Status
Not open for further replies.
Could you post the content, for those of us who can't access Twitter during the day? :)
Just a shoe dropping. When Jr. heard the Russians had stolen Clinton docs, apparently he immediately called one of Trump's best friends (and campaign advisor), Howard Lorber. The chances of this not being a preplanned arrangement to keep Trump in the loop while maintaining plausible deniability are something south of nil.
 
Trump Tweets

Just out: The big deal, very mysterious Don jr telephone calls, after the innocent Trump Tower meeting, that the media & Dems said were made to his father (me), were just conclusively found NOT to be made to me. They were made to friends & business associates of Don.

... whom he will not name. Voldemort?
 
I get the sinking feeling that the Trump Campaign operated very much like the Trump Administration: everyone working very hard to avoid involving Trump in an serious way.
It might very well be the case that a group of Trump advisers worked around Trump for the collusion with Wikileaks and Russia, knowing full well that Trump would only mess things up if he was asked to participate in any way.

oh. Good point, that does sound plausible to me.

But Trump knew that something was up, otherwise he wouldn't try so hard to keep his talks with Putin secret.

Trump's Putin connection may be an entirely different subject than the election interference.
 
She isn't spending enough time on distractions and clickbait stories.

Okay, then.

Nope. Everything but the Russia investigation takes second place.
On Wendesday, the big story on most shows was Trump's attacking his Intel advisors, but it just got a couple of brief mentions on Maddow, then it was back to some minor developments in the Russia investigation.
This is meant to be a friendly criticism of Maddown, not an attack.
 
I think the opposite of this is true, at least for me.

MSNBC's weekday evening news coverage is pretty damned good. If Chris Hays (8pm ET), Rachel Maddow (9 pm), Lawrence O'Donnel (10pm) and Brian Williams (11pm) all did a little bit on everything, all you would get is four versions of a little bit on everything.... That is very unsatisfying for a news hawk like me.

The strength of these four (and what they have got over outfits like Faux News) is that they are not "Sound Bytey". The news strories are analyzed thoroughly, and in depth.... Maddow on Russia, O'Donnell on Congress.

Each of the shows usually does an "anchor" piece; a 20 to 25 minutes of thoroughly researched in depth analysis on some part of the news cycle, and then a few short "supporting" pieces 5 to 10 minutes long to make up the hour.

Maddow, in particular sometimes finds herself dealing in subjects that are outside of her area of expertise; instead of doing a Tucker Carlson or Hannitty, i.e. trying bluff and blather their way though it, she gets people in to help explain aspects of the the laws or proceedings that she does not understand. These are regular contributors to her show...

Barb McQuade (former US Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan).
Chuck Rosenburg (former former acting head of the DEA).
Frank Figliuzzi (former Assistant Director for Counterintelligence at the FBI).
Joyce Vance (former US Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama).
Jill Wine-Banks (one of the prosecutors during the Watergate scandal and former US General Counsel of the Army)

These people bring a wealth of knowledge and experience to any US political discussion. I always come away from watching these shows with a sense of being better informed and having a better understanding of what is currently happening in US politics.

I just think even "Personality" driven news show should cover most of the days news;with Maddow it is often almost exclusively the Russia Probe, even on days when the developments there are pretty minor, and other stories are probably more important.
 
I can buy the Trump team insulating Trump. I can't buy Trump understanding that he needed to be insulated.
 
Nope. Everything but the Russia investigation takes second place.
On Wendesday, the big story on most shows was Trump's attacking his Intel advisors, but it just got a couple of brief mentions on Maddow, then it was back to some minor developments in the Russia investigation.
This is meant to be a friendly criticism of Maddown, not an attack.

And yet you call her Mad-down, you sexist! ;)
 
I can buy the Trump team insulating Trump. I can't buy Trump understanding that he needed to be insulated.

Why would he need to be insulated? He has a very good brain, after all. He's a very stable genius. He knows more about campaigning than any campaign manager, and he knows more about the law than any lawyer. He knows more about Russia than our intelligence services.
 
Why would he need to be insulated? He has a very good brain, after all. He's a very stable genius. He knows more about campaigning than any campaign manager, and he knows more about the law than any lawyer. He knows more about Russia than our intelligence services.

You forgot, and there was no collusion. :p
 
You forgot, and there was no collusion. :p

Exactly! There was nothing to insulate him from, because there was no collusion! And even if there was collusion, collusion isn't a crime! And even if there is a crime, it's just some low-level coffee-fetchers rather than anyone important to the campaign! And even if it was someone important, it didn't affect the outcome of the election, so it's not significant! And even if it affected the outcome, it's Obama's fault for not taking swift action when he learned about the Russian interference! And even if Obama's couldn't take action because McConnell blocked it, Benghazi! 17 Angry Democrats!

The Wall, the Wall!

okay, maybe I should have less coffee in the morning.

(in my mind, the Wall is spray-painted orange and has tufts of yellow hair on the top, blowing in the wind)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom