Media already criticizing Trump's foreign trip.

[frigidweirdo]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

Well, after eight years of doing it to Obama, now you know what it's like....

 

[iceberg]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

Well, after eight years of doing it to Obama, now you know what it's like....

given the media gave obama quite a few passes (cause if they're being objective then the things trump does obama did - well they would merit similiar outrage, it would seem) no.

the repubs came out and said OBSTRUCT!!! yes. but even then it wasn't to this level. however, each *next* iteration seems to push it further and further away from sanity using "but they did it first" as their sole basis to expand the hate.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

Well, after eight years of doing it to Obama, now you know what it's like....

given the media gave obama quite a few passes (cause if they're being objective then the things trump does obama did - well they would merit similiar outrage, it would seem) no.

the repubs came out and said OBSTRUCT!!! yes. but even then it wasn't to this level. however, each *next* iteration seems to push it further and further away from sanity using "but they did it first" as their sole basis to expand the hate.

Well, maybe Obama got passes because he didn't start a war on the media. Trump went out of his way to insult and belittle the media, and they're going to fight him back.

There are those who work with people, and those who work against people, those who work against people can't complain when others work against them. You know what I mean? It's called USING YOUR BRAIN, Obama did it, Trump didn't.

 

[iceberg]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

Well, after eight years of doing it to Obama, now you know what it's like....

given the media gave obama quite a few passes (cause if they're being objective then the things trump does obama did - well they would merit similiar outrage, it would seem) no.

the repubs came out and said OBSTRUCT!!! yes. but even then it wasn't to this level. however, each *next* iteration seems to push it further and further away from sanity using "but they did it first" as their sole basis to expand the hate.

Well, maybe Obama got passes because he didn't start a war on the media. Trump went out of his way to insult and belittle the media, and they're going to fight him back.

There are those who work with people, and those who work against people, those who work against people can't complain when others work against them. You know what I mean? It's called USING YOUR BRAIN, Obama did it, Trump didn't.

so - then obama didn't have the media attack him like they do trump - are we in agreement here?

 

[frigidweirdo]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

Well, after eight years of doing it to Obama, now you know what it's like....

given the media gave obama quite a few passes (cause if they're being objective then the things trump does obama did - well they would merit similiar outrage, it would seem) no.

the repubs came out and said OBSTRUCT!!! yes. but even then it wasn't to this level. however, each *next* iteration seems to push it further and further away from sanity using "but they did it first" as their sole basis to expand the hate.

Well, maybe Obama got passes because he didn't start a war on the media. Trump went out of his way to insult and belittle the media, and they're going to fight him back.

There are those who work with people, and those who work against people, those who work against people can't complain when others work against them. You know what I mean? It's called USING YOUR BRAIN, Obama did it, Trump didn't.

so - then obama didn't have the media attack him like they do trump - are we in agreement here?

What is the point of your reply? Is it trying to satisfy your need to twist this?

Trump has brought these attacks on himself by attacking FIRST. Any good politician knows you need the media on your side. Trump thought he could do without. He was wrong.

So, if you want anyone to feel sorry for Trump, no. It's like feeling sorry for Hitler's suicide, well he brought that on himself, and before you start with that mock hysteria about me comparing Trump to Hitler, I'm not comparing the two.

 

[BluesLegend]

Its interesting how the media no longer report the news, they fabricate a narrative then sell it like an infomercial.

 

[iceberg]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

Well, after eight years of doing it to Obama, now you know what it's like....

given the media gave obama quite a few passes (cause if they're being objective then the things trump does obama did - well they would merit similiar outrage, it would seem) no.

the repubs came out and said OBSTRUCT!!! yes. but even then it wasn't to this level. however, each *next* iteration seems to push it further and further away from sanity using "but they did it first" as their sole basis to expand the hate.

Well, maybe Obama got passes because he didn't start a war on the media. Trump went out of his way to insult and belittle the media, and they're going to fight him back.

There are those who work with people, and those who work against people, those who work against people can't complain when others work against them. You know what I mean? It's called USING YOUR BRAIN, Obama did it, Trump didn't.

so - then obama didn't have the media attack him like they do trump - are we in agreement here?

What is the point of your reply? Is it trying to satisfy your need to twist this?

Trump has brought these attacks on himself by attacking FIRST. Any good politician knows you need the media on your side. Trump thought he could do without. He was wrong.

So, if you want anyone to feel sorry for Trump, no. It's like feeling sorry for Hitler's suicide, well he brought that on himself, and before you start with that mock hysteria about me comparing Trump to Hitler, I'm not comparing the two.

heh, lord knows i'd never try to twist a narrow mind.

no room.

carry on.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

All restraints are off in the media's efforts to destroy Trump.

