Reporters have had some sort of workspace at the White House since Teddy Roosevelt's time, but the current press room is an artifact of the Richard Nixon era, the dawn of the symbiosis of the press and the modern presidency. The "room" is actually a space containing work stations and broadcast booths, as well as the briefing area that is so familiar to viewers of presidential news conferences.Should they be ousted if they are not playing the role the place supposedly symbolizes? Are they representing us, the People, who, collectively, elected Trump, or are they representing the Democratic Party?
For the media, the White House press room—situated on the first floor, in the space between the presidential residence and the West Wing—is not only a convenience, with prime sources just steps away. It is also a symbol of the press' cherished role as representatives of the American people.....
I don't know that the symbolism is what should determine whether the press has that space or some other space, but I don't think the press — with respect to the Trump administration — represents the people. I think the statement "They are the opposition party" is much more accurate. Too bad they did that to themselves. We could use a vigorous, professional press.
Posts
251 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 251 of 251"Harassing these people less certainly will help MAGA."
How about encouraging folks in such areas to skip making no dough and/or enjoying meth and/or thinking DJT or some other gov person will be their savior to get out of Dodge and become Computer Science majors, or whatever fields show good growth potential as the century unfolds.
My favorite recent anecdote is from San Francisco, where the left-wing school board, which represents local voters, not parents, there being so few parents here, wanted to change the name of historic George Washington High (one of our kids went there for a year) because it was "irrelevant" to the kids, being as they were mainly Asian immigrants.
What did that white slave-owning founder of the country they just showed up at have to do with them?
Therefore it should be "Maya Angelou" High.
This did not go over well.
That is how these people think.
Teresa 1959.5 said: "Drago, no one is listening to you about anything."
I couldn't disagree more. I thoroughly enjoy Drago's comments as they go to the core of the commie, pinko lefties' arguments. He then proceeds to destroy those arguments at their source.
Additionally, the reaction elicited from the aforementioned progressives (gag me) is worth the price of admission.
Quite often, PB&J, an improvement comes from ceasing the daily beatings. It feels so good when they stop.
And Comp Sci majors like milk. A lot of milk, from experience.
Life is made up of many niches like that. Some code, some make milk.
Quite often, PB&J, an improvement comes from ceasing the daily beatings. It feels so good when they stop.
And Comp Sci majors like milk. A lot of milk, from experience.
Life is made up of many niches like that. Some code, some make milk.
"death threats"
Great idea confining the Leftists far from the White House! What we still need is confinement of the Leftist professors far from our universities.
What we still need is confinement of the Leftist professors far from our universities.
It's hard to keep an ignorance-promoting university in business. Which corporation or "think tank" would subsidize it?
But it's interesting to see right-wingers speak of universities as "their" thing. La Cosa Nostra.
Unknown said...
"In NotMyPresident country we have the liberal and progressive media like the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, NBC, Vanity Fair, New Yorker, Vogue, Rolling Stones and so many thousands more. You can call them elitist - we don't care. We love 'em."
Well, if you like your Press, you can keep your Press.
Just get 'em out of America, we're governing here.
Put the indoor swimming pool back. Let the press pool move across the street
I'd start, in the case of CA, which I can't as I'm not a citizen nor would such a thing get enough support, start removing ignorance-promoting departments, majors, and administrators.
Not everything in your universities is economically value-adding. I'd say remarkably little is.
And its time that universities, and "intellectuals" stopped using engineering programs, etc. as their shields, to justify their priviliges and existence, while personally despising them. This is a tactic of swindlers, confidence men, which they are.
"But the armchair pontification on complex industries such as health care is always fun to watch. It's like apes resolving political disputes by chest pounding and other displays."
The only chest pounding I saw was by a clown saying costs for a family of four would go down $2,500 and if you liked your plan you could keep it.
Hope the complete failure of Chairman Zero's signature legislation is "fun to watch".
The press is the only part of the Democrat opposition that has any degree of effectiveness, and they seem to be in an increasingly desperate effort to destroy themselves before Friday. Making them walk across the narrow street (not much more than an alleyway) that separates the White House from the Executive Office Building to attend a briefing will have them caterwauling so heavily that any more negative reports about Trump that they file will seem like just so much more sour grapes to the public.
It's hard to keep an ignorance-promoting university in business.
I don't know about that. The leftists have been doing it for generations now.
And they laugh when some people say Trump will act like a dictator. Seriously, people, how is this a good idea? I didn't realize the press was supposed to be there as a marketing tool only.
Are they representing us, the People, who, collectively, elected Trump, or are they representing the Democratic Party?
What a strange question. How about - is the idea of press holding power accountable a uniquely Democratic idea, totally uninteresting to Republicans?
