media adaptations... :D

    I am trying to stay away from watching Season 8 so I can binge watch the entire season.. But I'll probably break down this Monday and watch Ep1 & 2...

    heh

  120. [120] 
    Michale wrote:

    That's my one beef with the show.. They kept killing off the characters I liked.. :^/

    Of course, I am well-versed in shows killing off good characters..

    I am a SUPERNATURAL fan... :D

  121. [121] 
    Michale wrote:

    ******* SPOILERS ******* *******SPOILERS*****
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

    Second best *HOLY SHIT* revelation of GAME OF THRONES (the series)...

    Littlefinger put on trial at Winterfell

    THE BEST *HOLY SHIT* revelation of GAME OF THRONES (the series)...

    Hodor

    :D

    As an aside, another advantage of DISQUS is it allows you to use spoiler tags.... :D

Comments for this article are closed.