UPDATE 1: Trump has "great respect for freedom of the press and all of that." He expresses admiration for the news outlets that refrained from reporting on the salacious dossier.
2: "We're going to have a very elegant day" on the inauguration, with lots of military bands.
3: "It's an asset if Putin likes Trump," because we need Russia's help fighting ISIS.
4. "Does anyone really believe that story? I'm also very much of a germaphobe, by the way."
5. He could run his company and serve as President at the same time and do great, but he doesn't want to do that.
6. Trump's lawyer explains the structure set up to separate Trump from his business "empire" ("hundreds of entities"). She stresses that this isn't legally required, but voluntarily. Trump is giving up all management authorities "for the duration" of his administration. The sons — Don and Eric — are given all power. Ivanka will have no further involvement with the organization. Trump's assets will be held in a trust. Many details about what will be in that Trust. Many liquid assets have been sold. Many deals canceled, losing millions. No foreign deals will be made during the administration. There will be an ethics adviser scrutinizing any domestic deals (from which Trump will be walled off).
7. Why not sell everything? Selling the brand "Trump" would create more dangers of exploiting the presidency. Ending the brand would be throwing away immense wealth. Other options are also dismissed as unrealistic.
8. The lawyer (Sheri Dillion) addresses the Emoluments Clause. First, the clause "has never been held to apply to fair value exchanges that have absolutely nothing to do with an officeholder." Paying for a hotel room isn't a gift, but an exchange of money for hotel accommodations. That's not an emolument. It doesn't require Trump to do something in his role as President. But Trump will go beyond what the Constitution requires and voluntarily donate all profit from foreign governments to the U.S. Treasury.
9. The lawyer ends by reminding us that the people elected Trump knowing of his business interests and perhaps favoring him because of them.
10. Trump is back at the lectern. Asked about Obamacare, he says the "easiest thing" would be to sit back and watch it implode, but that wouldn't be fair to the American people.
11. Mexico is going to pay for the wall. And it's going to be a wall, not a fence. The wall will go forward immediately, then the deal will be made, with Mexico reimbursing us.
12. I think he said he'd announce the Supreme Court pick on Monday. Soon anyway. He said he believes the Supreme Court was one of the reasons he was elected: People did not like what was going on with the Supreme Court.
13. Buzzfeed is "a failing pile of garbage." On the next question, the
14. There will be no "reset button." A "piece of plastic... guy looked at her like what is she doing?"
15. His last line, obviously planned, was that after 8 years he'll look at what Don and Eric have done with his companies and if they haven't done a good job he'll say: "You're fired."
16. Funny, I just blogged first thing this morning that "I'm not much of a live-blogger anymore" and then I live-blogged this.
Posts
276 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 276 of 276This is how dictatorships start. Trump supporters absolutely want no tough questions for their new king. They want softball questions and an obsequious press. EVERY news item that is critical of Trump will be labeled 'fake news'. It's ugly and will be so for at least 4 years.
Matt said...
This is how dictatorships start. Trump supporters absolutely want no tough questions for their new king. They want softball questions and an obsequious press.
If softball questions and an obsequious press start dictatorships we've been on the road 8 years. Where ya been sparky?
"They want softball questions and an obsequious press."
-- Maybe he'll wiretap the press to try and get them to fall in line. That'd be really authoritarian, huh?
No. Fake news will be labeled fake news. It will be the usual lefty lies, of course.
EVERY news item that is critical of Trump will be labeled 'fake news'. It's ugly and will be so for at least 4 years.
The media and the liberals have no one to blame for this than themselves. Presenting....no SHOVING fake news down our throats. Lying, distorting, taking things out of context, cutting and editing video to make false narratives, faking stories and lying lying lying.
People have decided....mostly rightfully that there is no truth in the media stories, that they are not accurately or even impartially reporting. Therefore there is no reason to believe anything the press, media, liberals say.
The Boy Who Cried Wolf is an enduring parable for a reason.
The media and liberals.....they did it to themselves.
The Obama years with the lapdog Press was the most dangerous time in the history of the United States.
Rick
The difference is I never demanded it of the press. They DID ask softball questions - although not always. The Trump supporters love it because Trump is basically saying 'screw the press it's all fake'. Which is crazy. The difference too is Trump and his clan are confusing who the press apparently favors with general questions that the American people would like to have the answers to. Just wait. Obama certainly got some tough questions. Trump will refuse to get any. He is that entitled.
