August 3, 2016

Why Trump won't step back from his remarks about Khizr Khan.

From the full transcript of Trump's intervieww with WaPo's Philip Rucker:
RUCKER: I have to ask you because this has been the story now for four days: the Khan family. I’ve seen the statements you’ve put out and what you had to say last night on Fox News. First of all, does it bother you that they continue to do interviews and sort of drive the —

TRUMP: Just unfair media. Just the unfair media. It’s purely and simply the unfair media.
Unfair media — said 3 times. That's exactly what he wants to say.
RUCKER: What do you mean by that?

TRUMP: They want the story to stay alive as long as possible.

RUCKER: Do you think they’re somehow trying to, the Khan family, are they on TV to try to help Hillary?

TRUMP: People have to form their own opinion. I’ve said everything I can say about it. I was viciously attacked from the stage, and I have a right to answer back. I’ve said everything I could say. I was viciously attacked on the stage, and I have a right to answer back. That’s all I have to say about it.
Again: repetition. These are clear statements, said twice. He knows what he wants to say. He was attacked, and when attacked he defends himself.
RUCKER: Do you understand why some people would say that you lack some sort of common decency?

TRUMP: I think frankly a lot of people agree with what I’m saying. I was viciously attacked on the stage. All I did was respond to it. Pure and simple. It should’ve been a one-hour story and they make it a longer story.
He doesn't take the bait and discuss his own "decency." He repeats the points already repeated: the media is unfair to him and he was responding to an attack.
RUCKER: It’s a four-day story.
Why did Rucker say that? I think he's prodding Trump to say he should have handled it differently, that it stayed in the media so long because he wouldn't agree with any of the outrage over his remarks. But Trump won't deviate:
TRUMP: I mean fine. So, I have no further thing to say other than I have a right to answer back.
Why won't Trump even concede that he could have handled it better? I think it's because if the media get him to step back on this one, they will only come up with the next one — I'll bet there are 3 or 4 lying there in the Rucker interview alone — and the media will dog him about that until he steps back. Every day, it will be a game of getting Trump to step back on something, and Trump's style and flow will be wrecked. He can see that's the game and he knows he can't play their game.
Just unfair media. Just the unfair media. It’s purely and simply the unfair media.
ADDED: Two issues I see in the Rucker interview — readymade as the new Outrage of the Day — are: 1. Where there's no voter ID law, people are just "voting and voting and voting" — "like 10 times." 2. When women experience sexual harassment in the workplace, they can choose to get a different job.

There's also the way Trump watches TV all the time and might have an attention deficit disorder. WaPo's Chris Cillizza analyzes the Rucker interview and notes this:
[Trump looks at a nearby television, which was tuned to Fox News.] Oh, did they have another one of these things go down? It’s terrible that crash. Never liked that plane, structurally. I never thought that plane could
Cillizza's take:
This is Trump. The dude watches a LOT of cable TV. And he appears to never be concentrating on any one thing for very long.
My take on that is: 1. Trump gave Rucker an interview but handled it in an alpha-male, dismissive way: He's also watching TV. 2. Trump can handle many things at once without losing his place. 3. Trump seems to have some depth of knowledge about the structural soundness of various planes.

Why didn't Rucker jump on #3 and test him? If that vignette about the plane is evidence of an inability to concentrate, as Cillizza would have it, why not test him, suddenly, on the spot, and smoke out the bullshit? I'd speculate: 1. Rucker failed to see his opportunity, or 2. Rucker had to worry that Trump actually could speak with impressive knowledge about the structural soundness of planes and didn't want to give Trump an opportunity.

338 comments:

1 – 200 of 338   Newer›   Newest»
MayBee said...

I watched CNN this morning, and they absolved themselves of any blame for keeping the story alive.

Freder Frederson said...

Because he will never admit to a mistake?

Sebastian said...

"I think it's because if the media get him to step back on this one, they will only come up with the next one" Right. But it's not either or. He can deflect the MSM attack with obfuscation, with expressions of concern for the dead soldier, with humor, with sarcasm, instead of just trying to bully his way through. His instincts about Khan were right and his urge to fight understandable but his skills are lacking.

"Every day, it will be a game of getting Trump to step back on something, and Trump's style and flow will be wrecked. He can see that's the game and he knows he can't play their game" Mostly correct. But he is in fact playing their game, which is: how can we make Trump look like an ill-tempered fool unfit for the presidency. O reinforced the meme, and of course the MSM is on board. Trump needs to step back and reassess.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

Never apologize and never explain?

gspencer said...

Trump has a chance of winning this thing.

But,

(and it's a big but),

He has to stop following his gut instincts, and start listening to people who are more knowledgeable in these matters.

Possible? Probably not. Trump has laid the rails of his life, and if past is prologue, he's bound and determined to follow them. Trains can only go back and forth on their rails, no going to either side of the rail bed.

rhhardin said...

It's not a mistake. He says what he wants, and is decent enough to get it right.

PC is saying what you know is wrong.

MayBee said...

I watched CNN for both the DNC and RNC. Every morning, after the RNC, there was some story they did not want to have to cover, but Donald Trump's failures made them. One morning (and for several days after), it was the Melania Trump plagiarism scandal. One morning it was that many good speakers were coming on after Prime Time coverage (so did President Obama, but everyone showed him). Oooooh, they lamented. We *wish* we could talk about how nice Melania's speech was, but we can't because the Trump camp just won't admit they'd plagiarized! We *wish* we could talk about Mike Pence's good speech but we can't because (I forget why).
And then, of course, came the DARKNESS of Trump's speech.

But the DNC??? They barely mentioned the boos, the walkouts, the firings. They showed clips of Michelle Obama over and over. Clips of President Obama over and over.

And now it is Khan. And Trump eating KFC. And Trump talking about a crying baby.

OH! And the absolutely unprecedented words from Obama yesterday, saying Trump was unqualified. Can you imagine if Bush had said that about Obama in2008? But no. CNN said this was a signal to moderate Republicans that they could move away from Trump


They are ridiculous, the media. And I don't even like Trump.

HeideCruise said...

The more he talks the better it is for Democrats.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

From my casual exposure, I've formed the tentative belief that an astronomer's go-to explanation is a collision of some sort, or maybe capture.

In ethology, it seems to be: Because that's how they behave as infants.

In politics, it seems that it's seldom disadvantageous to accuse the news media of unfairness.

Nonapod said...

Again: repetition.

That's his style. Trump loves repeating himself. He repeats himself a lot. For emphasis. He repeats himself to drive a point home. A lot.

MayBee said...

Just watched CNN doing a nice story about a female muslim Olympic athlete.
What did they want to ask her? About the Khan family, of course!! (she did not want to get involved and so didn't answer)

rhhardin said...

Our son died a hero so here's what you have to think about politics.

Trump: fuck you.

MayBee said...

Ace has a really good piece from last night.

Darrell said...

Except that Papa Khan has been exposed as a guy that made a fortune selling visas to any Muslim with enough money, no questions asked. And having deep connections with Hillary and Saudi money. He tried to disappear his internet history and websites, but the internet doesn't work that way. Republican globalists like Ryan and McCain will have to join the Democrat Party where they belong.

n.n said...

Khan and the Democrat ploy was to exploit his son's death as redemptive of a philosophy. The philosophy speaks for the man, but the man does not speak for the philosophy. It is a universal religion with a militant orientation. The Democrat's Pro-Choice is what it is and exposes their unprecedented bigotry. Obama owns the debasement of Khan son's sacrifice. Obama, Clinton et al own the mass abortion and conflagration of the Middle East, exported to Europe and America, which explains their resurrection of the "Soviet Union" boogeyman, and apoplectic opposition to Russia's productive efforts to stop their progressive wars and clean up their mess.

buwaya puti said...

Its not "unfair media"; thats how Trump says it but this is merely a simplistic and surface gloss.
Almost absurdly simplistic.
It is a propaganda machine, disciplined, centrally directed and paid for.
Its like calling the Chinese or Russian press "unfair".
The trouble is that the US public hasnt yet understood what their media really is.

HeideCruise said...

The game is to keep him talking and he plays right into their hands, because every time he opens his mouth we get to see more clearly who this man is. More people are rejecting him daily, even those of his own Party.

Nonapod said...

gspencer said...He has to stop following his gut instincts, and start listening to people who are more knowledgeable in these matters.

Possible? Probably not. Trump has laid the rails of his life, and if past is prologue, he's bound and determined to follow them. Trains can only go back and forth on their rails, no going to either side of the rail bed.


Pretty much this. There's no shortage of people who want to advise him, many of whom have great advice to give. But Trump's gotta Trump. As far as I can discern, accepting advice (help) to him seems like admitting defeat. And he's nothing if not stubborn. He never apologizes.