Destroying Donald Trump all that matters to some

What Trump does is not even as newsworthy as the way the press will twist it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, after eight years of doing it to Obama, now you know what it's like....

given the media gave obama quite a few passes (cause if they're being objective then the things trump does obama did - well they would merit similiar outrage, it would seem) no.

the repubs came out and said OBSTRUCT!!! yes. but even then it wasn't to this level. however, each *next* iteration seems to push it further and further away from sanity using "but they did it first" as their sole basis to expand the hate.

Well, maybe Obama got passes because he didn't start a war on the media. Trump went out of his way to insult and belittle the media, and they're going to fight him back.

There are those who work with people, and those who work against people, those who work against people can't complain when others work against them. You know what I mean? It's called USING YOUR BRAIN, Obama did it, Trump didn't.

so - then obama didn't have the media attack him like they do trump - are we in agreement here?

What is the point of your reply? Is it trying to satisfy your need to twist this?

Trump has brought these attacks on himself by attacking FIRST. Any good politician knows you need the media on your side. Trump thought he could do without. He was wrong.

So, if you want anyone to feel sorry for Trump, no. It's like feeling sorry for Hitler's suicide, well he brought that on himself, and before you start with that mock hysteria about me comparing Trump to Hitler, I'm not comparing the two.

heh, lord knows i'd never try to twist a narrow mind.

no room.

carry on.

Oh come off it, you can't even make a decent reply. God knows why 3/4 of the people on this site even have the vote, they can't even make an argument.

 

[iceberg]

given the media gave obama quite a few passes (cause if they're being objective then the things trump does obama did - well they would merit similiar outrage, it would seem) no.

the repubs came out and said OBSTRUCT!!! yes. but even then it wasn't to this level. however, each *next* iteration seems to push it further and further away from sanity using "but they did it first" as their sole basis to expand the hate.

Well, maybe Obama got passes because he didn't start a war on the media. Trump went out of his way to insult and belittle the media, and they're going to fight him back.

There are those who work with people, and those who work against people, those who work against people can't complain when others work against them. You know what I mean? It's called USING YOUR BRAIN, Obama did it, Trump didn't.

so - then obama didn't have the media attack him like they do trump - are we in agreement here?

What is the point of your reply? Is it trying to satisfy your need to twist this?

Trump has brought these attacks on himself by attacking FIRST. Any good politician knows you need the media on your side. Trump thought he could do without. He was wrong.

So, if you want anyone to feel sorry for Trump, no. It's like feeling sorry for Hitler's suicide, well he brought that on himself, and before you start with that mock hysteria about me comparing Trump to Hitler, I'm not comparing the two.

heh, lord knows i'd never try to twist a narrow mind.

no room.

carry on.

Oh come off it, you can't even make a decent reply. God knows why 3/4 of the people on this site even have the vote, they can't even make an argument.

that's just it. not here to argue but talk about what's going on.

huge difference.

people who talk debate back and forth and work to understand other points of view.

people who argue cuss you out and mock you and put on the smug face.

 

[frigidweirdo]

All restraints are off in the media's efforts to destroy Trump.

Destroying Donald Trump all that matters to some

What Trump does is not even as newsworthy as the way the press will twist it.

Of course all restraints are off, he didn't have any restraints in the first place. You fight fire with fire, right? This is what US politics has become, and the reason why the US is going downhill fast.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, maybe Obama got passes because he didn't start a war on the media. Trump went out of his way to insult and belittle the media, and they're going to fight him back.

There are those who work with people, and those who work against people, those who work against people can't complain when others work against them. You know what I mean? It's called USING YOUR BRAIN, Obama did it, Trump didn't.

so - then obama didn't have the media attack him like they do trump - are we in agreement here?

What is the point of your reply? Is it trying to satisfy your need to twist this?

Trump has brought these attacks on himself by attacking FIRST. Any good politician knows you need the media on your side. Trump thought he could do without. He was wrong.

So, if you want anyone to feel sorry for Trump, no. It's like feeling sorry for Hitler's suicide, well he brought that on himself, and before you start with that mock hysteria about me comparing Trump to Hitler, I'm not comparing the two.

heh, lord knows i'd never try to twist a narrow mind.

no room.

carry on.

Oh come off it, you can't even make a decent reply. God knows why 3/4 of the people on this site even have the vote, they can't even make an argument.

that's just it. not here to argue but talk about what's going on.

huge difference.

people who talk debate back and forth and work to understand other points of view.

people who argue cuss you out and mock you and put on the smug face.

I didn't say argue, make an argument is about putting thing together, forming something that is not just full of insults and tangents and the like.

Trying to push someone into saying something so you can then be "there, see, told you" when the reality is something different, is arguing, not debating. If you want to talk sensibly about things, then good, if not then just let me know.

