Althouse: "Oh, brother - if more and better tape emerges proving this was a bum rap on Lewandowski delivered by fellow sure to be characterized as a Trump-bashing media elitist, then yike."

March 11, 2016

"Oh, brother - if more and better tape emerges proving this was a bum rap on Lewandowski delivered by fellow sure to be characterized as a Trump-bashing media elitist, then yike."

"Even paranoids have real enemies, and even righties have real fears about a hostile media. Not Helpful to run towards the flames with a can of gasoline. DISCLOSURES: I am #NeverTrump with a long history of distrusting the media, so take a moment to imagine my angst... UPDATE... Unless C Lew and the security guy have extraordinary footwork I don't see how C Lew grabs Fields on her left arm without blocking the security guy. OTOH, the security guy could easily grab Fields' left arm, drag her back, and slide right by...."

Either you know what that's about or you don't. But steel yourself for endless he-hit-me stories from the press (as they jostle for position and feel roughed up) and from protesters at political rallies who get right where they only need to provoke one intemperate Trump enthusiast to make trouble for the politician they hate.

221 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 221 of 221

cubanbob said...: If Trump becomes the nominee all of the lefty agitators getting the shit kicked out of them at rallies they went to sabotage won't budge the I give-a-crap needle for anyone inclined to vote for Trump. Probably bring him more undecideds than he would lose.; 3/12/16, 3:11 AM
rcommal said...: *shrug*

at the end of the day, there's nothing worth cheering for, any more

you ALL have won

bless your hearts, 'n' all; 3/12/16, 3:12 AM
CachorroQuente said...: Grackle wrote:
And that “probably the guy that threw Jorge Ramos out … ” is weak. I’m not much impressed with stuff people “probably” know. Speaking of the Jorge Ramos incident.

I guess that it's possible that you honestly misunderstood what I wrote.

The Trump security guy that I was referring to is a retired NYPD detective named Keith Schiller. He is the guy that escorted Jorge Ramos out of the Trump rally, he is the guy who had a physical confrontation with a protester outside the Trump building; the exact nature of that confrontation is in dispute and some claim that Schiller was not the aggressor. He is still on the Trump security case. He shows up on TV just about every day. When Trump is recorded leaving his plane, Schiller is with him. When Trump is giving one of his goofy news conferences, Schiller is hovering around.

Schiller is very distinctive in appearance and is easily identifiable.

That is why I said he is probably the most identifiable of the non-secret service security that DilDon has.

He's been providing security for Dumb Dumb for a long time -- 16 years at least. People who know him speak highly of him, apparently. If you watch the videos about the Trump enterprise in Scotland, you will see Schiller toting Trump's gulf clubs around an airport, so he does more than just provide security -- at least he has in the past. Maybe he no longer provides gulf club relocation services or soap or whatever.

So, it's obviously true that not all Trump security is provided by the Secret Service. You are free to disregard the facts if you desire, reality does not hinge on your acquiescence.

"When I saw that tape of Ramos being put out was when I became a Trump supporter. Witnessing a public figure finally stand up to an asshole like that was deeply satisfying."

Seems an odd reason to support a political candidate.

Logic goes something like:

Jorge Ramos is a bigger dickhead than Donald Trump.

Therefore, Donald Trump is my man as opposed to any of the other Republican candidates.

Sequitur-wise, this is non.; 3/12/16, 3:16 AM
tim in vermont said...: I'm voting for Rubio because he is clearly lousy at this cut throat politics that has destroyed the Republican brand.; 3/12/16, 5:06 AM
Rusty said...: Blogger Terry said...
Any idea who is behind BLM? Who runs the organization? Who pays the bills? This is a group that demands racial privilege for their group and has no use for democracy. You'd think the press would be interested in a group like that.

Start with Soros and go from there. Soros finances a lot of fascist activities.; 3/12/16, 8:09 AM
Chuck said...: David said...
Chuck: "Show of hands; who is old enough to remember the Chicago Democratic Convention of 1968? Who finds tonight reminiscent of that week?"

Chuck, Chicago 1968 was a couple of orders of magnitude worse than what happened tonight. You are confusing television clips with reality.

So you quote me, but chop off my parenthetical comment that the protests last night were on a far, far smaller scale than Chicago '68. "(On a far, far smaller scale.)"

And then you scold me that Chicago '68 "was a couple orders of magnitude worse than what happened tonight." Huh?

Just exactly what sort of mendacious asshole are you?; 3/12/16, 8:10 AM
Bob Ellison said...: Rusty asks an interesting question: "Any idea who is behind BLM? Who runs the organization? Who pays the bills?"

Who knows? Who will report on it?

Chicago 1968 really was worse than what happened last night, but Chicago 1968 was at the Democratic Convention in the summer, much later in the political cycle, and it was a storm between Chicago's Democratic machine and a cultural movement by radical leftists.

This might be happening again. The GOP convention will be in Cleveland, and the Dem one in Philadelphia. Both sites are somewhat powder-keggy.; 3/12/16, 8:26 AM
Fritz said...: eddie willers said...
Show of hands; who is old enough to remember the Chicago Democratic Convention of 1968?