"Obama certainly got some tough questions."
-- One of Obama's toughest question came from Joe the Plumber, who the media promptly destroyed.
I have been trying to figure out what Chuck's role in life is with very little success. Part of the problem is that I can't force myself to read all his posts so I am always working with incomplete data. The farthest I have gotten is a theory that he is a retired lawyer who misses the opportunity to argue both sides of an issue and has decided to exercise that bad habit here. I know that's close, but it is incomplete. Has anyone else here had the courage to read all his posts and come to a better conclusion? I figure if we all contribute our theories we might get a better handle on why he is so disruptive and adds so little to the conversation. I am serious about this, because I believe there is an interesting answer to why he acts as he does.
Trump just had a whole press conference to talk about his potential conflicts of interest. He spent significant time during the campaign apologizing for being a jerk when asked about it. But, yes. Continue believing he hasn't had any "tough questions" asked of him.
I don't like Trump: But come on! The things people say about him are ridiculous.
Dust Bunny Queen
So you read, what, Breitbart news? Give an example of fake news. I can give you a long list of the b.s. I see from conservative facebook friends - often linking right back to Breitbart and Gateway and the rest of the ultra-right. You know the one's about Obama being a Muslim born in Kenya with a fake birth certificate [which Trump believes], or PizzaGate all of which I hope you don't believe are true.
Matthew Sablan
Right, so watched ALL of Obama's press conferences and determined he never once got a tough question. Good grief....
Trump did get some tough questions but now that he is president he can more easily slide around and not answer them because he is no longer running for president. Big difference.
Matt: Altering the audio in the Trayvon Martin shooting. Claiming Trump didn't participate in donating to was it flood victims? Claiming Romney never paid taxes. Cruz having a racist rock meaning he is a racist. The long list of fake hate crimes in the past few weeks (fake church burning, fake hijab grabbing, just for two.)
And that's what I've got in 10 seconds of thinking about it.
"Right, so watched ALL of Obama's press conferences and determined he never once got a tough question."
-- Name me difficult questions Obama got that were anywhere near as difficult as the one Joe the Plumber gave him.
Rolling Stone's fake rape story.
Claiming Russia hacked voting machines.
Insisting Clinton's use of a private server was approved by Colin Powell.
Again, that's without really thinking about it.
"The Trump supporters love it because Trump is basically saying 'screw the press it's all fake'. Which is crazy."
Crazy? Try not true. He called out one irresponsible news organization.
Note that none of the stuff I listed was like PizzaGate -- something the Internet ran with that most everyone agrees is nonsense, or Obama's birth certificate, something that Hillary Clinton pushed out and some on the right ran with.
Matt got taken to the woodshed by Matthew.
Only in NY kids, only in NY . . .
khesanh0802 said...
I have been trying to figure out what Chuck's role in life is with very little success. Part of the problem is that I can't force myself to read all his posts so I am always working with incomplete data. The farthest I have gotten is a theory that he is a retired lawyer who misses the opportunity to argue both sides of an issue and has decided to exercise that bad habit here. I know that's close, but it is incomplete. Has anyone else here had the courage to read all his posts and come to a better conclusion? I figure if we all contribute our theories we might get a better handle on why he is so disruptive and adds so little to the conversation. I am serious about this, because I believe there is an interesting answer to why he acts as he does.
What I wonder is why all of the personal attention lavished on me, instead of plain issues? Why is it necessary, in order to gauge my arguments, to speculate about whether I am a real Republican, or whether I am a paid Democratic operative, or something else more exotic? Why would it matter at all? Is it a better argument, or a worse argument, depending on who I am? I honestly don't concern myself as much with any of you, and I don't understand why the personal attacks on me. How many posts have we all seen, in which the contents are a one-line attack on me, with nothing else of substance related to the subject of the blog post? Often times with an opening line of "Chuck, who supported Hillary Clinton..." or a scare-quoted "'Real Republican' Chuck..."
Whatever; knock yourselves out.
Matt: Right, so watched ALL of Obama's press conferences and determined he never once got a tough question. Good grief....
Trump did get some tough questions but now that he is president he can more easily slide around and not answer them because he is no longer running for president. Big difference.
