Show trial tonight

[Seymour Flops]

-----------------------------------------------------

And then the observation by poster Flops that DonT was maybe "Trump-ing it up a little too much" on J6 resonates.
That 'too much' Trumpery evidently was too much for Rupert Murdoch.

See, this is the difference between an unfortunate person suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, and one not suffering from that malady.

I am pretty sure that Rupert Murdoch used to own Fox News and maybe founded it. He may still own it, I'm not sure. So, whatever point you made by that statement about him, goes over my head. Or beneath me, I might prefer to say.

I don't think of Trump as Satan, so I don't need to do a demonological analysis of his followers, former followers, or whatever. I also don't think of him as God, so I need not obsessively inform myself of who is faithful to him and whose faith may be suspect.

When Trump does things like run on a promise to put America first, to secure the border and to build a wall, I agree with that. When he negotiated the Remain in Mexico policy with Mexico, I strongly agreed with and gave him credit for that. When he finished four years without building a wall, and without getting our troops out of Afghanistan, I disagreed with that and think that he should have known that Biden would botch the withdrawal.

He's like any other politician, and I judge him accordingly.

This coverage is widespread today:

"Donald Trump has lost the confidence of both of the major newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation."

Under the headline, "The President Who Stood Still on Jan. 6," The Wall Street Journal editorial board harshly criticized the former president.

"No matter your views of the Jan. 6 special committee, the facts it is laying out in hearings are sobering. The most horrifying to date came Thursday in a hearing on President Trump’s conduct as the riot raged and he sat watching TV, posting inflammatory tweets and refusing to send help," the editorial board wrote.

"The committee’s critics are right that it lacks political balance," the newspaper wrote. "Still, the brute facts remain: Mr. Trump took an oath to defend the Constitution, and he had a duty as Commander in Chief to protect the Capitol from a mob attacking it in his name. He refused. He didn’t call the military to send help. He didn’t call Mr. Pence to check on the safety of his loyal VP. Instead he fed the mob’s anger and let the riot play out."

The editorial concluded, "Character is revealed in a crisis, and Mr. Pence passed his Jan. 6 trial. Mr. Trump utterly failed his."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Comments about Murdoch's NYPost's editorial are in the following post.

Well I typed all that about not knowing much about Murdoch before I read that. It still applies, but at least now I know what you're talking about.

So Trump "lost confidence" of major newspapers? That is absurd. Not that newspapers lost confidence in him, but that anyone thinks that it matters a hill of beans. Does the New York Times and the Washington Post have "confidence" in Joe Biden? Does it matter if they do?

BTW, your bolded quote says "two newspapers," but the larger quote only mentions the Wall Street Journal. Quick! What's the other one? I'm simply dying to know!

Hint: a link would be nice . . .

 

[Independent thinker]

-----------------------------------------------------
First, I won't dispute IT's opinion that the descriptions of DonT's behavior by his own staffers and lawyers is accruing to the benefit of the Democrats.
But I'd submit that that is mostly an ancillary benefit. Not the intention. My take on it is those Republican staffers, lawyers, and campaign professionals are trying to launder their reputations and get on the right side of history. But....that is merely my opinion.

And then the observation by poster Flops that DonT was maybe "Trump-ing it up a little too much" on J6 resonates.
That 'too much' Trumpery evidently was too much for Rupert Murdoch.

This coverage is widespread today:

"Donald Trump has lost the confidence of both of the major newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation."

Under the headline, "The President Who Stood Still on Jan. 6," The Wall Street Journal editorial board harshly criticized the former president.

"No matter your views of the Jan. 6 special committee, the facts it is laying out in hearings are sobering. The most horrifying to date came Thursday in a hearing on President Trump’s conduct as the riot raged and he sat watching TV, posting inflammatory tweets and refusing to send help," the editorial board wrote.

"The committee’s critics are right that it lacks political balance," the newspaper wrote. "Still, the brute facts remain: Mr. Trump took an oath to defend the Constitution, and he had a duty as Commander in Chief to protect the Capitol from a mob attacking it in his name. He refused. He didn’t call the military to send help. He didn’t call Mr. Pence to check on the safety of his loyal VP. Instead he fed the mob’s anger and let the riot play out."

The editorial concluded, "Character is revealed in a crisis, and Mr. Pence passed his Jan. 6 trial. Mr. Trump utterly failed his."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Comments about Murdoch's NYPost's editorial are in the following post.