I'm afraid he'll steer the ship into the rocks before asking for help. He'd rather lose the election than acquiesce on anything. He knows he'll be fine either way. Too bad for everyone else I guess.

Darrell said...

The Muslim Brotherhood is probably thinking of making it look like Papa Khan and wife committed suicide as a result of Trump's mean words. That is the only way to salvage the situation and stop the investigation into Khan's past. Hillary would sign off on that. Don't be surprised if this happens.

Meade said...

"The trouble is that the US public hasnt yet understood what their media really is."

An anti-America front.

DanTheMan said...

It's a four day story! Because we've been pushing it for four days!

The first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club.

khesanh0802 said...

The Khan thing, then add Ryan thing, has me grinding my teeth. Even though I admire Trump's willingness to fight, I sometimes wish he would think a little harder before he speaks. Then I read Ann and agree completely that the press is trying to get him to back down and he won't acquiesce - a good thing. I also think about the headlines I have been reading for the last few days. It has been "Trump, Trump, Trump" on every site. Anybody have any idea what Hillary is up to? Is she on the news? She's not in the papers. Maybe the old adage that "you can say anything about me, just spell my name right" is correct.

mockturtle said...

The more Khan stays in the news, the more will be discovered about him [a lawyer who specializes in visas and immigration] and his motives. He apparently removed his web site in anticipation of scrutiny. I once heard it said that 'Satan always overplays his hand'. I believe this is true of the media, as well.

n.n said...

Darrell:

The same conflict of interest exhibited by the judge presiding over Trump's trial. The judge condones and facilitates mass emigration from not only Mexico, but also second and third-world nations, rather than addressing the causes for people to uproot their families in progressive numbers.

Brando said...

Kudos to Althouse for continuing with putting herself in the mind of the Trump shill--defending his insane ability to continue driving into ditches when any half-sane politician would have stayed on track. No, Trump did not need to take the bait, and no, even if he did have to take the bait--let's say the Khan story went viral without his help--he could have responded in a way that let the story die or used it to his advantage. But no, that would not be Trump, would it? An overgrown child who sees everything against him as unfair, and he has to snap back petulantly and ridiculously in a way that reveals the ugliness inside him.

The Khans, if anything, should be a Republican's natural ally--well to do immigrants who raised a son who served the country honorably and died for it. Trump might have co-opted their speech, noting that if Khan wasn't misinformed by the Clintons he would see that they're on the same side, wanting to fight the radicals and terrorists, and that in an ideal world we would be letting in people like them and not the kind of people who killed their son. He would have also mentioned that Clinton voted for the war that he died in, and that he would try to keep this country from wasting the lives of heroes like their son. That would bolster his support among Republicans, remind dovish Democrats why they don't like Hillary, and spin the narrative.

But no, now we have to hear that it's unfair that he is too dense to see he made a mistake, it is the fault of the same media that he is addicted to for reporting on the stupid things he has to say. Yes, always someone else's fault. If he loses this fall, do you think he would say "maybe I could have done things differently"? I'm sure it'll always be someone else's fault.

buwaya puti said...

The reach of the propaganda machine is impressive.
This goes even to paying for trolls on political blogs. This behavior is typical on several now, not just Althouse.
I have seen these before, at various times there were many such that were obvious Russian operators on Freerepublic, and elsewhere, and there have been far less sophisticated operators from China, but in high volume, as apologists for the South China Sea issue. These have been pushing a general hatred of the Philippines and Filipinos on overseas Chinese communities btw, for years. Just so you know where they are going.
Anyway, you can tell a broad-spectrum propaganda campaign is going on. Which makes sense, the stakes are huge. The masters are worried that the peasants are revolting.

exhelodrvr1 said...

He's absolutely correct; the question is if enough people will see through the hugely biased coverage enough to get a reasonably accurate comparison of the two candidates. That didn't happen in 2008 or 2012.

Brando said...

"Trump has a chance of winning this thing."

I still think it's technically possible, but it requires him to do something he hasn't been able to do yet--control himself for a sustained period of time and let the general dynamics of the race work in his favor. If the media's so unfair, why not stop feeding them ammunition? They haven't really had to work hard to make his words sink him.

harrogate said...

He's already pivoted to "the election is rigged" strategy. Does anyone in the world believe he would ever give a "concession speech"?

If he loses he'll scream voter fraud and a thousand Bundys will bloom. It'll be Bigly.

But it's the media that's unfair.

Ann Althouse said...

"Because he will never admit to a mistake?"

Yes, that's what I said too, but I'm interested in why not.

I guess you think there's just an obvious answer like: He's the kind of asshole that will never admit he's wrong.

Ann Althouse said...

"He can deflect the MSM attack with obfuscation, with expressions of concern for the dead soldier, with humor, with sarcasm, instead of just trying to bully his way through. His instincts about Khan were right and his urge to fight understandable but his skills are lacking."

But he did do that. He doesn't get credit for that. The media need him to take back the bad thing he said and he won't.

Darrell said...

n.n.--The head of the lawfirm bringing the lawsuit against Trump was also a pal of the Judge and a member of the same La Raza social group. That lawfirm had paid big fees to Hillary to have her speak and was participating in fund raising. Details don't matter anymore, just meemes. Like all the details that came out right after Benghazi that are never heard again.

HeideCruise said...

More juicy stuff from the WaPo interview:

"Trump, in an interview with The Washington Post published Tuesday, said of Ryan "I'm not quite there yet" — echoing language used by Ryan when he was reluctant to endorse Trump in May. Ryan eventually endorsed the GOP nominee. A spokesperson for Ryan said Tuesday neither Ryan nor anyone on his team sought an endorsement from Trump."

Reince Priebus reportedly "apoplectic". What a fool Paul Ryan was for endorsing Trump.

William said...

I saw Anderson Cooper's interview of Khan. Khan said all the right things about the Constitution, but in a somewhat muddled way. Cooper's questions were not probing, and the answers were accepted at face value.......Cooper showed no interest in eliciting this man's opinion on gay marriage or constitutional protections to the drawing of Mohammed cartoons........The subtext of Trump's campaign is media bias. When the media performs in a biased way against Trump, they actually buttress his campaign.

rhhardin said...

The media need him to take back the bad thing he said

What bad thing?

buwaya puti said...

The Khans have a background as part of the Democrat machine. You are dealing with people who feed off that spigot, Brando.
How to deal with such an issue I dont know, I am no expert in PR. But you are not dealing with persons of good will, you are dealing with enemy people in an enemy system.
I have experience here, back in the 80's during the anti-Marcos movement. The state press/media and the controlled private press behaved in much the same way, but in a far less sophisticated manner. The revolutionary opposition has to render the propaganda machine illegitimate, along with the regime it serves.

Nonapod said...

Ann Althouse said... Yes, that's what I said too, but I'm interested in why not.

I assume he follows the John Wayne school of thought on apologizing ("Never apologize, it's a sign of weakness").

The problem with that philosophy, in my opinion, is that it's appeal is not universal. It's massively appealing to a certain mindset, say 30 - 35% of the electorate (the so-called "Trump ceiling"), but a wider audience interpret that as just being an asshole.

Tommy Duncan said...

The media/DNC wants to take Trump out right now. They are going thermonuclear on Trump.

The danger for the media/DNC is that Trump will survive the onslaught. Once they've spent their ammunition their only option will be to repeat the process while Trump says "we've already been there and done that".

HeideCruise said...

"But he did do that. He doesn't get credit for that. The media need him to take back the bad thing he said and he won't."

He did far more than that. He also said that the Khans "had no right" to criticize him. He also whined that he was being "viciously attacked" by the Khans. How is this a reasonable response? How does he not realize how bad that makes him look? He's a candidate for the presidency for pity sake.

harrogate said...

" but a wider audience interpret that as just being an asshole."

And rightly so.

MayBee said...

Kudos to Althouse for continuing with putting herself in the mind of the Trump shill--defending his insane ability to continue driving into ditches when any half-sane politician would have stayed on track.

Remember War on Women and Binders Full of Women?
Remember the attacks that McCain was racist because he put Paris Hilton and Brittney Spears in an ad mocking Obama as a celebrity (this was because he was feeding the black male= rapist mentality we all have)

Trump is what always happens, ramped up because Hillary Clinton is actually really beatable.

So just remember this when Hillary Clinton is President. We will have a person known to hide her correspondence, known to be careless with classified information, and eager to lie (and continue lying once caught!) to the American people, and we will have a press who knows how to shout down any dissenters. The people who call others racist for opposing illegal immigration and for saying "All Lives Matter" will have won.

What could possibly go wrong?

wildswan said...

