I've been noticing so many news stories reporting that Trump is angry:
1. "Internal chaos at the White House, Trump angry" (MSNBC March 1, 2018): "President Trump say [sic] he is in a bad place -- mad as hell about the internal chaos and the sense that things are unraveling."
2. "The angry past 24 hours in Trump’s fight with his own attorney general, explained" (Vox March 1, 2018): "President Donald Trump’s public feud with Attorney General Jeff Sessions keeps getting uglier — and may soon lead to the unceremonious ouster of one of the president’s earliest and most enthusiastic supporters."
3. "Trump was angry and ‘unglued’ when he started a trade war, officials say" (NBC News March 2, 2018): "According to two officials, Trump's decision to launch a potential trade war was born out of anger at other simmering issues and the result of a broken internal process that has failed to deliver him consensus views that represent the best advice of his team. On Wednesday evening, the president became 'unglued,' in the words of one official familiar with the president's state of mind."
4. "Think the White House is in chaos now? Just wait" (CNN, Chris Cillizza, March 2, 2018): "The descriptions coming out of the White House describing Trump's state of mind over the last few days all paint a picture of a frustrated and angry executive who feels more and more isolated in his own White House." And maybe that's the way Trump likes it... "President Donald Trump has, throughout his life, embraced chaos as a life philosophy. (He's like Littlefinger in that way)"... and I seem to need to watch a "Game of Thrones" clip to understand the President's psyche.
5. It's nothing new. Look at this from last May, in Slate: "Why Is Trump So Angry?/The president’s uncontrollable rage powers his ruthlessness—and his ineptitude." The illustration artist seems to have been told, just show Trump as angry as you possibly can. He's got pointed teeth arrayed in a circular formation around the circumference of his gaping mouth. His eyes are black. What color are his eyes really? Blue, right? That question was weirdly hard to Google. I kept getting things about the whiteness of the skin around his eyes — the "reverse raccoon" look that might be highlighter makeup and might be from using eye protection while tanning. And I stumbled into "What is going on with Donald Trump’s eyes?" in The New Republic 2 years ago. The young TNR writer — who seems never to have heard of the way older people tend to need reading glasses — questions Trump's fitness for office based on the large size of the font in his printed-out notes. But, yeah, Trump's eyes are blue. And Slate (racistly?) made them black, because he's angry. Imagine if they'd made his skin black to convey that he's angry!
So I'm thinking, what about President Obama? Was he portrayed as angry? No, Obama had to be the never-gets-angry man, perhaps because he actually did not get angry (behind the scenes or in public) but perhaps because advisers and the media believed they had to mollify Americans who were believed to harbor racial stereotypes.
"Obama's Anger Management Problem/As the cool-headed president says goodbye tonight, one lesson from Trump: He should have picked more enemies" (January 10, 2017 Politico): "The best comedy about President Obama has been the series of Key & Peele sketches featuring Luther, the 'anger translator' who screams the unexpurgated thoughts the first black president would scream if he weren’t so chill, so deliberate, and so unwilling to scare white people.... And if you had to pinpoint one specific thing he’s done badly, you might start with his perplexing failure to get riled up about rile-worthy behavior, his no-drama reluctance to pick defining public fights. Obama has an anger over-management problem...."
That's after his party lost the election. Maybe the media wished they'd portrayed him as less bland, more fiery. Well, there was that one time.... "Angry President Obama Tears Into Donald Trump Like Never Before" (NBC June 15, 2016):
Chris Cillizza explained that in "Why President Obama is so angry about Donald Trump’s ‘radical Islam’ attack." I'm thinking maybe Obama was worried that his party was in danger of losing the White House and that he actually had to activate himself to generate support for Hillary Clinton. Cillizza says Obama genuinely disapproves of the "radical Islam" rhetoric and really hates having to do things "purely for the sake of politics."