Matt knows what questions will be asked and answered in press conferences that haven't taken place yet, but finds it implausible that the contents of publicly archived past press conferences are knowable by ordinary mortals.
What bullshit. Again, Obama was calling out Fox News channel by name for a very long time. Nobody -- not me, for sure -- ever felt that there was any cause for Fox News to be peeing in their pants. Fox News certainly never thought so, and never acted any differently.
Fox is the number one news network on cable, by quite a bit. CNN is not. Fox already made their bones being the outlier - the only one with some conservative content. CNN is part of the rest of the legacy-style media. So once again, I'm not sure how making this comparison is apt. Fox GAINED viewers during the Obama administration by being the one that was different. Are you inferring that CNN is going to gain viewers if Trump shuts them out? They were bleeding viewers anyway.
You all know very well that I have latched onto something deep within Trumpism; the desire to authoritatively smash the domestic enemies of Trump and Trumpists. What a bunch of nasty, dumb bumpkins.
And once again, you're setting up bogeymen, because of your own visceral dislike of Trump. You know damn well that most of the people here who voted for Trump are not authoritarians, and it's a dishonest smear to say that. What color is the sky on the planet you live on?
Matt said...
The difference is I never demanded it of the press.
I don't see anyone demanding it of the press. I'm watching people laugh at a press which thinks it can push one side of the debate and then whine we're not allowing them to perform their watchdog role. Here's a clue sparky: they've never performed the watchdog role they so grandiosely assign to themselves. They're propagandists. And if they'd rather be seen as watchdogs rather than propagandists the appropriate strategy is to stop being propagandists.
Trump is basically saying 'screw the press it's all fake'.
Trump is saying this is fake, and he's correct. Meanwhile you're arguing calling fake news fake is illegitimate because non-fake news exists. Apparently this makes sense in your world.
He is that entitled.
Obama went forever without giving a press conference, Clinton did the same during the campaign. But we're going to convict Trump before he's even taken office? Your ability to draw such certain conclusions against Trump while saying nothing about the others shows your only "evidence" is bias.
Matt says:
I can give you a long list of the b.s. I see from conservative facebook friends - often linking right back to Breitbart and Gateway and the rest of the ultra-right.
Put your money where your mouth is, then. Give me one single link of fake news that Breitbart put out on their website. One rule, however - if you have to do a google search of "Breitbart fake news", then you've cheated, and it doesn't count.
I'll wait.
Matt: "This is how dictatorships start, Trump supporters want no hard questions asked of Trump"
Gosh, you are on to us. Have you been sneaking into our Nazi KKK Intersectional meetings? Time to change our secret handshake again.
Also time for your meds Matt. Mind the shape shifting nurse though, or she'll gnaw on your brain.
I have discovered that the sole member of life-long republican commenter is now a group. Welcome, Brando, to the group.
I Callahan;
Don't misunderstand me. I would never slander all Trump voters. How could I possibly do so with any credibility? I AM A TRUMP VOTER! I think there were and are lots of thoroughly reasonable, credible Trump voters. I personally tend to think what won the election for Trump in the face of contrary polling numbers was loyal Republicans who had spent the primary season loathing Trump, returning to the fold when the choice was, as I have been told, "binary."
"lifelong "golden showers meme retransmitter" republican" Chuck takes timeout from his continuous attacks on Trump and republican base voters to complain about other posters misinterpreting his non-stop Trump/republican base bashing.
Well, gee.
Trump's tax returns = lefty version of Obama's birth certificate.
Cuckservative Chuck (CuckChuck) is more unglued than usual today. He really hates that Trump didn't lose with dignity, as he was hoping to complete his masterbatory trilogy of GOPe concession speeches.
He really hates that Trump didn't lose with dignity
What he can't forgive is that Jeb never got his opportunity to lose with dignity.....
Trump's tax returns = lefty version of Obama's birth certificate.
Closer would be Obama's college records.......
Has anyone else here had the courage to read all his posts and come to a better conclusion?
I've always figured him for a Moby.
If he really is a lifelong Republican, then I would guess he is a K Street lobbyist or a mid level staffer for an Establishment Republican.
Mark Levin saying "I don't watch Shemp Smith" while playing clips of Shep Smith.
The next four years are going to be quite entertaining.
Mark Levin saying "they started organizing the day after he was elected." 1) that's a dream - Democrats are not that organized 2) is he criticizing? Why?