 

[BULLDOG]

wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, they are so mean. somebody stop them

see - this is where the real danger lies.

you - i would guess - don't care for trump. ergo the media hit pieces are great for you and cannon fodder to make your day a sure fire giggle fest.

but what if it were turned? the media should not have this *Power* they claim they do not have. many people for whatever reason still look to CNN, Fox and other outlets as viable in trying to sort through the clouds of bullshit out there today.

in truth - they fan those flames and send up whatever smoke signal sells.

if you're ok with it being done to trump i hope you're ok when it works against you - cause it will. our sense of "fair play" died over the last decade and if we're gonna get through this, we need it back.

The article was about specific steps that trump has taken which reduce the chances of a successful trip. You don't think the diplomats he will meet will be offended or have a lesser opinion of him for refusing to visit one of Israel's most revered sites just because he can't land his helicopter there, or that his supposed visit to another of their most revered sites is reduced to a 15 minute photo op? It's like he is trying to make the visit a disaster. His arrogance might have worked with contractors, but it is a detriment to diplomatic relations

i'm sure it is to many but i doubt to all.

and great - but put the article to the headline now - is it already a disaster or is that trying to tell me how to feel about "said steps"? given the media will "hit job" him at will, how do i know what they say is even true?

Only an idiot would believe "said steps" would do anything but reduce the chances of a successful trip. Insulting your host before you get there is not a good way to start.

yea, but insulting the subject of your story before he even starts is ok.

again - put trump hate aside. you don't do this. you don't tell people how to feel as a journalist.

iNSULTING? Calling a stupid action stupid might make him feel insulted, but it's not the journalist's job to worry about Trumps feelings, or to sugar coat the facts If Trump and his supporters are sad because his actions are said to be stupid, the answer is to quit doing stupid stuff instead of pouting because a reporter accurately described what happened.

 

[Weatherman2020]

What statements in that article do you see as criticisms of Trump?

• Trump had planned to make a speech atop Masada. Those plans are no more mainly because Trump has refused to take the cable car trip to the plateau's top and make the speech.
• Trump has noted he doesn't want to take the trip.
• His aides are distraught over the risk that Trump will go "off script." (That's so domestically too and has been every since the 2016 campaign.)
• Do you deny that Israel's "local media was reporting complicated logistical details including only 15 minutes allotted for Trump's visit to Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Remembrance Museum in Jerusalem?
• Do you deny that Mrs. Trump will accompany him on the trip?
• Do you deny Miller's having a track record of anti-Muslim sentiment and rhetoric?

I don't think you understand the difference between criticizing and reporting information.

Read the headline, dufus.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

 

[Weatherman2020]

What statements in that article do you see as criticisms of Trump? I don't think you understand the difference between criticizing and reporting information.

"Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started"
This is the headline on the piece. Are you saying "disaster" indicates objectivity? A summary of the article couldn't have been something more benign, like "Changes being made to Trump Trip"? Really?

"Trump was set to take a cable car to the top, as visiting U.S. presidents before him have done, like George W. Bush in 2008 and Bill Clinton in 1998...But Trump doesn't do cable cars apparently, so the Masada visit is canceled..."
"But Trump doesn't do cable cars apparently" - yeah, no blatant cattiness there. The writer just had to cram that in there for journalistic integrity, right?

"Also while in Israel, local media was reporting complicated logistical details including only 15 minutes allotted for Trump's visit to Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Remembrance Museum in Jerusalem. Apparently this is enough time for a quick talk and to sign the guest book."
Same blatant, biased cattiness. See above.

"Another opportunity with lots of terrible potential is a speech Trump is planning to give about radical Islam in Saudi Arabia. The speech writer is none other than his policy adviser Stephen Miller. He's credited as one of the chief architects of Trump's failed travel ban to keep people from Muslim-majority nations out of the U.S. He also has a strong history of anti-Muslim rhetoric and beliefs."
Well, there's a nice, down-the-middle comment, right? "Lots of terrible potential'. Yeah, I don't see any opinion there, do you?

"His aides are apparently freaking out about the president going off script, walking into unfamiliar territory or making promises to foreign leaders that he can't keep."
"Freaking out". Was this written by a high school kid? Can you think of a more professional, objective way that could have been written?

"Welp, it’s not like Trump ever spontaneously says offensive things or gets distracted, so, um, this should end well."
Well, there's a perfectly appropriate end to the piece. Nice and objective and fact-based.

Is this really fact-based reporting to you? This thing is presented as an "article" and not a biased opinion piece, which is what it is.

Anyone who can't see the blatant LACK of professional journalistic objectivity in this "article" can only be so blinded by their own partisan ideology that they can't understand the difference between partisan bias and reporting information.