I am.
And I also remember that Nixon won the election.

That was my thought, too. Funny, Bill Ayers is stumping for Trump. Does he know it?; 3/12/16, 8:34 AM
Chuck said...: Bob Ellison:

You ask a wonderful question: Who will report on it? ["It" being the money, power and influence behind BLM. The dubious motives and policy stances of BLM, MoveOn, and several others.]

There is an answer. Try this; Google "black lives matter" and "The Weekly Standard" together.

You'll find maybe a dozen or more good, conservative exposees of things relating to "Black Lives Matter" and its tactics. For years, The Weekly Standard, the National Review and others have all done a good job of acting as a journalistic check on the left-leaning mainstream media, and telling the real story of the left-wing activist groups.

But you may see less of that this election cycle.

Because, you see, The Weekly Standard and the National Review have disowned Donald Trump in the most emphatic way. They want no part of Trump's bellicose taunting on the campaign trail. They've observed what a liar Trump is. They won't be much motivated, to fight the good fight against BLM, if it amounts to some sort of support for Trump.

I never liked anything about Trump; least of all his emotional pull, on less-educated working class stiffs who might be susceptible to the emotional. We'd both agree, I expect, that the BLM movement is another sort of emotionalist extremism. I find both distasteful and toxic. And in combination with each other they are absolutely dangerous.; 3/12/16, 8:49 AM
damikesc said...: I'm not blaming Trump for Chicago. Bernie and Hillary are to blame here. They need to bring their idiot supporters under control. Trump's supporters are bad...but the pro Dem camp is magnitudes worse.; 3/12/16, 9:15 AM
Chuck said...: damikesc:

I think you make a good point; I'd express it differently.

The conservative press has, to a very great extent, done a good job in speaking out against the excesses and abuses of the Donald Trump campaign.

The liberal press ought to do the same, speaking against BLM and MoveOn.

But I say as I did before; BLM interrupted a Sanders speech, and also two Hillary Clinton speeches. Yes, they are both courting black support. But BLM is a wide-scale, equal-opportunity nuisance.

It is always interesting to recall that Chicago '68 was a protest of the Democratic convention. Not the Republicans. Far-left college activists, protesting what was becoming the party of George McGovern, Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy.; 3/12/16, 9:37 AM
Big Mike said...: I remember watching the coverage of the police 'riot'. I was rooting for the cops.

Me too.; 3/12/16, 10:40 AM
Big Mike said...: As I understand it, Ms. Fields had to have been grabbed -- strongly enough to raise bruises -- by either a Secret Service agent or Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski.

My old aikido sensei told us in class that the Secret Service agents assigned to protection details are trained to make people move without their being aware that they've been moved. A nudge here, a slight push while in midstride, just a slight touch at the right time and the person moves. So if Ms. Fields was grabbed and yanked, it had to have been by the untrained individual.

(N.B., I'm not sure how my sensei knew that but as he was a fourth degree black belt and living in the Washington metro area, it's fair to assume that he knew people who knew people.); 3/12/16, 10:48 AM
grackle said...: The Trump security guy that I was referring to is a retired NYPD detective named Keith Schiller … He is still on the Trump security case. He shows up on TV just about every day.

Schiller used to be “up on TV just about every day.” But he hasn’t been seen guarding Trump since November of 2015, which is when Trump was given Secret Service protection.

So, it's obviously true that not all Trump security is provided by the Secret Service. You are free to disregard the facts if you desire, reality does not hinge on your acquiescence.

No, it’s not “obviously true” at all. If Schiller “shows up on TV just about every day” it should be no problem for the commentor to locate a recent image created after November 2015 that has both Trump and Schiller in it and provide a link to it. There’s lots of recent images of Trump on the internet – loads of them. We’ll be waiting …

In the meantime, we do have recent images to look at. Take the Michelle Fields incident for example. There’s lots of images and videos of Trump leaving that rally. And those images have men close to Trump that are obviously Secret Service. But Schiller appears in none of them.

Seems an odd reason to support a political candidate. Logic goes something like: Jorge Ramos is a bigger dickhead than Donald Trump. Therefore, Donald Trump is my man as opposed to any of the other Republican candidates. Sequitur-wise, this is non.

The commentors logic – not mine. My logic is that Ramos is a propagandist for far-left La Raza causes claiming to be a journalist that has gotten away with dictating and pontificating to public figures on the right without challenge. But Trump unceremoniously ejected him when he tried taking over a Trump event. No other candidate or political figure had the courage of their convictions until Trump did it. After that I saw Trump in a different, more favorable light. I favor Trump for many reasons but that particular spectacle became the beginning of my personal pro-Trump cascade.

So if Ms. Fields was grabbed and yanked, it had to have been by the untrained individual.

Nope. Readers, view the video at the below link. In it you will see a Secret Service “roughing up” a reporter who had stepped out of bounds.

http://tinyurl.com/j65n8qm; 3/12/16, 1:36 PM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Chuck said...3/11/16, 4:36 PM

"Sammy: ....