Right on, Matt! Because dictators are terrible and mostly known for not giving office space to reporters in the residence they will voluntarily abandon in 4 or 8 years. That's often how you can spot the worst offenders. Thank you for calling out this horror, this tragedy. This could dramatically affect the ability of Leftist Progressive Americans from getting #FakeNews.
Did you cheer normalizing relations with Cuba?
Did you support sending $150+ billion to Iran?
#consistency
HT: "What a strange question. How about - is the idea of press holding power accountable a uniquely Democratic idea, totally uninteresting to Republicans?"
What a strange reply. You are being purposely obtuse. Of course the press has not held Obama accountable for anything. A fact totally uninteresting to Democrats.
HT:
We can agree that the magical powers of specific office space will transform those diligent reporters into Trump Administration mouthpieces. Accountability will fail because reporters are not where they would prefer to be, but rather a couple hundred yards away.
#RealityBasedCommunity
I'm saying the issue should not be partisan even if many think the coverage was. If you're concerned about Democratic bias, for God's sake, get some Breitbart people in there. Is Fox not allowed in? Is Fox incapable of holding powerful people to account? Can people not watch Fox? Is Fox the only credentialed press who Republicans trust? Really?
HT:
Why should anybody trust anybody except by witnessing the continued honorable, truthful and ethical behavior of another? Arguments should be accepted because they coincide with reality and logic.
And everybody knows those things only happen in one specific room. Otherwise the Republic falls and the First Amendment is repealed because a few reporters were moved from one government building to another.
#ProgressiveLogic
jrapdx said...
The press has become a degenerate shell of what it is supposed to be, and certainly does not represent the American people. Going by its performance in the recent election cycle and beyond, it's plainly evident that "the mainstream media" are now indistinguishable from Democrat party operatives, completely in the tank for "liberal" causes and determined to undermine the upcoming Trump administration.
What's worse is the obvious collusion among news media companies to drive a unitary "narrative" against Trump and in favor of whatever lame Democrats are leading the charge at the moment. Based on industry actions, it sure looks like media companies are acting in a anti-competitive manner. To my mind a thorough investigation into news corporation monopolistic practices should be a high priority for the new administration taking the reins of government.
Wouldn't the press claim that the Constitution gives them the right to do this? Freedom of the press, you know.
As the Russian journalist, Alexay Kovalev, wrote to the American journalist welcome to the era of bullshit, and the deep disdain for your trade we in Russia have been experiencing for 12 years. Facts don't matter in this age of whose tweet is loudest,, so why not pile on Journalist, who sometimes, do try to present facts?
sometimes.
roesch/voltaire:
If a Tweet Tweets in the woods, does a Tweet ever make any noise at all? Your hyperbolic metaphor machine appears to be broken.
cornroaster:
The text of Sherman I is quite plain. Any contract, combination of conspiracy in restraint of trade is illegal. The First Amendment offers no refuge.
cornroaster:
Now I would say that if there is no commerce involved, no trade to be restrained, then colluding in nom-commercial matters is perfectly legal.
But that is a layperson's opinion.
"Oh how I love every bit of the idea of the democrats with bylines getting kicked out of the White house. Seriously, what is the downside for trump? The media will shit on trump anyway, so why not stick your thumb in their eye from the get go? Or if he does keep the media room hand out slots to the Oklahoma Intelligencier and other fly over state press. Seriously, fuck these guys! Start over."
Exactly. Whole swathes of the Left are intent on burning the bridges of a civil society, apparently in the smug belief that there will always be a ferryman handy. Imagine their surprise....
Meade takes the prize.
Meade said...
"What you permit, you promote.
What you allow, you encourage.
What you condone, you own.
What you tolerate, you deserve."
1/15/17, 1:39 PM
yeah Man. why clinton lost.
I propose 4 #bumperstickers.
[please allow me my prayerful -- aimed to most high good -- streaming consciousness on this . . .]
tell it to all the democrats
Tell it to the refined WA-islands-vacationing Wife, smirking that Gregoire won her governorship by cheating. Fine and thoughtful people you would think, yet so easily corruptible cunts and bitches, every one of em -- would let you grab their pussy if they thought (nobody will know, and) they would gain in power.
Obama, queen cunt at the apogee of this expression of womenGayPower in full can't-judge-us-ever privilege. Obama was the fullness of this female nasty power trip we have had to ride on, LGBTQ jackboots included. I always have said Obama is the first Cunt President, and it is ending up being more right than I can bear. (so really, getting a woman in is much less important now).
its the women that have failed us. (just look at "our" tolerance for Mylie Cyrus.) thank god for some real Men in charge now. thank God.
its the women that have failed us. not the men. American Men have only, bravely, tried to oblige. bless their hearts.