The next four years are going to be quite entertaining.
Indeed. Trumpster is a vexing mix of constant subterfuge and displacement mixed with some legitimate priorities to cleverly raise every now and then, and some strident disparagement thrown in on top.
He definitely comes across as someone with a very activist demeanor, and likely a very activist approach to the whole thing.
He will cut a lot corners that have been deemed ethical "red lines" in the past, and he will offset that with some actual agenda goals that either achieve broad consensus or are balanced between broad constituencies.
Ordinarily it's not a bad approach, but we are in uncharted waters here, and his temptation to be a despot, and to use this precise approach as the best time-tested formula for achieving despotism, should be watched carefully.
Trump just had a whole press conference to talk about his potential conflicts of interest. He spent significant time during the campaign apologizing for being a jerk when asked about it. But, yes. Continue believing he hasn't had any "tough questions" asked of him.
Oh yes! He was asked a question! Wow what a big boy. Let's give him credit for standing there while the 1st amendment proceeds.
Anyway, the problem is that his answers, while creative and a little helpful, were still unsatisfactory.
But I get it. This is finally the "results-oriented" administration Republicans have wanted for decades. They-ey-ey-ey-ey-ey want action. And they want in on it. They want a piece. Ethics don't concern them any more.
There is something odd about the audio at the news conference.
I watched CNN and ABC's version and found Trump's audio quality strangely crappy: Boomy/echoey..almost like recorded with a camera mic instead of direct from the usual hardwired feed from a press distribution box provided at national news events.
Then the questions began.
Though I can see in the ABC footage a mic on a boom pole fishing around in the reporter section, Acosta seems particularly well miked compared to other reporters..and consistently. It almost sounds as if he was wearing a lavalier mic and that somehow made it to at least ABC and CNN cameras...maybe others.
“In an ever-changing, incomprehensible world the masses had reached the point where they would, at the same time, believe everything and nothing, think that everything was possible and that nothing was true. ... Mass propaganda discovered that its audience was ready at all times to believe the worst, no matter how absurd, and did not particularly object to being deceived because it held every statement to be a lie anyhow. The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that, under such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism
Well done Professor.
The media and the liberals have no one to blame for this than themselves. Presenting....no SHOVING fake news down our throats. Lying, distorting, taking things out of context, cutting and editing video to make false narratives, faking stories and lying lying lying.
People have decided....mostly rightfully that there is no truth in the media stories, that they are not accurately or even impartially reporting.
Well THERE'S a lie - right there. "People" have decided? Which people? All of them? NYTimes subscriptions are way up. (No wonder).
But I guess you wanted to get sloppy with your point to drive us to a premature, de-contextualized narrative.
"The media" is having problems right now. But "the media" is a very big and complicated thing. And "the Don" is more full of fake, false starts than any politician ever in America. The number of lies he told and contradictions he floated were legendary. Talk about false narrative. Every fact he addresses has to come to the conclusion that he's the greatest, the best, the most terrific, etc., etc., etc., garbage, garbage, garbage. Now there's a narrative that can't be sustained. Highbrow and mainstream press might have a quick narrative they conclude on, based on years of observation. But nothing so simple and crude as, "I'm terrific, I'm the best, and every point you raise will either bore me too much to respond to or somehow be put to use in the construction of my 'I AM AWESOME' narrative."
BTW, he met with RFK Jr. to discuss ways of promoting anti-vaccination efforts and the phony link to autism. Talk about a guy with a poor hold on reality. I realize connies think intellect is over-rated, but come on. Some facts and interest in them, please?
Personally, I got anxious listening to the Trump conference because I could tell how taxing it was on his psyche to have to address so many important things and only be able to connect a few of them at most to a display of how great and awesome he is. It was distressing on him and I picked up on it and felt it along with him.
He just intuitively conveys the distress of an ego too taxed and undeveloped to handle all the pressures of the job. This is not the office for someone so far from being humble.
Commander Crankshaft said...
Personally, I got anxious listening to the Trump conference because I could tell how taxing it was on his psyche to have to address so many important things and only be able to connect a few of them at most to a display of how great and awesome he is. It was distressing on him and I picked up on it and felt it along with him.
He just intuitively conveys the distress of an ego too taxed and undeveloped to handle all the pressures of the job. This is not the office for someone so far from being humble.