Obama liked to tell us he was "mellow." Here he is in 2015 at the White House Correspondents Dinner:
Now, clearly, the press was much more favorable to Obama, and I think they portrayed him as exceedingly slow to anger because that's the way he and his people wanted him to look, but it probably had some truth to it. The press is so hostile to Trump, and they seem to be openly attacking him with reports of his anger — sometimes making him look like a scary rageaholic. But there must be some truth in it. Maybe the distortion is mostly in failing to comment on Trump's full array of emotions. He's an outwardly expressive guy, often joyful and ebullient. Another distortion is the failure to speak in positive terms when the anger is justified and properly targeted and a good and balanced part of the psyche of a human being.
March 3, 2018
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
144 comments:
One of the Clintons admitted they both woke up angry nearly every day of his presidency. Presumably not at each other. Probably what kept them going.
The MSM went all in for Crooked Hillary, and now losers have to hate winners.
Chris Cillizza explained that in "Why President Obama is so angry about Donald Trump’s ‘radical Islam’ attack."
THAT was pretty much the only time Obama WOULD get angry....not when Americans got their heads cut off, or when Americans were denied help in Benghazi.....
Typical Obama strawman: all Muslims are radical.
If that's what riled him up, maybe he really was Muslim.
The newspeople are oblivious to the fact that so many people agreed with Trump about letting in more Muslims willy nilly.
Interesting that all these stories seem to have a common theme, almost as if they were coordinated by some central agency.
JournOlist, or something. Nah, Couldn't be,
Oh, I think Obama gets angry, all right, and he does get even.
With Trump, you have to wait and see what comes next. Sometimes he is throwing M-80s into the chicken yard to get some attention and set an opening position for something he wants something done about, and some times he throws them to divert attention from something he does not want so much public attention to.
But I think he rarely gets angry enough to lose sight of what he really wants.
Lefties don't have a failing economy to pin on Trump. In fact it looks as though the standard of living of people around the world is improving because of his policies. So let's try to make it seem like there's chaos...
The best part is nobody cares if Hillary is angry or not.
The Left has to keep their lies alive.
Last Wednesday, I had to spend some time at a place that had The Today Show on the TV around 6AM. The entire coverage made it seem that Trump was going to be led away in handcuffs at any moment. Hope Hicks had been interviewed by Mueller's team the day before and NBC made it seem that the leak that came out saying that she had told white lies during the campaign was a game changer. The NBC reporters and anchors spoke in that serious, somber tone they use when they have to disclose disturbing details about some horrific event. They interwove this by bring "RUSSIA!" into the conversation every few minutes--as if the "lies" were related to Russia. They even had some statement from Barack Obama talking about Russian involvement in the election and him saying that Trump should have done something about it to ensure the integrity of American elections. I had to walk away from the room before I put my foot through the television. And it was 10 feet off the floor.
Perhaps Obama smoked too much weed to possess a fiery personality? Mellow all the way, even when he shouldn't have been. Or perhaps he was too ignorant to get angry?
If you can keep your head when those about you are losing theirs then you don't understand the situation
I think its projection. Their angry because Hillary didn't win. As for anger issues.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nt0bEkra3wU
I used to like to watch “A Football Life” and Buddy Ryan’s defenses came under discussion. He said that he didn’t design his defenses to counter the X and O actions of the other team so much, his defenses were about punishing the opponent and breaking the human being there.
It’s kind of like the Rule 13
13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.“ Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.
What is sad is to see that the press feels that it is part of the game. What kind of world do they imagine they will create with one-party and unaccountable rule?
Another narrative. Tomorrow, it will be the color of his underwear, with expert opinions on the significance, and how it affects his ability to be President.
It seems obvious to me that the Media (i.e. the propaganda arm of the DNC) engages in any speculation that will make Trump look bad.
They also engage in projection when it comes to anger. The Resistance is angered to the point of derangement.
It's only part Trump Derangement Syndrome. It's mostly the usual derangement when a Republican in in the White House.
"Another narrative. Tomorrow, it will be the color of his underwear,”
8. “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.“ Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.
Angrrrr
How President Obama stayed so mello.