The Khan story will fall off as the fact the Mr. Khan makes money by assisting Moslem immigration and by lobbying for Saudis begins to spread.

But the fact that the globalists who dominate both parties and the media want Crooked Hillary will not. They will say and do anything. Including nominating or supporting our first feminist-rape-enabler as President and saying with a straight face that the nomination of a feminist-rape-enabler is an advance for women. Including disregarding Hillary's betrayal of national security. Including disregarding an American economy that has been bad for the last seven years.

The globalists have shared in the pickings arising from destruction of the American economy. That is all they care about. If NAFTA and other trade deals required other countries to abide by the laws which make American goods expensive then globalization would not have been such a blow. But instead our political class worked with other countries to lobby for exceptions - from everything. Even as regulation increased in this country the same group who forced through regulations here (the political/lobbyist class and their media jackals), that same group made sure it did not increase in the countries we made trade "deals" with and that the exemptions they got for other countries were never discussed in media forums.

Competition by Americans in these conditions is hopeless. Anger ensues

But the political/lobbyist class just gives the finger to those objecting to the situation they have imposed - that is, they raise a professorial finger and begin a lecture starting with "Racist Xenophobe" and ending with STFU. Then off to wagyu beef. And merry laughter over Americans, the stupid fools.

There's only one person standing up to this and that is Donald Trump.

n.n said...

The situation in the Middle East, Europe, and America must be more dire than we know, if the Democrats and JournoLists are actively attacking everyone who attempts to expose their cover-ups in foreign, domestic, and social matters. And to resurrect the "Soviet Union"... desperate.

HeideCruise said...

Trump's intractability on this matter and overall, makes him appear even less suited to be president. People are seriously wondering about his mental health.

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

"The media need him to take back the bad thing he said and he won't."

Why does Althosue have such a huge blindspot? Maybe she actually thinks that the media's making these demands rather than the media reporting Rs and veterans (e.g. vfw, and Palin son-in-law) who are making this point.

Hopefully she's intentionally misrepresenting reality here. Being genuinely unmoored to reality is a bigger problem.

buwaya puti said...

You dont get it - this will not stop. The machine is running, it will continue to run like this, in fact escalate, to the end. You are dealing with a state-controlled press/media.
They dont need to acknowledge anything, they have no need to retain credibility or even subscribers or revenues. They are a political mechanism, thats all.

Oso Negro said...

Our mellifluous mulatto doesn't spend a lot of time admitting that he is wrong, from what I have noticed - or could it be that I didn't watch enough TV the past eight years? That Hillary admits to mishandling documents after an FBI investigation does not make her a paragon of self-reflection. I hate Trump, but I hope the fucker forces the two major partied to merge. We should quite pretending.

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

Maybe Althouse is so used to believing the evil-lamestream media stuff that she doesn't pause to question it, even in a situation like this one which is clearly about much more than lib media attacking a con.

rehajm said...

The Thomason's taught the Clinton's never to apologize.

You will never hear them apologize for their actions. Others, sure, but never their own.

traditionalguy said...

Back down to Islam Khan. Prostrate yourself, you infidel idol worshiper who believe Jesus Christ is God. Do it Now! Or CNN will keep shaming you.

CNN knows who pays their paycheck. They are seriously puzzled why Trump does not also pay the Jizrah, bow to the Prophet, and build Trump Mecca where he can worship the black meteorite idol Mohammedans seriously call god.

Even Pope Francis thinks Trump is being silly to resist. Just bow down and worship, Trump! It is easy, and it pays big time.

HeideCruise said...

"Why does Althosue have such a huge blindspot?"

I blame Scott Adam's power of persuasion.

MayBee said...

buwaya puti said...
You dont get it - this will not stop. The machine is running, it will continue to run like this, in fact escalate, to the end. You are dealing with a state-controlled press/media.
They dont need to acknowledge anything, they have no need to retain credibility or even subscribers or revenues. They are a political mechanism, thats all.


Yes. This is what scares me.
I don't want Donald Trump to be President. But I don't want the machine we already have to gain more control.

n.n said...

Khan has a "black" heart and "dark" soul problem. The Democrats have a class diversity problem that stems from their twilight religion which is exacerbated by the "black" hole controversy.

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

"I don't want Donald Trump to be President. But I don't want the machine we already have to gain more control."

Is it a problem when the R briefing DJT about US nukes leaks how DJT responded to the briefing? It can't be a good thing if your own advisor is selling you out because you scared them w/ your eagerness to blowup countries w/ nukes.


buwaya puti said...

Note that the principal hole in the Philippine propaganda system, back then, was through the Catholic radio. This the regime was unwilling to suppress. There are many such holes in the US system, but the place is not, quite, in the pre-revolutionary situation where the common person will seek these alternate sources.
This election will escalate the situation far more into the pre-revolutionary state, no matter the outcome.
This is a very dangerous game, because the powers that be have mismanaged so very badly and are left with progressively cruder means.

jaydub said...

rhhardin said: "Our son died a hero so here's what you have to think about politics.
Trump: fuck you."

Were I their son I would also have said "fuck you" if I knew my parents were digging up my corpse 12 years later so that they could drag my bones around a political convention stage, particularly the stage of the political party that abandoned Iraq and made Afghanistan unwinable, hence made my "ultimate sacrifice" irrelevant.

But, if Trump didn't give the media something to be outraged about, they would invent their own - like claiming Trump called on the Ruskies to hack Clinton's email server, a remarkably outrageous claim given that Clinton's email server had already been erased, removed and locked up by the FBI; hence it was impossible to hack. Trump's pointing out that the Ruskies already had her emails because she had already been hacked by every two bit dictator in the world presented the media with a problem because they didn't want to have to open that particular can of worms. Solution? Just make crap up. This will go on unleast until November.

Alexander said...

HAVE YOU NO DECENCY!!!

Can we talk about how Khan (the father):

1. Named his son for a warlord who slaughtered Hindus.

2. Ran an immigration legal service to bring more Muslims into the United States, and possibly had a hand in selling citizenship.

3. Connections to Muslim brotherhood

Or is CNN simply too busy simulating how Trump eats his KFC to get into that? When they're not cutting away from families talking about their children being slaughtered by illegals.

Unfair media is too fair a term.

Big Mike said...

He can see that's the game and he knows he can't play their game.

@Althouse, you broke the code! That's how they have played their "gotcha" games with Republicans for years and Trump ignores their stupid games and They. Are. Going. Nuts.

In 1884 Grover Cleveland won the presidency on the campaign slogan “We love him most of all for the enemies he has made." It helped that his opponent, James Blaine, was one of the most personally corrupt individuals to ever run for President of the United States. Blaine's corruption didn't rise to Hillary Clinton levels, but it was pretty bad.

Will history repeat itself? Because I'm ready to vote for Trump for precisely those two reasons -- Hillary Clinton's corruption and the people who hate him. Hell, if PBandJ writes one more comment disparaging Trump I'm ready to send a donation to The Donald's campaign.

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

I disparage Trump.

mockturtle said...

What a fool Paul Ryan was for endorsing Trump.

Ryan has been wearing a kool-aid mustache ever since he became Speaker and I think most people have noticed.

walter said...

HeideCruise said...
The game is to keep him talking and he plays right into their hands, because every time he opens his mouth we get to see more clearly who this man is. More people are rejecting him daily, even those of his own Party.
--
And that explains keeping Hil from pressers and anything and anyone not vetted by her helicopter staff.

YoungHegelian said...

Ya ever notice how when Muslims are interviewed they never get asked about

1) Do they believe in evolution (they don't)
2) Do they think that Muslim bakers should be required by law to bake cakes for gay weedings?
3. Do they support gay marriage & equal rights for homosexuals?
4. Why aren't Muslims okay with chix with dix in the ladies' room?

Strange how issues can be so important that a state can be boycotted for crossing them, but here we have multiple interviews with a genuine Muslim legal scholar & not one press outlet has thought to ask him --- 'Why do Muslims believe this about X"?

Because only Christians can be h8ters, doncha know.

hombre said...

Khan is a Sharia huckster whose law firm represents Middle East immigrants and there is no constitutional issue.

End of story but for the corruption of the Clinton mediaswine.

Fernandinande said...

khesanh0802 said...
It has been "Trump, Trump, Trump" on every site. Anybody have any idea what Hillary is up to?


Pretty close:
washingtonpost.com: 16 Trump mentions, 6 Clinton.
cnn.com: 16 Trump, 3 Clinton.

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

B.M.

Now you'll be joining me, sorta. I sent money to the Trump pro veteran thing that occurred during the primary debate.

I would never send money for DJT's benefit, but I did funnel dough to vets through him.

YoungHegelian said...

Gay "weedings"?