Another Dimension of our era:
Somewhere between the World-Wide-Web and the I-phone I started saying: America -- the world -- is on an express elevator UP technologically, culturally, and when the elevator goes PING and the doors open, we will be so far distant, wayyyy UPPP! it will be, new word: "Yuge".
we have been on this elevator more than a decade and are still on that amazing Express zipping Up.
Most High good godspeed: America!!!.
"you get more of the behavior you tolerate"
White House Correspondents’ Association President Jeff Mason said in a statement Sunday. “We object strenuously to any move that would shield the president and his advisers from the scrutiny of an on-site White House press corps.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-01-15/trump-team-may-move-briefings-from-west-wing-to-accommodate-more
Mr. Mason than began to laugh . . . and he laughed . . and he laughed . . . and he laughed.
Did you all hear the background to CNN Acosta demande for a question from Trump pressser this week?
CNN reserved the top eight seats in the front row for reporters at the press conference. Eight seats.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3twrg6Q0znE
Just how important do they think they are?
Maybe a quonsett hut on the south lawn?
Blogger roesch/voltaire said...
As the Russian journalist, Alexay Kovalev, wrote to the American journalist
Oh, what bullshit. Kovalev's article begins "Congratulations, US media! You’ve just covered your first press conference of an authoritarian leader with a massive ego and a deep disdain for your trade and everything you hold dear."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alexey-kovalev/a-message-to-my-doomed-colleagues-in_b_14138842.html
"Authoritarian"? How? Does he operate with a phone and a pen to get around the peoples' legislators? Does he conclude treaties with foreign powers without the legally required consent of congress? Does he redefine laws without congress to suit his political needs? Has he used the IRS to oppress his political enemies? Has his Attorney General been found in contempt of congress?
Because the current occupant of the White House has done all of this. Trump hasn't been sworn into public office yet -- he has never held any public office, ever -- and Kovalev calls him an authoritarian?
Kovalev is joke.
It's funny the PNAs always seem to be on the same side of each issue.
Trying out a new screenname.
They should be moved to the White House garden shed.
With the rest of the tools.
Birkel said...
cornroaster:
The text of Sherman I is quite plain. Any contract, combination of conspiracy in restraint of trade is illegal. The First Amendment offers no refuge.
Birkel:
But might the liberal press argue that Sherman is in fact unconstitutional if applied to the press because "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."
and the argument could be made that, in this case, the law would abridge the freedom of the press. Perhaps some clarification could be offered by a recently retired law professor, as I too am merely a layman.
There are two teachable items here.
One, Removing the press from the White House, has already been done by Obama. He Removed FOX news. So, structurally, Trump is doing the same thing. One representative, or all, Obama demonstrated the "power" of the executive to make that determination, and act appropriately. The left cannot say they are against this in principle, because they weren't against it in principle. One or all, the executive has demonstrated the power to carry this out.
Two. Trumps team informed us that they have over 400 hundred requests for press credentials. Moving them to larger accommodations, does increase the coverage of the White House by the Press. Not expanding the seats from 42(?) to 400+ restricts coverage to <10% of those desiring to inform the public. How can the left be against the increase in coverage? Unless...this is the perfect example of Government protected monopolies. The Government in an unholy alliance with the media. agrees to limit the number of "real' press passes, protecting those on the inside from messy interlopers on their sacred ground. In reality, the existing system is in place because the press agrees to be malleable and not point out the idiocy of the official statements, and in return, the White House agrees to protect their turf, and keep competition out of the way.
"Trumps team informed us that they have over 400 hundred requests for press credentials. Moving them to larger accommodations, does increase the coverage of the White House by the Press. Not expanding the seats from 42(?) to 400+ restricts coverage to <10% of those desiring to inform the public."
They could hold a drawing. Sounds egalitarian to me. Who could possibly object?
cornroaster:
No, Sherman is content neutral and its effect on speech is incidental as a Time, Place or Manner restriction. Plus, it has been around since 1890 and was constitutional even before FDR's New Deal transformed the Court's interpretation of the Commerce Clause.
Not that any of that would stop the press from making spurious arguments, of course. They are not a bright group.
The plan is to increase the size of the press at conferences, to include non-elite journalists and bloggers. It is brilliant. Trump should make half the seats rotating for small non-elite journalists, papers from Wyoming, Alabama, Arizona, Iowa. The NYT and CNN are going to have a tough time characterizing him as restricting the press if he opens access to more journalists. The non-elite journalists might actually try to cover what they hear fairly without having the narrative set ahead of time.