@Darell
You should listen to NPR some time. The MSM business model is to cater to the increasingly small portion of the population that watches it, which is mostly elderly and left-leaning. Of course, the propaganda worked in the past because there was no other source of information. All the talk from politicians about the need to police the Internet in regards to "hate speech" and "fake news" is an attempt to recover their control over what the public sees and hears. So now some 22 year old at youtube who thinks that "hate speech isn't free speech" gets decide what you can watch.
Anger wasn't really Obama's thing; arrogance and condescension were.
There are 4 or 5 Trump Presidency topics in the press: Anger, Chaos, Republican Disenchantment, Russia/Collusion, Racist/Sexist. They rotate through as needed.
What kind of world do they imagine they will create with one-party and unaccountable rule?
A utopia of course, once the right people with the correct ideas are in charge and the hoi polloi are gotten under control then everything will be wonderful. Its called a technocracy. Rule by experts.
Wasn't a good week for the president, hard to ignore that.
Those MSM headline writers sure sound angry about something. Maybe their jobs are in danger because people are finally catching on to their fake news.
google [chaos theory] and the first page of results has five "Trump"s. He must be really powerful!
When he stops being angry, they'll start "reporting" that he is so calm, he must be near death or on drugs. Can't have that!
The prog/MSM credo is: whatever.
Their words and images are strictly tools, to be used in the moment, as strategic considerations dictate, to browbeat the populace, carry on the culture war, and advance prog power.
Good-faith interpretation and deconstruction miss the intrinsic bad faith.
Michael K said...
Interesting that all these stories seem to have a common theme, almost as if they were coordinated by some central agency.
JournOlist, or something. Nah, Couldn't be,
Or some former "Central Agency" perhaps?
There's a scoop out there for someone to document anything like this.
Has news coverage always been so speculative? People (reporters) who have no actual sympathy for or support of Trump's views claiming to know what goes on in Trump's brain, or in the discussions of the Trump inner circle. "Tillerson to be fired," "Kelly to resign in protest," "new special prosecutor to be appointed," "Kushner on the outs," "Hope Hicks not respected," etc. Do people inside the Trump White House actually leak confidentially to the NYT and WaPo and NPR? Does the lack of leaks from the inside cause reporters to base their stories on what they might do/think if they were the (awful disreputable foolish) person they imagine Trump to be?
Went to The Today Show website and turned off my add blocking software.
I see an add for some medication to treat type 2 diabetes and a skin creme with "age defying results." There is also a lot of "sponsor created content that is just adds disguised as news stories. And lifestyle type "news stories" that are excuses for pushing various products. By the way, Michelle says the food at the White House is better than the food at Buckingham palace. Can't say that surprises me.
How much are we supposed to care if Trump is angry or not? The press focuses on such stupid stuff.
Nobody seems to bat an eyebrow that a guy as politically partisan as Brennen was in charge of the CIA.
"and they seem to be openly attacking him with reports of his anger..."
Seem to?
Attacking and discrediting Trump is all that they do! The MSM coverage of Trump is speculation, gossip, partisan hackery, laughable and completely over-the-top.
The media is like a cluster of high school Mean Girls watching the classmate they hated most enjoy her unexpected night as prom queen.
Wasn't a good week for the president, hard to ignore that.
I was not aware that it was a particularly bad week for POTUS. But then I am allowed to turn off my telescreen, even though I'm not a member of the inner-party. Did some bad thing happen that will cause him to lose all of his supporters and is going to mean he is indicted for collusion or obstruction or mopery dopery?
I was not aware that it was a particularly bad week for POTUS. But then I am allowed to turn off my telescreen, even though I’m not a member of the inner-party.
LOL
You folks can fantasize and deflect until the cows come home... but these observations are coming from witnesses on the inside of the WH and people in contact with the president and his advisers.. Do we really think that a trade war out of the blue after he's been advised of the negative effects of such an action are in OUR best interests...
Watch your wallets - they are stealing US blind.. and they are coming for your 'entitlements'
Wasn't a good week for the president, hard to ignore that.
Translation: Hillary (still) isn't the President.
” The Truth is “the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference.” Trump is never indifferent and isn't afraid to tell you what he thinks at the moment no matter how little he has thought it out. Democrats won't be able to accuse Trump political hedging.