Maybe autocorrect knows something about gay gardening technique that I don't?

Hagar said...

OK PB&J,
Why do we have nukes if we can't use them?

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

Btw, I have received zero followup dough or support requests from the DJT campaign. I think it's noble they haven't gone after vet donors to make dough for the campaign. Or, maybe the campaign management is such a mess that they haven't gotten around to this yet.

Jack Wayne said...

Buwaya, are they really worried?

Unknown said...

Gingrich,Christie, Gulliani trying to enlist Trump children in an "intervention" for Trump! A presidential candidate that needs an intervention. LOL!

Curious George said...

"HeideCruise said...
Trump's intractability on this matter and overall, makes him appear even less suited to be president. People are seriously wondering about his mental health."

People.

M Jordan said...

The media is going for the knockout here. Obama telegraphed this yesterday. It's really a terrible thing to have a media so in concert with one political party, but it is what it is.

At any rate, when you do go for the knockout, you had better connect. You only have one chance to kill the king.

My gut instinct is that they have swung and missed. I predict a slight poll rebound starting tomorrow. And if I'm right, the media/Democratic machine will have inoculated Trump from another virus.

n.n said...

I wonder if this means that the anti-native factions have a renewed respect for the sacrifices of our soldiers, police, border guard, etc. Probably not. The Democrats have a Pro-Choice problem. Their principles are selective, even arbitrary.

The overlapping and converging interests with what is ostensibly their competitors is revealing. They are both phobic that their status quo is being challenged. It is telling that their reaction to Obama's "redistributive change" did not approach these feverish levels. The situation must be far more volatile than their JournoLists will publicly acknowledge.

buwaya puti said...

Only partly into the media issue, but -
Should Trump win, do you imagine he will be in office for very long? He will instantly trample over some rice bowl (he would have to, if he means anything he says), create an "issue" that could easily be "trumped up", an absolute certainty given the nature of the press. An impeachment will follow, and there is far more than enough money on the other side to buy a sufficient majority.
That is the desperate state you are in.

M Jordan said...

On a related note, I wonder how Mr. Khan feels about homosexual marriages.

Unknown said...

NBC News reported:

Key Republicans close to Donald Trump’s orbit are plotting an intervention with the candidate after a disastrous 48 hours led some influential voices in the party to question whether Trump can stay at the top of the Republican ticket without catastrophic consequences for his campaign and the GOP at large.

Republican National Committee head Reince Priebus, former Republican New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich are among the Trump endorsers hoping to talk the real estate mogul into a dramatic reset of his campaign in the coming days, sources tell NBC News.

The group of GOP heavyweights hopes to enlist the help of Trump’s children – who compromise much of his innermost circle of influential advisers – to aid in the attempt to rescue his candidacy.

The Republicans are worried that Trump will reject the concept of an intervention, and refuse to listen to them



Oh hahahahahaha! Who would've ever guessed it would come to this?

Brando said...

"How to deal with such an issue I dont know, I am no expert in PR. But you are not dealing with persons of good will, you are dealing with enemy people in an enemy system."

They have less power than most on the right recognize--particularly these days with so much media splintered. But even still, Republicans from Nixon to Reagan were experts in using them. When a politician flails around and makes their job easier, we shouldn't excuse them, particularly when that flailing suggests a personal flaw that will repeat itself.

"Remember War on Women and Binders Full of Women?"

I don't think Romney was a good example of dealing with the media either. Hell, his whole "binders" answer, even without the misspeak, was a weak response to Obama's answer (which was just "Lilly Ledbetter!" and should have been exposed as the creampuff it was).

n.n said...

Unfortunately, for the JournoLists' tale, the Democrat ploy is undermined by the terrorism exported by Obama, Clinton, Merkel et al to Europe and America. The refugees of progressive wars in the Middle East, and the effort to pin a "yellow star" on Russia, are failing to sustain their ball of yarns. Most people are not Pro-Choice and do not defer to their faith nor accept their religion.

Anglelyne said...

Brando: The Khans, if anything, should be a Republican's natural ally...

Naïvété of such depth is touching in an adolescent, shameful in a grown man.

n.n said...

do you imagine he will be in office for very long? He will instantly trample over some rice bowl

Another Watergate? Perhaps. But it will not be The Washington Post that will back him into a corner. They lack credibility, so it must be another operation. Maybe a trans-social pornographer/humanitarian.

EDH said...

Clinton strategy in a nutshell:

1.) Hide Hillary.

2.) Disqualify Trump early through the media so that damaging national and world events can't take over the narrative.

3.) Give Hillary the space to refuse to debate Trump.

hombre said...

I notice that the recent appearing, presumably paid, trolls here simply beat the drum of the Clinton campaign and the leftist mediaswine. "It's all about Trump."

Standard, transparent tactics for those who promote influence peddling and incompetence in government. "Dead broke" Hillary and Bill's net worth now exceeds $100 million. Hillary destroyed Libya, killed Americans and created and armed ISIS. She took and concealed donations from Russians and approved sale of uranium to them. Hillary and the Obots put Putin back on the map and helped create the refugee crisis with their weakness. She violated federal law and jeopardized national security by hiding her emails in her bathroom. And more.

This is their candidate? Amoral trolls.

Hagar said...

For the Clintons' net worth, you need to add the value of the "non-profits" they control.

rehajm said...

Not that anyone cares about policy decisions and their impact on the quality of life of our citizens anymore but there's a very good reading of the future we're facing from John Cochrane this week.

rhhardin said...

Candidate explains Hillary's white dress. It's from candidus, white, referring to white robes.

rhhardin said...

The analog to Obama's Greek columns.

EMD said...

"control himself for a sustained period of time and let the general dynamics of the race work in his favor. "

Bullshit. No matter what he says or does it will be a story. This is how DNCNN operates.

GRW3 said...

A lot of people are watching the Republican establishment, me included. We wonder why they can't take the same aggressive stance any democrat would in the same position. Each one, when asked, should have said something to the effect of "What about Hillary calling the Bengazi Moms liars?"

Not ready to endorse Ryan yet? What goes around comes around. A lot of us had to swallow hard for McCain and Romney. These guys were pushed by the establishment types who've made it clear they don't care for the will of the people.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

I left work last night after 11pm and when I stepped into the elevator the CNN show playing silently had a split screen--a host and 3 people, with the chyron (all caps) showing "TRUMP KICKS MOTHER AND CRYING BABY OUT." That was the big news story that CNN had to objectively analyze, and it took no less than 4 adult people to do it.

This morning on NPR they had a news blurb about the candidates' stops. The two sentences on Trump were 1. he gave a speech in place x and 2. a protester interrupted near the end of the speech and said "Trump is a racist". That was the last part of the news blurb--they gave the protester not just half the "story" time but in fact the last word.

Trump is in no way my guy, but I fully support his belief that the Media is garbage and no one on the Right should every be shy about saying that the Media is garbage and biased.

But hey, don't whine...

Kevin said...

Ann said: "But he did do that. He doesn't get credit for that. The media need him to take back the bad thing he said and he won't."

Exactly. They need him to kneel. Just once. And then they own him.

His campaign becomes one long apology tour. And no one votes for weakness.

buwaya puti said...

This is not the same system Reagan or Nixon were working with.
There simply is no "goodwill" to be had in this system, there are no independent minds, there is no negotiation. Within their system they have tremendous power, because, also unlike previous cases, there is far more power in the center, and the mediating institutions have withered.
You are all naked before the state.

Hagar said...

Buwaya's scenario for a Trump presidency can also be envisioned for Hillary!

In fact, this is something that has worried me, i.e., that someone really hostile to the U.S., not just Hillary!, will wait until after she is inaugurated and then dump incontrovertible proof of her past crimes.

Brando said...

"Naïvété of such depth is touching in an adolescent, shameful in a grown man."

Yes, that's right--Muslims by nature cannot be allies of Republicans. I forgot who I'm talking to.

Kevin said...

Hillary hasn't apologized for lying to the American people. In fact, she doubled down on her "truthfulness" just last weekend.

Where is the media demanding she apologize?

They would never do that. They know it would effectively end her campaign.

EMD said...

A lot of people are watching the Republican establishment, me included. We wonder why they can't take the same aggressive stance any democrat would in the same position. Each one, when asked, should have said something to the effect of "What about Hillary calling the Bengazi Moms liars?

Paul Ryan is a fucking useless turd. He's a denizen of the Capitol District, and lives well off the toils of decent people whom he fails to represent at nearly every turn. And he wonders where Trump came from.

The United States is the Hunger Games, but without the kids killing kids on TV part. Yet.

Brando said...

"Bullshit. No matter what he says or does it will be a story. This is how DNCNN operates."