Remember when Romney and Palin were mocked for pointing out that Russia was still a serious geo-political enemy? Now those same tools see russkies under their bed and behind every bush. Funny how none of them have apologized to Romney and Palin.
The MSM ("Dem operatives with bylines") went to war with Trump, lost, and are now butt hurt that they are paying the price.
Interesting thread. Over 200 comments, and a large percentage were by leftists, which is unusual here. Some of the regulars, but at least one unhinged new troll - Theresa or some such, who seemed to alternate between saying "la, la, la..." with her fingers in her ears to everything that Drago said. Earth to Theresa - Drago has been around for awhile and has garnered some respect, and your drivel has little respect from the regular readers of this blog. And your point about investigations was frankly absurd. This has been the most corrupt Administration of the last, at least, half century. Yes, there were a number of Congressional investigations, precisely because the Administration was stone walling as hard as it could, with the Holder/Lynch jailing political opponents, and protecting political allies, including the NBP, Los Lerner, Crooked Hillary, the BATFE, etc. Claiming transparency, they were the least transparent Administration in decades. And where was the press during this time? Mostly snuggled closely in bed with the Administration and the Dems, blocking and misdirecting any real investigation into the steady beat of crime and corruption coming out of it. Congress was investigating because the MSM would not, and was more a part of the problem than part of the solution - not only in covering up the rampant corruption and misbehaviors going on, but also in selling the snake oil, whether it was ObamaCare, or Iran. And, that was why the American public elected, and has kept reelecting, Republican Congresses.
Probably though the most egregious was their handling of Crooked Hillary and her illegal email server. A non-politicized DoJ would have convicted her of hundreds, if not thousands, of violations of the Espionage Act and Official Records Act, sentencing her to prison for the rest of her natural life, and maybe the next couple lives too. Dir Comey laid out facts that showed those violations, but then implied political pressure by intentionally utilizing the wrong standard (Espionage Act violations only require gross negligence, which he showed, not actual specific intent, which he said couldn't be found). So, in response, and to sidetrack us from this corruption (as well as the Clinton foundation pay-to-play), plus her health issues, bad decision making, etc, the MSM, following the lead of their Dem party leaders, have led us down the irrelevant rabbit hole of Russian involvement.
Let me add to this that Trump appears to be conveniently vindictive, getting extracting political revenge when convenient. Which is why he has made peace with most of his Republican opponents, but isn't about to let the MSM off without their pound of flesh. The other place to keep an one on is the intelligence community, esp the CIA. I expect a bit of blood on the streets in the next couple of months. Hopefully theirs, if they don't want Langly burned to the ground.
One big advantage of the move is that it'll offer more space and thus allow more journalists to be present and ask questions. It'll democraticize White House journalism when 250 people are there rather than about 50. And that's one reason elite journalists are likely to be all in a dither.
It'd also be great to randomize the seating to rid the system of squabbling over who's on the front row. Make it as likely that Joe the Blogger is there as someone from NBC.
Birkel said...
cornroaster:
No, Sherman is content neutral and its effect on speech is incidental as a Time, Place or Manner restriction. Plus, it has been around since 1890 and was constitutional even before FDR's New Deal transformed the Court's interpretation of the Commerce Clause.
Not that any of that would stop the press from making spurious arguments, of course. They are not a bright group.
Birkel:
Nor would that prevent a federal district court judge from accepting such spurious arguments before Supreme Court review.
cornroaster:
No District Court judge would buck 125 years of precedent.
Inkling:
The seating could be general admission. And Trump could set up four lectures and choose them randomly each day.
Trolling the press would never get old.
Mitt Romney, of all people, actually had the best answer to this tripe during a press conference in which a reporter was asking obviously tendentious questions and making speeches about some issue or other. He slyly asked whether the reporter had an opinion on the matter, and the guy just sort of fumbled for an answer,m and finally got out, "I represent the people, Governor."
To which Romney responded, "No, I represent the people. You represent the media. You're not supposed to have an opinion." The press pool actually liked that one.
It's a preposterous and civically ignorant conceit of the media that politicians are meant to represent themselves only, while the media (who are not chosen by the people in any meaningful way) somehow "represent" the rest of us. If that is true, how do they propose we replace them, given that they're the only American institution that has figured out how to become LESS popular than the Congress?
Birkel said...
cornroaster:
No District Court judge would buck 125 years of precedent.
Birkel:
Not so sure that there is precedent re: a dispute between Sherman and Freedom of the Press.
But as I said, I am just a layman.
cornroaster:
What dispute is there? You suggest there might be one. I suggest you are a Martian with mind control powers.
We are both equally able to defend our conjecture.
Class D office space in Anacostia should be fine.
Post a Comment