This is a PERFECT example of the bias the right screams about.
.

MSM knows the left only read the headlines.

 

[usmbguest5318]

What statements in that article do you see as criticisms of Trump? I don't think you understand the difference between criticizing and reporting information.

"Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started"
This is the headline on the piece. Are you saying "disaster" indicates objectivity? A summary of the article couldn't have been something more benign, like "Changes being made to Trump Trip"? Really?

"Trump was set to take a cable car to the top, as visiting U.S. presidents before him have done, like George W. Bush in 2008 and Bill Clinton in 1998...But Trump doesn't do cable cars apparently, so the Masada visit is canceled..."
"But Trump doesn't do cable cars apparently" - yeah, no blatant cattiness there. The writer just had to cram that in there for journalistic integrity, right?

"Also while in Israel, local media was reporting complicated logistical details including only 15 minutes allotted for Trump's visit to Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Remembrance Museum in Jerusalem. Apparently this is enough time for a quick talk and to sign the guest book."
Same blatant, biased cattiness. See above.

"Another opportunity with lots of terrible potential is a speech Trump is planning to give about radical Islam in Saudi Arabia. The speech writer is none other than his policy adviser Stephen Miller. He's credited as one of the chief architects of Trump's failed travel ban to keep people from Muslim-majority nations out of the U.S. He also has a strong history of anti-Muslim rhetoric and beliefs."
Well, there's a nice, down-the-middle comment, right? "Lots of terrible potential'. Yeah, I don't see any opinion there, do you?

"His aides are apparently freaking out about the president going off script, walking into unfamiliar territory or making promises to foreign leaders that he can't keep."
"Freaking out". Was this written by a high school kid? Can you think of a more professional, objective way that could have been written?

"Welp, it’s not like Trump ever spontaneously says offensive things or gets distracted, so, um, this should end well."
Well, there's a perfectly appropriate end to the piece. Nice and objective and fact-based.

Is this really fact-based reporting to you? This thing is presented as an "article" and not a biased opinion piece, which is what it is.

Anyone who can't see the blatant LACK of professional journalistic objectivity in this "article" can only be so blinded by their own partisan ideology that they can't understand the difference between partisan bias and reporting information.

This is a PERFECT example of the bias the right screams about.
.

You can say bias... But the is Yahoo News... Seriously.... The reporter is based in San Fran, if that doesn't get a liberal edge then what would we expect...

Bill Clinton suffered from Vertigo and he took the Cable Car... Sorry see that as a bit of an asshole thing to do..

Millar writing a speech to be delivered in Saudi, Sorry man that is just highly ironic. Millar is one of the major weak links in this admin...

Saying that the headline goes too far... All they have to do is wait a few day and put it in the past tense...

Bill Clinton suffered from Vertigo and he took the Cable Car... Sorry see that as a bit of an asshole thing to do.

Presumably you see Trump's refusal to take the cable car as the "asshole thing to do." If so, I agree.

Millar writing a speech to be delivered in Saudi, Sorry man that is just highly ironic. Millar is one of the major weak links in this admin...

That he is more a part of the problem than part of the solution is a shame and waste of talent for he's a fairly bright guy; however, after having established that of himself, he's proceeded to use his intellect in a "shoot from the hip" style to achieve a host of dubiously based ends in the service of a man who is aptly characterized, as the "Conspiracy Theorist, Cry Baby, and Ranter in Chief."

Saying that the headline goes too far... All they have to do is wait a few day and put it in the past tense...

Be that as it may, unless an act's outcomes are ineluctable, any discussions about the nature and extent of what they will be is editorial, thus not news.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Well, that "disaster" prediction just became more probable than it was this was this morning.

 

[BertramN]

People who remember history accurately can recall the many embarrassments Dubya caused the U.S. with his many faux pas when visiting foreign leaders.

Well, Dubya was an accomplished statesman when compared to Der Gropenfürher.

Der Gropenfürher's first trip abroad as POTUS is already beginning badly, as he is acting as the spoiled child he truly is. His army of advisers will have their hands full keeping Der Gropenfürher's feet out of his mouth for the nine days of the trip.

Unlike the consistent dignity shown by President Obama during his eight year administration, Der Gropenfürher's daily idiocy here at home is comic gold for late night talk shows, but, he is also the chief ambassador of our nation. Therefore, his usual boorish behavior offers the citizens of the countries he visits a terrible example of the American people.

Of course, conservative do not care how the American public is perceived overseas due to their misguided belief they are superior to all other human beings. This is how Der Gropenfürher won their votes, by feeding the conservatives’ insane belief in their own supremacy.

Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Yawn...at least he won't go around apologising to anyone that will listen like the Mocha Disaster did

 

[irosie91]

I am optimistic