Maybe we could try and see what not feeding their narrative might do for a change? Maybe make them work a bit at trying to turn the electorate against him, rather than do the job for them?

wendybar said...

I do not like what Trump said about the Khans....but I abhor that HILLARY called the families that she lied to about Benghazi liars, and that they misremembered what she said.....She said it to AMERICANS too!!! SHE is a liar and was hiding the gun running she was doing in Benghazi...and people are attacking only Trump and the Benghazi families.

EMD said...

Maybe we could try and see what not feeding their narrative might do for a change?

You are so dumb sometimes. Mitt Romney gave a guy cancer. Binders of women!

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

"This is not the same system Reagan or Nixon were working with."

Duh. This system is drenched in conservative media, unlike the past. But, please, please don't let that stop y'all (not that you need proving in this regard), it's awesome to read the 'poor us getting picked on by the media' jabber. Carry on.

buwaya puti said...

As for the Republicans, its easy enough to tell that many are bought. Thats one reason why Trump would very easily be impeached.
And it wouldnt take some personal issue. Something as simple as a contested executive appointment would do. And he wont back down.
I dont think Trump would be subject to Schwartzenegger type blackmail, another trick of the center.

Darrell said...

Hillary wore white because she promised Satan that she would do it. Satan prefers his marriages to young beautiful women, but women like Hillary can deliver more souls to be consumed in eternal damnation. Satan takes one for the team.

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

proving should be prodding

buwaya puti said...

Poor us?
Yes, so many are.

rehajm said...

Obamacare takes another step towards failure.

Darrell said...

A Muslim that refutes the Qu'ran can be an ally of Republicans. But that also gives them a rather short shelf life. Apostasy equals death.

buwaya puti said...

The Hunger Games is an excellent analogy.
I thought there was some such idea in back of it when I saw it.
A bit subversive that.

EMD said...

"Duh. This system is drenched in conservative media, "

Yes, but it's labeled as such and the biases are known. CNN still believes it's somehow objective.

Here's the thing -- I don't care about biases in media because it's impossible to eliminate them all. Just be honest about them.

Matthew Sablan said...

"RUCKER: Do you think they’re somehow trying to, the Khan family, are they on TV to try to help Hillary?"

-- Obviously they are, or they wouldn't have spoken at her convention.

Earnest Prole said...

Politics 101 says never apologize, never explain. The more interesting question is why Trump seems constitutionally incapable of ignoring bait. A normal person understands there is zero upside and enormous downside attacking the adorable mother of a man who died for our country.

Kevin said...

Kahn story dying down. Time for MSNBC put out an unsourced report, from an unnamed person, without any context, about Trump’s sincere desire to know why the US can't use nuclear weapons.

We can talk about that for a day or two. Then we can ask Trump whether he confirms or denies the reports.

We can discuss that for a day or two. Then we'll ask him for when he would or would not use nuclear weapons.

When he declines, we'll discuss his inability to articulate his nuclear strategy in advance for another two days.

Total for the anti-American front: Six days of people hearing Trump can't wait to use nuclear weapons!!

Was it ever true? What difference, at that point, does it make?

Brando said...

"You are so dumb sometimes. Mitt Romney gave a guy cancer. Binders of women!"

Again, why are "Romney tactics" the only alternative to "Trump tactics"? It's like complaining that your 18 year old keeps getting into car accidents so you decide instead to let your dog drive.

Darrell said...

The UN is now suggesting that nations tax meat until it is too expensive to eat. Hillary starts stocking up before she writes her meat tax plan. Trump tell UN to go fuck themselves. 2016 election in a nutshell.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

William said...Cooper's questions were not probing, and the answers were accepted at face value.......Cooper showed no interest in eliciting this man's opinion on gay marriage or constitutional protections to the drawing of Mohammed cartoons

No, of course not! Contrast that with Cooper's "interview" of the Florida AG wherein he all but blamed her for the Orlando mass murder (carried out, remember, by a Muslim-type guy)...but don't whine about bias.

[Pointing out bias is whining, and pointing out that the extreme bias and thumb-on-the-scale practices of our Media actually harm America as a whole (irrespective of one's political beliefs), well, that's just paranoid whining. Don't do that.]

Brando said...

And please, EMD--let's keep it civil. I can argue with you without name-calling. I'm sure you can do the same.

Matthew Sablan said...

Romney actually had great responses. He had ads up with people who got jobs and benefited from what he did very, very quickly. He was still made to be a monster by the media.

Every Republican forever and ever is going to be a Trump-level monster from here on out. The guy who closed his business to find a missing girl; the guy who sat down with a kid dying of cancer to help him write his will -- that guy was made out to be just as much the next Hitler as Trump.

Hagar said...

The late Captain Kahn is all right.
I may give his mother a pass, but his father used his son's death as an opportunity to make hay with the Democratic Party.

And I am up to here with all the talk about heroes, sacrifice, etc, etc.
Some military personnel - past and present - indeed do deserve to be named as heroes, but most do not. This indiscriminate insistence that all who ever served are heroes, etc., and must not be criticized in any way is unseemly and a great disservice to the actual heroes.

(Of which, BTW, Captain Kahn may well deserve that appellation, if the manner of his death has been accurately reported. His behavior was, at a minimum, highly commendable.)

Darrell said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

CNBC

I exchanged messages Tuesday evening with a longtime ally of Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, whom I asked about who was calling the shots in the campaign. The response indicated that Manafort, a veteran of Republican politics brought in this spring for the transition from primaries to the general election, has lost control over his candidate.

"Manafort not challenging (Trump) anymore," Manafort's ally wrote. "Mailing it in. Staff suicidal."

Darrell said...

Obama hasn't apologized a single time. He re-writes history and blames Republicans for his litany of failures.

Kevin said...

Meanwhile in the Clinton campaign:

"HILLARY SEEMS TO BELIEVE THE FBI DECLARED HER INNOCENT: This Fox News video clip has made the rounds but it’s still astonishing. Here’s her bet: by October media misinformed voters will believe Comey exonerated her."

sunsong said...

“…Trump defended his Twitter tantrum against the soldier’s parents with a sixth-grader’s playground defense: “He called me a name.” He forgot that his own convention engaged in a mad chant of “lock her up” about Clinton, but she ignored it and stayed on her message. That’s what adults do…”
~ Thomas Friedman

damikesc said...

He won't because, simply put, APOLOGIES DO NOT HELP. They are just the blood in the water that starts the stampede.

Can you think of anybody who apologized for anything "offensive" who benefitted for doing so? Now throw out "Democrats" and name one person who has.

Because he will never admit to a mistake?

So he's like Obama, but not as delusional as Hillary.

Mike said...

Obama will never admit he's wrong. I recall Bush resisting the media's constant imploring to admit he was wrong. This is a media meme that, like everything else, is tainted by the partisan press and their absolute two-faced approach to this "issue."

Is this a Democrat? No issue!

Is this a Republican? This is an issue!

buwaya puti said...

In the Philippines we whined for a few years. Then the dictator fell. Quite a coincidence really.

Darrell said...

Did Romney follow Manafort's {or one of the other "professionals"] advice?

Then he was a fucking idiot. Trump turned out to be right once again. Romney was a loser, like Cruz following the advice of a team of consultants and experts.

Anglelyne said...

Young Hegelian:

Ya ever notice how when Muslims are interviewed they never get asked about

1) Do they believe in evolution (they don't)
2) Do they think that Muslim bakers should be required by law to bake cakes for gay weedings?
3. Do they support gay marriage & equal rights for homosexuals?
4. Why aren't Muslims okay with chix with dix in the ladies' room?


...or that the enquiring minds interviewing them never ask themselves:

5) Why is generations of close-cousin inbreeding a fit object for contempt and jokes, and an all-purpose explanation for low IQ and dysfunctional behavior, but only when it's practiced among hillbillies? (And why is it bigoted to inquire into its effects among non-whites?)

6) Why are hijabs, niqabs, and burkas expressions of self-respect and female empowerment, while anyone who favors traditional Western standards of modesty, self-control, and dignified public comportment is a wicked, misogynist, sex-hating (and self-hating if female) prude?

Strange how issues can be so important that a state can be boycotted for crossing them, but here we have multiple interviews with a genuine Muslim legal scholar & not one press outlet has thought to ask him --- 'Why do Muslims believe this about X"?

Oh, the progtard has no need to put the question to a Muslim, since the progtard has already answered the question to his own complete satisfaction. When you ask a progtard to explain these things, you'll invariably get some huffy, nebulous response either 1) denying that Muslims do that or believe that, or 2) explaining why it's different when they do that or believe that, or 3) yeah, they do that or believe that, but it's the White Man's fault that they do that or believe that, or 4) the Crusades!. (Or 5) all of the above, followed by an order to "educate yourself!".)