1/11/17, 6:40 PM
Nice live blogging commenting narrative. You were feeling our leader at him. Brownie points for sure.
You were feeling our leader at him.
Apparently our other leaders had something called "confidence" and I took that for granted. There was reassurance in their voice, in their demeanor. A feeling that they'd be able to face something.
Trump was full of anxiety in his voice that he wouldn't be able to bitch loudly enough at whomever he deemed to be the nearest threat to his ego. And he was incredibly anxious. Such threats were everywhere, for him. He never knows what issue will jump out from behind the corner and spook his toddler's sense of self and security in the world right out of him.
I recently got a cat. Very skittish things, those.
Trump is the human equivalent. Instead of fearing large primates walking around nearby that could possibly fall on him, he fears that his ego and reputation will be harmed by more secure egos in the room, and all over America.
Help me, Putin! Help me! Throw me a life preserver, here!
He just intuitively conveys the distress of an ego too taxed and undeveloped to handle all the pressures of the job. This is not the office for someone so far from being humble.
Humble?
Maybe Eisenhower or Truman, but certainly nobody since them. What type of person do you think runs for president these days?
Khesan 0802
"I figure if we all contribute our theories we might get a better handle on why [chuck the liefelong Republican] is so disruptive and adds so little to the conversation."
The reason people respond to chuck's posts in my opinion is that chuck is pretty clever guy and busy, busy. He is out in front on issues formulating challenges. That is interesting.
The reason people get mad at him in particular, in my opinion, is that he asks a clever question and then brutally insults anyone who engages with him without answering their arguments. When you see that happening over and over, you become disgusted with Chuck. Moreover, he is out in front on issues formulating challenges SOLELY to issues that Republicans face. Then he calls himself a "lifelong Republican" and implies that he is about to leave the party because he can't get his current question answered. When you see that over and over, then "lifelong Republican" becomes a joke and, even over time, an insult to the intelligence.
The answers people give to him are pretty good and I read them, skipping over his insults in response. Since he is so topical and clever, he is kind of an asset because of the answers he elicits but really it is the other commenters who are the asset.
It's all very irritating.
An example from today's thread of "lifelong Republican's" insincerity in argument. First, "lifelong" said: "You all know very well that I have latched onto something deep within Trumpism; the desire to authoritatively smash the domestic enemies of Trump and Trumpists. What a bunch of nasty, dumb bumpkins." Further on, "lifelong" said: "I would never slander all Trump voters. How could I possibly do so with any credibility? I AM A TRUMP VOTER!"
Is there something deep in all this? I wonder.
@Matt & Matthew: "The long list of fake hate crimes in the past few weeks (fake church burning, fake hijab grabbing, just for two.)" fakehatecrimes.org has reached #276.
Humble?
Maybe Eisenhower or Truman, but certainly nobody since them. What type of person do you think runs for president these days?
Someone who doesn't say, "Someone insulted me! I must now put ALL other things on hold and figure out the nastiest way to retaliate RIGHT NOW!"
Yeah. Someone who doesn't do that. Someone with more important things to do than that.
We've elected an internet troll as president.
"Having the White House refuse to even speak to you ..."
Not just the white House,the POTUS heads the entire Executive Branch. That is the DOD, EPA, State, Treasury, Justice and on and on....
Push hard enough and CNN could be cut out of a LOT of loops.
And, as an aside, those that say Hillary got a majority of the votes cast are dense, unfamiliar with English or intentionally lying.
Those that say a majority of Americans voted for Hillary pretty well narrow it down to the dense option.
AprilApple said...
Democrats make a lot of money selling speeches and books. Does that need to end now too?
If someone overseas bought Obama's book, did that violate the emoluments clause?
Trump is going to shift the window of what's acceptable press conference behavior by over a ton.
It's already done!
Trump is going to shift the window of what's acceptable press conference behavior by over a ton.
Kind of like how he did, here.
@ Chuck You could have easily answered my question, instead you took off on one of your digressions. That convinced me even more that you are a lawyer who feels a need to argue both sides of the case with the intention of aggravating your readers. That is one of the things I have been trying to get a handle on- your clear intent to aggravate rather than add to the analysis. I don't care whether you are a Democrat, Republican or non-believer. Part of the reason people scoff at your "life long Republicanism" is because you consistently argue the "other side's" case. Then, of course, when called on it you argue "the life-long Republican" stance until your next comment when you take the opposite side again. I find your thought processes fascinating, if unrewarding.