I have to point out that in 2016, Fox News and the like were very much anti-Trumpers. These Murdoch medias did everything in their power to stop Trump. It wasn't until Trump would become the obvious nominee that these media got in bed with Trump and did his bidding.

 

[Chillicothe]

CALL: BTW, your bolded quote says "two newspapers," but the larger quote only mentions the Wall Street Journal. Quick! What's the other one? I'm simply dying to know!
Hint: a link would be nice . . .

See post #240....following the Wall Street Journal quotes in #239.

RESPONSE: From Murdoch's New York Post's editorial board under the headline, "Trump's silence on Jan. 6 is damning."

 

[Seymour Flops]

See post #240....following the Wall Street Journal quotes in #239.

Oh, the New York Post? Well, that settles it then.

I was being snarky and sarcastic when I said that I was eager to know what the other newspaper was. Sorry that wasn't clear, and I thank you for answering, even though I didn't really expect you to.

Point is, who cares what any newspaper says? Journalism died during Obama's campaign and presidency.

 

[Chillicothe]

See, this is the difference between an unfortunate person suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, and one not suffering from that malady.

Well, I suffer from a malady or two, I suppose, but Trump Derangement Syndrome ain't one of them. Rather I find the development of Trump Sycophancy in so many of his supporters quite odd, quite noteworthy....and quite amusing at times.

Further, I've looked at this "TDS"-thingy as more applicable to his sycophantic supporters, the "Trump's Duped & Snookered".......than anything else.

You too?

 

[Chillicothe]

Point is, who cares what any newspaper says?

Well, it is true that readership in 'paper' newspapers has declined precipitously since the advent of the internet. However, both the Washington Post and the New York Times, to name just two, have secured greater paid readership via their online publication of their newspapers. In short, their readership as increased. I think that may apply to other large newspapers also.
(What is really dying though, are local newspapers that cover the county board meetings, the city council meetings, the local obits, the local millages. That is so sad. Without local reporters overing a school board or road commission meeting how can citizens stay informed, and how can those same citizens hold accountable the folks on those boards and commissions? IMHO)

But back to the issue of Murdoch's American newspapers...the WSJ and the NYP....the thing about them, the most notable aspect of that story is.....well, it is a 'the-worm-turns' story.
Both papers have been full-throated cheerleaders of DonT. Ever since 2016. Come thick or thin of the Trump trajectory in the nation's politics they have been his stalwart defenders.

So their editorial board's condemnation is newsworthy.

And does it signal a greater skepticism amongst the TDS'rs than we've heretofore witnessed?
What does that portend for Trump's national prospects?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Well, it is true that readership in 'paper' newspapers has declined precipitously since the advent of the internet. However, both the Washington Post and the New York Times, to name just two, have secured greater paid readership via their online publication of their newspapers. In short, their readership as increased. I think that may apply to other large newspapers also.
(What is really dying though, are local newspapers that cover the county board meetings, the city council meetings, the local obits, the local millages. That is so sad. Without local reporters overing a school board or road commission meeting how can citizens stay informed, and how can those same citizens hold accountable the folks on those boards and commissions? IMHO)

But back to the issue of Murdoch's American newspapers...the WSJ and the NYP....the thing about them, the most notable aspect of that story is.....well, it is a 'the-worm-turns' story.
Both papers have been full-throated cheerleaders of DonT. Ever since 2016. Come thick or thin of the Trump trajectory in the nation's politics they have been his stalwart defenders.

So their editorial board's condemnation is newsworthy.

And does it signal a greater skepticism amongst the TDS'rs than we've heretofore witnessed?
What does that portend for Trump's national prospects?

Sorry, I wasn't talking about the decline of newspapers, though I agree that loss of locals is a bad thing. I should have said "any news organization."

It doesn't matter what the news of any kind says about Trump, certainly not to Trump supporters. You believe that they will go home from one of Trump's record-breaking rallies, turn on the TV and think, 'oh, wait. That weird chick on MSNBC doesn't like Trump? I guess I don't either, then.'

The fact that any particular news outlets first laughed at Trump, then jumped on his bandwagon, and now are abandoning him, will not sway Trump's voters. They will see that as a flaw in the character of the news organization, not a flaw in Trump.

What anti-Trumpers may never understand is that Trump supporters support his policies and especially that he actually implements them. They don't support Trump because he is such an appealing personality. They support him because Trump is on their side.

 

[WEATHER53]

Amazing that considering the Russian hoax, the Ukrainian hoax, the contrived and crafted dossier, two failed impeachment attempts, the Mueller non delivery, Hillary destroying evidences, all of these deliberate actions that were taken and Democrats are doing a media spectacle over the Non Actions that they feel Trump should have taken.