Because only Christians can be h8ters, doncha know.

Well, white Christians.

coupe said...

Humayun Khan died when the USA did a Pearl Harbor on Iraq. The USA nuked Japan for that kind of infamy.

Unknown said...

"There is great unity in my campaign, perhaps greater than ever before," Trump wrote, adding, "I want to thank everyone for your tremendous support. Beat Crooked H!"

Haahahahahahaaah!

Darrell said...

Hillary armed ISIS.

No wonder she is going through her custom Depends at twice her normal rate.

buwaya puti said...

The media mouthpieces of this place remind me, each one, of their analogues across the Pacific thirty years ago. Zakaria is very much, in tone and style and ethnic look, as Romy Nathanielsz- look him up.

Darrell said...

Hillarybots "Let's talk about Trump!"

MayBee said...

He forgot that his own convention engaged in a mad chant of “lock her up” about Clinton, but she ignored it and stayed on her message.

Yes, she also ignored it when her own convention engaged in a mad chant of "Lock her up". Booed a general. Booed a Medal of Honor winner. Booed Tim Kaine.
She also has stayed on message about her emails. "The FBI said I was honest". Because that's what adults do.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

I may give his mother a pass, but his father used his son's death as an opportunity to make hay with the Democratic Party.

Yeah, in my book, when you make a political statement at a political event (and is there a more political event than a national convention?) you forfeit your right to claim indignation when your target pushes back. Also curious that instead of focusing on the people responsible for the loss of their son, they attack... Trump. This despite the fact that Hillary supported all our military adventures this century and spawned a few of her own.

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
traditionalguy said...

What Trump said about the Khans was a query about their motives. Again he was 100% right to question them.

The son's motive in 2004 was stopping a Muslim suicide bomber. For his heroism ISIS says he was an apostate Muslim.

The Dad's 2016 motive is to protect his scam where Saudi Royals can spend half a million on Family Citizenship packages and get their money back later. The Saud royals spend that much per day on London road trips.

If questioning a Saudi scam loophole Lawyer makes Trump into the attacker of a Gold Star Family, then so be it. Trump is on our side. And he will take the heat for fighting for us.

Brando said...

"Yeah, in my book, when you make a political statement at a political event (and is there a more political event than a national convention?) you forfeit your right to claim indignation when your target pushes back. Also curious that instead of focusing on the people responsible for the loss of their son, they attack... Trump. This despite the fact that Hillary supported all our military adventures this century and spawned a few of her own."

That's the problem--whose fingerprints were on the very war that (I'm estimating) a solid majority of Democrats consider a heinous mistake and caused their son's death? Why none other than their nominee! But rather than point this out from the beginning, Trump--who could at least say he had nothing to do with the war and turned against it by 2004, the year the son was killed--decides to go right for the "submissive Muslim wife" theme that played right into the media's hands. And now we're being told "the media would have sunk him anyway, he did good!"

Hagar said...

Then the dictator fell.

Which one of them?

I Callahan said...

Maybe Althouse is so used to believing the evil-lamestream media stuff that she doesn't pause to question it, even in a situation like this one which is clearly about much more than lib media attacking a con.

If the media were doing the same thing with Clinton, as flawed as she is, then I'd agree with this. But they don't. And never have. And if it were Cruz, Bush, Rubio or any of the others, they'd be doing the exact same thing. As others have pointed out in this thread.

The media are in the tank for Hillary, like they were for Obama both times. Anyone who cannot see this is willfully blind or flat-out stupid.

Curious George said...

"coupe said...
Humayun Khan died when the USA did a Pearl Harbor on Iraq. The USA nuked Japan for that kind of infamy."

You're comparing the US invasion of Iraq to the Japanese at Pearl Harbor?

Seriously?

geoffb said...

'“The invariable and basic rules of Islamic law are only those prescribed in the Shari’ah,” Khan writes. “All other juridical works… must always be subordinated to the Shari’ah.”

Dear DNC: "All other juridical works" include the US Constitution.

Get it?'

Unknown said...

"Hillarybots "Let's talk about Trump!"

This blogpost IS about Trump, you idiot.

CStanley said...

For all of the reasons already discussed, Trump's reaction to this may not work out badly for him- but it seems to me that he missed a much greater opportunity. If he had more restraint he could have led off by expressing sympathy for the family's loss and praising the son's valor and service, while lauding fact that this father is free to express his disagreement with the policies that he (Trump) proposes (he could have even snuck in a dig at HRC for voting for the war that sent the son to his death.) That would have left him perfectly positioned to pivot as the oppo research came out, showing that this man is basically a Democrat party operative, associated with lobbyists for the Saudi government, and has an obvious bias against Trumps immigration policy because he sells visas. His message then would be a subtle shift, "well, as I said he has a right to his opinion but now we know more about why he has those opinions!")

Trump fancies himself as the best deal maker ever, but he's really got a limited toolbox and could really up his game, IMO.

knighterrant said...

Trump's insistence on always clinging to a failed line when every voice of common sense says it's time to cut bait and recast reminds me of an old folk song.

We were -- neck deep in the Big Muddy
And the big fool said to push on.

Terry said...

sunsong said...
“…Trump defended his Twitter tantrum against the soldier’s parents with a sixth-grader’s playground defense: “He called me a name.” He forgot that his own convention engaged in a mad chant of “lock her up” about Clinton, but she ignored it and stayed on her message. That’s what adults do…”
~ Thomas Friedman
8/3/16, 11:32 AM


Friedman? Thomas Friedman? Are you F'ing kidding me?
"The first rule of holes is when you’re in one, stop digging. When you’re in three, bring a lot of shovels."
-Thomas Friedman
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/21/opinion/21friedman.html

Earlier in that article, written in 2008, Friedman wonders whether there is a single thing Bush will ask Americans to do to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Higher fuel standards? A return to a 55 MPH speed limit? A carbon tax on oil and gas?
Well, howzabout drilling and fracking, Friedman, which have, for the first time in my life, actually done something to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Completely over Friedman's head.
Friedman lives in a 14,000 square foot mansion in Maryland. He married into money. His wife's family made their money financing suburban shopping malls.



EMD said...

"he could have even snuck in a dig at HRC for voting for the war that sent the son to his death."

He did talk about this. Of course, it's nowhere to be found on CNN or Washington Post or NBC or POLITICO.

Heh, I'm most likely voting for Gary Johnson, but the media in this country is reprehensible and part of the problem.

Jon Burack said...

Brando, good comment. It really doesn't matter what the media is up to in this. Trump by now should have honed a skill at deflecting the media and instead he plays into their hands at every turn. He is not only crude and belligerent, he is dumber than I originally thought. And that's saying a lot.

Mockturtle, yours is not a good comment, or at least this pat: "I once heard it said that 'Satan always overplays his hand'. I believe this is true of the media, as well." It is typical of the debased nature of our politics that both sides are never far from seeing the devil at work. Trump is not Satan. The media are not Satan. And the only one overplaying a hand here is Trump.

walter said...

Yeah..the "binders full of women" bit. I have an adult niece who references that as if the phrase alone is damning. But really, nice guy Romney was just submitting to the proscribed rules of SJW society/affirmative action and still was burned.
So yeah..better for Trump to redirect than submit/apologize.
He might do far better by invoking the "no man (person?) left behind" credo of the military and wonder aloud how Captain Kahn would view Hil's inaction in Benghazi leaving military to "sacrifice" their lives.
Seems like a far greater affront to a military man who himself paid the ultimate price.

David said...

"People are seriously wondering about his mental health."

Because all people they don't like politically are unbalanced. All people they agree with are sane and good.

Millions of people are now lathered up about Trump, who is sometimes crass but sane. It's a mass effort to intimidate Trump, and those who might support his revolt against groupthink. Trump is not going to be intimidated, so they use his steadfast defiance to impugn his mental health. Intimidation will never work on Trump. Unfortunately it is working on enough voters to be a significant factor.

Next? Hillary refuses to debate this wild crazy man? Stay tuned.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David said...

How about Obama using a joint press conference with the Chief of State of Singapore, an important visitor, to take five minutes to excoriate Hillary's opponent for president? The man has come half way across the world to discuss important trade and security issues with the President of the United States. And that president uses their press conference for a political sideshow.

There are many ways to be crass. That was one of them.

Unknown said...

"People are seriously wondering about his mental health."

"Because all people they don't like politically are unbalanced. All people they agree with are sane and good."

Nope. If you are unable to see what is going on in front of your own eyes you need a reality check. Others in Trump's own Party are wondering the same thing.

walter said...