@Wildswan Thank you. You put in words thoughts I have been too stupid or lazy to make coalesce. You're correct that Chuck is clearly well prepared to attack anyone who answers his posts. That's what I mean about the lawyer who enjoys arguing both sides of the case (it was not meant as a compliment!). I think if we keep picking away at this issue we may get an interesting handle on what makes "Chuck" tick.
Matt said...
This is how dictatorships start. Trump supporters absolutely want no tough questions for their new king. They want softball questions and an obsequious press.
Rick said...
If softball questions and an obsequious press start dictatorships we've been on the road 8 years. Where ya been sparky?
--
++++++
The press..documented to be actively assisting Hil.. Good grief.
He will cut a lot corners that have been deemed ethical "red lines" in the past,
Ritmo seems to have changed IDs again. New minimum wage job ?
The complaints about Trump are so futile since he hits back. If only Romney had known how to do so.
Commander Crankshaft said...Kind of like how he did, here.
What Trump did on that score during the campaign was mild compared to what Hillary did: link
She was mocking the disabled, right? Because what is the other option?
One thing I've yet to hear from a mainstream Democrat is what a mistake it was to run Rodham. Not. One. Word. They still think she will somehow take office. They haven't taken even the first step towards reconstruction. Mere obstruction is the intellectual game plan. Not a shred of introspection.
Ritmo seems to have changed IDs again. New minimum wage job ?
Are you confusing me with your wet nurse again?
You really must miss her a lot.
Is Hillary like a squirrel for you?
Look, it's Hillary. Go chase her!
Chickenhead retorts that mocking the disabled isn't as bad as actually either having an illness or being part of a doctored clip that purports to make you look ill.
At this point it's worth asking: Is chickenhead capable of actually getting anything right?
It would appear not.
Poor chickie. He never learns. Attracted to error like a moth to flame.
@Commando Crankshaft: I'm not buying the "exaggerated startled" BS. Nobody does that. Have you ever seen anybody do that?
No one's "selling" it to you. It's an organization that people trust to sift through the copious and ever more subtle BS on the net with what there's actually a damn bit of evidence for. I doubt Hillary had all her neurological marbles. I also doubt that connies didn't know that fact and doctored whatever they could. They're notorious for it and now get caught. The side you're siding with seems especially gullible. But hey, it's ok, right? Media leans left and is not infallible so let's go completely coy on the disinformation campaigns of the right.
But just as always, we're pseudonyms on the internet so I guess we must be telemedicine neurologists also.
Commando Crankshaft said...Is Hillary like a squirrel for you?
Why not? She is still the anointed one on the Left. Do you see otherwise?
Trump was merely the fly in the anointment.
@Commando Crankshaft: I don't believe the "exaggerated startled" BS. Nobody does that. Have you ever seen anybody do that?
Actually, Obama was even more fly in the anointment back in 2008.
I remember when I mentioned that Andrew Sullivan had become like a mobile collage dangling from a pole attached to crash helmet on your head. You had become that obsessed with him.
Maybe Hillary is your new obsession. Either way, you refuse to be objective about her. And you absolutely refuse believe that she has nothing to do with Trump's impending disasters.
You own this guy, now. Hillary's out of the picture.
I think that fact terrifies you. And so you deflect. Like always.
I remember when I mentioned that Andrew Sullivan had become like a mobile collage dangling from a pole attached to crash helmet on your head. You had become that obsessed with him.
What ever happened to that guy? Who of consequence took so much time off to read and write books after Hitler was elected in 1933? If he's not careful, some future liberal is going to write a thesis called "While Ingaland Slept."
Chuck, recall that CNN was the organization that turned itself into a propaganda outlet for Saddam Hussein in the middle of a shooting war with the US because they were unwilling to lose access to the Iraqi government. Yes, they are "peeing their pants".
Chuck, recall that CNN was the organization that turned itself into a propaganda outlet for Saddam Hussein in the middle of a shooting war with the US because they were unwilling to lose access to the Iraqi government. Yes, they are "peeing their pants".
Just remember who was whispering in Ted Turner's ear during that time.
Post a Comment