 

[ElmerMudd]

Lastamender is far better liked and respected around here than you are, so..........................................

"around here" is dominated by Trump trained monkeys. The Trump trained monkeys are taught to hate and attack people like me. I consider being attacked and hated by the trained monkeys as an honor. Thank you!

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

"around here" is dominated by Trump trained monkeys. The Trump trained monkeys are taught to hate and attack people like me. I consider being attacked and hated by the trained monkeys as an honor. Thank you!

Cool. Nice that you get to feed your little ego that way.

 

[Faun]

How many of the rioters have been charged by the Biden Justice Department with insurrection?

A bunch have been charged with seditious conspiracy.

 

[Seymour Flops]

A bunch have been charged with seditious conspiracy.

So the "Insurrection" lie should be dropped?

 

[Faun]

why do you lie? and cut lies?

LOLOLOL

I posted that from the National Guard's official website. You think you know better than the National Guard??

You're fucking crazy.

 

[Faun]

So the "Insurrection" lie should be dropped?

Why? Seditious conspiracy was the planning of the insurrection.

 

[struth]

LOLOLOL

I posted that from the National Guard's official website. You think you know better than the National Guard??

You're fucking crazy.

because reporting to the president, doesn’t mean he has the right to send them into the city or the capitol without permission dumbass

 

[WEATHER53]

Why? Seditious conspiracy was the planning of the insurrection.

How were two dozen Buffalo Bills going to stop the government, take over the government, and implement their own polices?????
You loons live in feelings land with knee jerk , bullshit, clownish insurrection make pretends on an issue that is entirely infeasible .

 

[Faun]

I'll take a crack at that question, if struth won't mind too much.

Great, because struth has taken every opportunity to avoid answering it.

First and foremost, Nancy Pelosi and the Chief of the Capital Police had turned down Trump's offer to send NG troops to prevent any violence. The Chief, he could have ignored, but Nancy Pelosi is the leading member of a co-equal branch of government. Forcing the protection on her, would have been made into a constitutional crises by her lapdogs in the media. With some justice for a change. Imagine if Nixon had said, "If you impeach me, that could cause my supporters to riot, so I'm sending troops to protect you. In case you impeach me, you know?"

Did Nancy Pelosi ever contact the White House to say, "Ok, I changed my mind. Sent in the troops?" If not, why not? If the Jan 6 committee was really about investigating Jan 6, instead lynching Trump, they would have asked her that question.

Second and equally important, what effect would a bunch of NG soldiers in camo with assault weapons - under the command of Trump - have had on the Dems in that building?

The Capital police had already stood flat-footed and shot a woman for breaking a window. What if they took a shot at a National Guard squad?

It's a pity you had to lie though to answer it. Nancy Pelosi was not in charge of Capitol security. Case it point, you can't actually quote Nancy Pelosi rejecting National Guard presence that day because it's never proven she did.

But that aside, that still does answer the question for why Trump didn't call them up on the 6th when he saw his cult storming the Capitol.

And you lie about Benedict Babbitt. She was not shit for breaking a window. Shit, she didn't even break a window and the guy who actually did wasn't shot for breaking it.

 

[Faun]

Why are you trying so hard to keep Trump from running? Can't you beat him legally? Hell no you can't.

Because I don't want to see our government attacked again by his goons.

 

[struth]

Great, because struth has taken every opportunity to avoid answering it.



It's a pity you had to lie though to answer it. Nancy Pelosi was not in charge of Capitol security. Case it point, you can't actually quote Nancy Pelosi rejecting National Guard presence that day because it's never proven she did.

But that aside, that still does answer the question for why Trump didn't call them up on the 6th when he saw his cult storming the Capitol.

And you lie about Benedict Babbitt. She was not shit for breaking a window. Shit, she didn't even break a window and the guy who actually did wasn't shot for breaking it.

i’ve answered the question…trump couldn’t order the military into the city without permission

hence why it offered days before. why it was turned down i don’t known

 

[Faun]

because reporting to the president, doesn’t mean he has the right to send them into the city or the capitol without permission dumbass

LOLOL

Your ignorance truly knows no boundaries. Again...

As such, the Commanding General of the D.C. National Guard is subordinate solely to the President of the United States.

subordinate

submissive to or controlled by authority​

Your ignorance aside, Pence was able to reach out to the acting Secretary of Defense who did call them up.

Why didn't Trump do that?

Why did Trump even wait over 3 hours just to ask his cult to leave the Capitol?