Gotta give the journolists cred for continuing the tradition of adopting a suggestive word like "intervention" as oppposed to advisers.
I guess "dark" just wasn't cutting it.

mockturtle said...

Muslims always get a pass on bigotry.

n.n said...

The JournoLists are on trial. They took the bait and confirmed they are merely a biased, even prejudiced special interest. They have a Pro-Choice problem.

Meanwhile, ... I suppose it doesn't matter, now.

Good luck to the Germans, French, Americans, Russians, Syrians, Iraqis, Libyans, Mexicans, etc. The consequences of anti-native policies have created a progressive condition.

Unknown said...

"Next? Hillary refuses to debate this wild crazy man? Stay tuned."

This proves you are out of touch with reality. It will be Trump who will weasel out of any debate. He has a history of ducking debates. In what world do you people live in?

walter said...

It would be funny for Trump to quote the Benghazi victim's father who suggested Hil may not remember due to her head injury. Would be classic Trump: "Just saying what he said, I don't know. Someone should ask her."

MadisonMan said...

"Hillarybots "Let's talk about Trump!"

This blogpost IS about Trump, you idiot.

I believe the Hillarybots in question are in the Media.

Earnest Prole said...

It’s touching to read complaints of media bias, as though complaining will somehow change things. It’s like complaining about the prevailing wind.

mockturtle said...

Back in the 1960's there was fear of a one world government. At that time, there was much less to fear.

Unknown said...

Yes, we are the Media, lol.

n.n said...

mockturtle:

Some Muslims. The victims of social justice adventurism and progressive wars have been notably nationalist Muslims.

The Pro-Choicers have an emergency exit built into their religion.

Rusty said...

HeideCruise said...
"Why does Althosue have such a huge blindspot?"

I blame Scott Adam's power of persuasion.


You fundamentally misunderstand both our Hostess and Trump.

walter said...

Unknown said...It will be Trump who will weasel out of any debate. He has a history of ducking debates. In what world do you people live in?
--
True. Hil had now dethroned/Hil employed DWS to limit debates for her.
How is DWS? Been kinda quiet...

walter said...

Priebus is so incompetent, he might as well hook up with DWS.

Brian McKim & Traci Skene said...

The comment-posting bot entitled "HeideCruise" said:

More juicy stuff from the WaPo interview:

"Trump, in an interview with The Washington Post published Tuesday, said of Ryan "I'm not quite there yet" — echoing language used by Ryan when he was reluctant to endorse Trump in May. Ryan eventually endorsed the GOP nominee. A spokesperson for Ryan said Tuesday neither Ryan nor anyone on his team sought an endorsement from Trump."

Reince Priebus reportedly "apoplectic". What a fool Paul Ryan was for endorsing Trump.


Yes. All that intrigue surrounding endorsements is positively riveting, overwhelmingly "juicy!"

Except that it's not.

That's the old model. Nobody gives a rat's ass about any endorsements any more. That's so 2008. Get with it.

This is Trump. The old rules? Gone. The new rules? They come out daily and many folks are having trouble keeping up.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

Trump is saying something fairly direct about his own decency in relation to common decency:

RUCKER: Do you understand why some people would say that you lack some sort of common decency?

TRUMP: I think frankly a lot of people agree with what I’m saying.

Chuck said...

So right now Rush Limbaugh is positing the notion that this controversy is galvanizing Trump supporters. Rush may be right; he probably is.

But while Trump is galvanizing his 28%, he's losing everybody else.

Trump had a golden opportunity to pivot and try to bring in mainstream Republicans after he won the nomination. He didn't do it. So Trump has his fanatics. And nobody else.

And now don't tell me about that bitch Hillary. I'm not voting for her. But Trump has to WIN my vote. And he hasn't done it. Not with me; not with millions of mainstream voters. (And I am not even all that mainstream. Trump isn't nearly conservative enough for my tastes.)



320Busdriver said...

Trump is not fit

Hillary is not fit

My conscience won't allow me to vote for either.

I will laugh at you, just like I laugh at the Obama voters. I can live with that.

Unknown said...

The polls don't indicate that Trump supporters are being "galvanized".

YoungHegelian said...

@Unknown,

Others in Trump's own Party are wondering the same thing.

Uhhhhmmm, are you forgetting about HRC & Bernie? Aren't lots of Democrats "wondering the same thing?" Remember, Bernie won more primaries against HRC than any of Trump's opponents won against him.

"Oh, yeah, well, the pundits are against Trump." Yes, as opposed to the Democratic voters who were against Hillary.

Just_Mike_S said...

IMO there are many, many people who support Trump only because he stands up to PC and he is not Hillary. They're quiet about it because in polite company it is declasse to voice support for Trump the Lout. But inside, they are F'ng HOT about the establishment (both sides) selling America out to Global Corporatism, open borders and PC nonsense. They are broken glass voters too. They will not be staying home out of apathy - they WILL make a choice and vote it. Anectdotal, I know, but these are regular hard working people and retirees with families. College educated, or if not at least sophisticated. Pro-immigration...LEGAL immigration, control the border types. Against rewarding lawbreakers. Not neo nazi skinheads. I would expect Trump to outperform the polls.

Darrell said...

Hillbots--This blogpost IS about Trump.

Since when did that matter to you. You talk about Trump on every Hillary post. KYA, as the kids say.

Darrell said...

I suspect that Chuck is a real asshole. What does his wife have to say about that?

Unknown said...

The Intervention.

Top Republicans and political allies to Donald Trump are planning an "intervention" with the candidate following several disastrous days of a political firestorm that has encircled the Republican presidential nominee, according to a report Wednesday.

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Speaker Newt Gingrich (Ga.) are among those looking to talk with the businessman, NBC News reports.

The group hopes to enlist Trump's children, who have proven pivotal in advising the businessman's candidacy, in their effort to get Trump back on track after days of feuding with the parents of a slain U.S. soldier that even his closest political allies, like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, have called inappropriate.


The Hill

buwaya said...

You aren't dealing with a PR contest anymore.
Its not about policies or slices of the pie or anything manageable within a political process.

This is a propaganda campaign between warring powers, between which there is no possibility of either goodwill or restraint. And it is not about Trump, other than incidentally.

They really, really hate you, and want you gone, those millions of you.
They are at war with you, and they know it, most of you still don't.

In this it is worse, much worse, than what we were dealing with with our dictator. Back then it wasn't peoples vs peoples, and both sides shared deep links through mediating institutions, religion, family, tradition, and region. The split was not that deep, and there was the moral and cultural basis to live and let live. And they did, and both sides, now, live in peace within their own spaces. And this was after substantial bloodshed.

Here, the split is total. There is nothing much in common at all. Those people conducting interviews might as well be from Alpha Centauri, to their interviewees, and vice versa.
Here, once the blood starts, it seems to me that both sides will treat the other like vermin.

Brando said...

"Trump had a golden opportunity to pivot and try to bring in mainstream Republicans after he won the nomination. He didn't do it. So Trump has his fanatics. And nobody else."

That seems to be his pattern. It's not so much about winning an election or (as at least Goldwater was trying to do in '64) advancing a cause. Instead, it's about a childish old man working out his inner demons in public, winning the undying loyalty of a distinct minority of voters and doing little to win over a large chunk of support that he needs.

Look also at his latest smug "non-endorsement" of Ryan and McCain, both of whom endorsed him in the belief that only party unity could win in the fall. Clearly this sends a message--if you come around to him late, or even speak out against him, you're better off pulling a Ted Cruz and sticking to your honor than selling out, because he won't reward you. It also tells them that they will have no leverage with him if he gets elected, so all the rationalizations Trumpskeptic Republicans made for supporting him were unfounded.

The man is a dumpster fire. Ben Sasse had it right from the beginning.

mockturtle said...

But Trump has to WIN my vote. And he hasn't done it.

Aw, Chuck. It would hearten you to know that the Trump campaign is up late every night brainstorming over how to win your vote. 'Gee, what can we do to win over Chuck?' The whole campaign pivots on that very question.

walter said...

So Chuck..you're above voting for the lesser of two evils? Gonna stay home and smug it out?

Darrell said...

Chuck's wife will cancel out his vote. She does it every election.

mockturtle said...

Those people conducting interviews might as well be from Alpha Centauri

I really think some of them are, buwaya.

Darrell said...

Quite a few Republicans are open border, amnesty-loving Globalists. Are they insane? Should Trump try and win them over or show them how to switch to the Democrat Party?

YoungHegelian said...

@Unknown,

Do you not think that in the course of normal campaigns harsh words haven't been exchanged between the candidate & his support team? Do you really believe that? It's actually the normal course of affairs, except that this time the press wants to paint it as dysfunctional & an "intervention".