And the reason for zero complaints, which produced the "A" rating, is because Trump University a/k/a Trump Entrepreneur Initiative had no students. No students = no complaints. No complaints = "A" rating. "

Donald Trump just repeated this now on Fox News Sunday, (about the "A" rating from the Better Business Bureau) and complained about Megyn Kelly not telling the audience. Chris Wallace said they wouldn't do anything without checking, but he did not say, (I think - I didn't hear all of it) that that "A" rating was misleading.

Viewers could be left with the impression that it wasn't.

Donald Trump also claimed the university was only shut down because of the lawsuits and would re-open after he won the case (if I understand what he said correctly); 3/13/16, 9:38 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Chris Wallace also mentioned the New York Times story in the Saturday paper:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/12/us/politics/donald-trump-trump-university.html

He said that one person who has been in an anti-Trump ad told the New York Times that he gave his approval rating because the instructor told him he'd be fired.

Actually he told him he would be fired by "Mr. Trump" I guess Chris Wallace didn't want to report that exactly, because that would mean that Trump was actually doing the hiring and firing, and Fox News doesn't think he was.

The instructor actually had probably distorted the actual situation. My understanding is that Trump's involvement in hiring was at most maybe vetoing some people based on resumes when he took the time to peruse them - and taht was mostly for higher ranking people. It seems to be a fact, though, that if instructrs got too many rating below 5 they were fired.

Trump was claiming on Fox News Sunday that they said it was no good because they thought they could make money in lawsuits. That's his line. The New York Times gives several reasons for the good ratings. First, people who dropped out didn't give any ratings and Trump University was actually giving people refunds. Second, the collection of the ratings was done using a method which you'd never do if you wanted honest ratings - academic institutions do not rate professors this way. Yes, they could be anonymous, but the students weren't told that. In some cases, a positive approval was a condition for receiving a graduation certificate. (The instuctor made that a condition)

Furthermore, the students' association with Trump U. was not over at the time of the rating - people were told there'd be a 1-year's worth of counseling, and they didn't want to aleinate the instructor.

The New York Times didn't even call attention to the fact that this was a rating of the instructor, not of the value of the course.; 3/13/16, 9:42 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Original Mike said...Apparently a group called "People for Bernie" is responsible for the Chicago riot.

chickelit said...3/12/16, 2:15 AM Look at the faces of the perps. Do they look like Bernie people? Them people are drowning in soros.

It's a two-fer. It's people for Hillary Clinton who are doing this (to motivate their voters more against Trump, by backward reasoning, i.e., if protests are so strong, Truiump must really be ad) and want to blame it on Bernie (so that moderate Democrats get repelled by him.

The truth of the matter is, the "Black Lives Matter" people once chased Bernie off a stage.; 3/13/16, 10:32 AM
CachorroQuente said...: grackle:"No, it’s not “obviously true” at all. If Schiller “shows up on TV just about every day” it should be no problem for the commentor to locate a recent image created after November 2015 that has both Trump and Schiller in it and provide a link to it. There’s lots of recent images of Trump on the internet – loads of them. We’ll be waiting"

OK, here you go. Starting at about 12 seconds in you can see Schiller right behind DilDon's mail-order Russian bride, keeping his beady little eyes peeled, doing his job, earning his pay. At about 38 seconds he turns to the camera.

Grackle: "The commentors logic – not mine."

You're changing your tune. This is what you said previously:

"When I saw that tape of Ramos being put out was when I became a Trump supporter. Witnessing a public figure finally stand up to an asshole like that was deeply satisfying."

Those are your words, not mine, and there they are, right here in this comment thread. Not like I'm quoting you out of context from years ago or anything. It's right there in this comment thread. Ramos is a bigger asshole than Dumb Dumb so you're voting for Trump.; 3/13/16, 5:56 PM
chickelit said...: CachorroQuente said...Starting at about 12 seconds in you can see Schiller right behind DilDon's mail-order Russian bride,...

Thank you for your old lady virtue signalling.; 3/13/16, 6:32 PM
CachorroQuente said...: "Thank you for your old lady virtue signalling."

You're more than welcome.; 3/13/16, 11:57 PM
grackle said...: You're changing your tune. This is what you said previously: "When I saw that tape of Ramos being put out was when I became a Trump supporter. Witnessing a public figure finally stand up to an asshole like that was deeply satisfying."

Nope. Here’s my “tune,” unchanged in any manner.

My logic is that Ramos is a propagandist for far-left La Raza causes claiming to be a journalist that has gotten away with dictating and pontificating to public figures on the right without challenge. But Trump unceremoniously ejected him when he tried taking over a Trump event. No other candidate or political figure had the courage of their convictions until Trump did it. After that I saw Trump in a different, more favorable light. I favor Trump for many reasons but that particular spectacle became the beginning of my personal pro-Trump cascade.

Tactic: take a quote out of context, quoting only part of it. Sort of like the MSM does with Trump so often.

The readers are the ultimate judges on these mini-debates.; 3/15/16, 12:59 PM