Do you ever wonder why, even after failing to dispatch an old Jewish Lefty like Bernie in a jiffy, there were no shake-ups on Hillary's team? That when Wasserman Schultz was caught tilted the playing field for Hillary, she resigned, only to get hired by HRC's campaign?

Hillary can't shake up her team for one reason: she is her team. Her coterie runs her & she doesn't run them. She is simply the brand name out in front.

BDNYC said...

Hillary's fingerprints were all over our disastrous policies in Libya, including the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi leading up to September 11-12, 2012. After the shit hit the fan, she lied to the families of the Benghazi victims. One of the people Hillary lied to called her out on her incompetence and her lies, and the media relentlessly fact-checked the comments in order to protect Hillary.

The Khans are parents of a soldier who died in in Iraq in 2004, back when Hillary was a pro-war senator and Trump was a private citizen with known anti-war leanings. So Trump had exactly zero to do with their son's death. But fine, they are entitled to their opinion, just like the rest of us are. But I totally reject the notion that the Khans get to be the final arbiters on anything having to do with Islam or immigration simply because their son was a hero.

It's incredible. Mrs. Smith spoke about Hillary based on her personal experiences and interactions with Hillary, and the media scrambles to discredit Mrs. Smith. Mr. Khan says nasty and likely untrue things about Trump -- not to mention ignorant things about the Constitution -- and the media scrambles to bolster Mr. Khan and diminish Trump. It's an incredible thing to see.

That said, Trump should just ignore the Khans from now on. He should have ignored them from the very beginning.

readering said...

I don't know what the plane was that Trump was referencing from Fox News but I would be shocked if he knows anything useful about the subject. Few things are more heavily regulated than aircraft safety, for obvious reasons. (Now, if it was a hot air balloon . . . .) Rucker obviously thought the subject of Gretchen Carlson, which Trump was deflecting with the aircraft business, was more important.

I actually think the tv is a Trump criticism that's overblown. I know executives who have cable finance channel playing on their office wall during the day, and lots of folks check their phone during meetings. Rude, but not unique. And Bill Clinton was famous for doing the NY Time crossword during meetings.

Brando said...

"Aw, Chuck. It would hearten you to know that the Trump campaign is up late every night brainstorming over how to win your vote. 'Gee, what can we do to win over Chuck?' The whole campaign pivots on that very question."

You can laugh at Chuck, but you can't deny there are a large number of conservatives who are so disgusted with Trump that they simply cannot bring themselves to vote for him. You can think they're crazy (because Trump is so clearly a better alternative to Hillary) but you can't deny that if Trump does not win over enough of them he's toast.

"Quite a few Republicans are open border, amnesty-loving Globalists. Are they insane? Should Trump try and win them over or show them how to switch to the Democrat Party?"

Quite a few Republicans think raising the minimum wage is insane at a time when the labor market is weak. Should they just smile and assume Trump wasn't serious about raising it?

Chuck said...

walter said...
So Chuck..you're above voting for the lesser of two evils? Gonna stay home and smug it out?


You're goddamned right. And you can't even blame me for the loss. Trump didn't want my vote; he made no effort to get it. He didn't want the Party's support; he ridiculed it. He doesn't want Ryan's or McCain's endorsements.

Fine.

And in the event of such a loss, the Trump crowd is going to have hell to pay.

Darrell said...

Bill Clinton has a new TV show--Politicians in Airplanes Making Deals and Drinking Coffee. His first guest was AG Loretta Lynch. Perhaps that is what Trump was talking about.

Unknown said...

Young Hegelian,

This is not your run of the mill misunderstanding and disagreement between the candidate and the Party/support team he/she belongs to. This is not merely the press spinning, this is serious, far more serious than you folks want to admit. The sooner you recognize what is going on here the easier the let down will be. I'm sorry your candidate is crashing and burning so early, I thought it would be closer to November. It is actually shocking.

n.n said...

BDNYC:

Unfortunately, ignorance is not bliss. With public and private institutions, domestic and foreign, that construct narratives based on a presumption of guilt, inherited guilt, associative guilt, or merely a tale pulled out of the ether, we no longer enjoy the luxury to wait years, even decades, until the narratives unravel to demonstrate their conspiracy and motives. The establishment, the wealthy, the connected, may be able to afford it, but the rest of Americans cannot.

jdniner said...

Trumps has stated why he doesn't step back. Because the media then implies guilt by associations across a wide range of issues.His "unfair" word is on the mark. If you want an "unfair" country run by big money then yes vote for Hilary by all means. You can fool yourself as much as you want but you are fooling yourself. Darell up above nailed the current election personalities in a nutshell I think.

Just remember anyone pulling the lever for Hilary is fool no matter how smart and wise they think they are. The DNC will suppress your vote anyway if its not the unfair one.

Trump is leveling the media arm of the DNC. Which is what most GoP candidates are afraid and unwilling to do.

Even if you don't like Trump you should pull the lever for him. Your kids will have a better future.

Unknown said...

"Even if you don't like Trump you should pull the lever for him. Your kids will have a better future."

Sure...until Trump gets his feelings hurt by Little Kim. Or vice versa.

walter said...

"It's incredible. Mrs. Smith spoke about Hillary based on her personal experiences and interactions with Hillary, and the media scrambles to discredit Mrs. Smith."
Yeah..the media, in concert with the Dems managed to both call her appearance manipulative, while championing the appearance of the Kahns.
It's enough to make Blitzer dance.

n.n said...

Wages should correlate with cost of living, and individual performance, not to arbitrary or selective standards, and not to compensate for policies that distort the economy, devalue capital and labor, and cause/encourage unemployment.

jdniner said...

There is a lot of back channel talk that Hilary is ill. Had a stroke. Stressed out. People say that is why she avoids media pressers now. She just wants to get in the office and manager her image from there.

hombre said...

Trump is running against Hillary, the leftist mediaswine, the GOPe, illegal immigration, crime, terrorism, globalism, etc., and hopefully, graft.

Hillary is running against her fellow Americans, the ones she calls "haters," "racists," "sexiests," "homophobes," and gun owners and those deemed "dangerous hate groups" by the SPLC, about forty percent of the population. She's running FOR, graft and influence peddling, because without them her speaking fee is a buck-fifty.
.

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

The anti-Ryan folks now have a traitor on the ticket. Pence split w/ the leader.

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

Pence gave in to the lib media. Can he be repealed and replaced?

Anglelyne said...

Jon Burack: Trump by now should have honed a skill at deflecting the media and instead he plays into their hands at every turn.[...]

...the only one overplaying a hand here is Trump.


No need to argue the point. The only meaningful answer to whether Trump is "playing into their hands" or overplaying his, is a statistical one: poll numbers, voters voting.

It is typical of the debased nature of our politics that both sides are never far from seeing the devil at work.

You're being rather literal-minded about mockturtle's comment, no?

That said, I'm constantly running into people these days who deplore how everybody these days is, as you say, "seeing the devil" in contrary opinion. I've observed that these "deplorers", right or left, tend to share a certain set of beliefs about the stability of the status quo. I.e., that it is stable, and that the people manning the parties and the bureaucracies, whether one agrees with their policies or not, are not actively opposed to one's own interests, are tolerably competent in managing their jobs, and aren't too corrupt, vindictive, made stupid by ideology, or just destructively stupid, period.

To them, we just need to work at restoring some decorum and generosity of spirit to political life, that's all that's really gone wrong in our system. But there are some junctures in history when conflicts of interest exist at such a basic level, that "debased politics" are an effect, not a cause.

mockturtle said...

@Darrell Quite a few Republicans are open border, amnesty-loving Globalists. Are they insane? Should Trump try and win them over or show them how to switch to the Democrat Party?

These Republicans are a holdover from the party of Wall Street. Open borders are good for business, e.g., cheap labor. I doubt there has been a populist Republican since Teddy Roosevelt, and he was only a modified populist. The GOP establishment has never really wanted a bigger tent--just more voters who think that 'What's good for General Motors is good for the country.' Even if that means taking its jobs to Mexico.

Brando said...

"Wages should correlate with cost of living, and individual performance, not to arbitrary or selective standards, and not to compensate for policies that distort the economy, devalue capital and labor, and cause/encourage unemployment."

That's the standard conservative/libertarian believe on wages. The fact that Trump repeatedly came out for a higher minimum wage shows that (1) his word is as worthless as a Trump University degree; or (2) he really has no concept of conservative ideology. I seem to remember a lot of complaints that Romney, McCain, etc. were insufficiently conservative, and if we could just get someone to fight for conservative principles the GOP would win big. Instead we have someone who may not even understand conservative principles, let alone be guided by them.

Conservatives got the shaft this year, more so than ever before. Their fight was lost long before November.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 338   Newer› Newest»