Angry or not, he is wrong about tariffs
He's angry that Tillerson quit before New Year's.
Now, clearly, the press was much more favorable to Obama
If the major media outlets could just recognize this about themselves, they could be on the path toward doing better.
Ralph L3/3/18, 7:09 AM
The newspeople are oblivious to the fact that so many people agreed with Trump about letting in more Muslims willy nilly.
I think that most of the media understood — they do if they didn’t then — that Trump can say almost anything an it will please his core supporters. The 25 or 30%.
I think Trump was oblivious to the fact that “a ban on all Muslims entering the United States” was fundamentally not legal and utterly impossible as a policy or a promise.
Anger is an Energy: My Life Uncensored by John Lydon:
“Anger is an energy. It really bloody is. It’s possibly the most powerful one-liner I’ve ever come up with. When I was writing the Public Image Ltd song ‘Rise’, I didn’t quite realize the emotional impact that it would have on me, or anyone who’s ever heard it since. I wrote it in an almost throwaway fashion, off the top of my head, pretty much when I was about to sing the whole song for the first time, at my then new home in Los Angeles...
...You’d see these reports on TV and in the papers, and feel that this was a reality that simply couldn’t be changed. So, in the context of ‘Rise’, ‘Anger is an energy’ was an open statement, saying, ‘Don’t view anger negatively, don’t deny it – use it to be creative.’
A (somewhat meandering) line can be drawn from Johnny Rotten to Donald Trump. Perhaps.
"God Save the Queen", a salvo at a monarchy. Trump's Tweets, pipe-bombs for the Elite.
Anarchy in the US?
The Germans have a word for this.
Lefties don't have a failing economy to pin on Trump.
Is the economy significantly better than in the last few years of the Obama administration. The answer is no, growth is about the same, There was finally a bump in salaries, but 2.9% (barely above inflation) is really not that great.
Here are just some of the things in the presidents world this week... this would not constitute a good or even 'normal' week in any presidency.. we agree?
• Hope Hicks resigns
• Jared loses top secret clearance
• Kelly vs. JaVanka
• Trump vs. Sessions
• Companies ditch NRA
• Trump-Hill gun meeting
• Manafort trial date
• Mueller on Trump/Dem emails
• Carson/HUD’s $31k dining set
• Don Young weighs in on Jews
I think Trump was oblivious to the fact that “a ban on all Muslims entering the United States” was fundamentally not legal and utterly impossible as a policy or a promise.
I think chuck is oblivious to the fact that that is not what Trump said.
IT helps to have facts.
Trump said he didn’t hear the MSNBC reporter’s question clearly, "but even if I did, I mean, I want databases for the Syrian refugees that Obama is going to let in if they come in."
Listening to this interview, we noticed that Trump still didn’t give a definitive "yes" or "no" answer on whether he would want an all-encompassing Muslim registry, though he said it’s "certainly something we should start thinking about." He also clearly said he wants a registry for Syrian refugees.
Althouse wrote; I'm thinking maybe Obama was worried that his party was in danger of losing the White House and that he actually had to activate himself to generate support for Hillary Clinton.
Obama, July 27, 2016:
"That’s the Hillary I know. That’s the Hillary I’ve come to admire. And that’s why I can say with confidence there has never been a man or a woman—not me, not Bill, nobody—more qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as president of the United States of America."
What a horse's ass that man is.
I don’t have to read the headlines just look at tweets against Sessions or his public flips on gun regulations, or his love for trade wars to note his erratic behavior but I don’t think this is from anger but more his love to at the center.
But there must be some truth in it.
Must be, because NBC and CNN keep saying so.
I think it's time to let go of the Hillary hate... she 'lost' and now we have president bombast and have to deal with the fallout from him... Hillary is assigned to the ash heap of history... she is in gahenna and is not bothering anyone... our current problems are in front of us...
There was finally a bump in salaries, but 2.9% (barely above inflation) is really not that great.
Yes, Nancy. That's just Crumbs! Crumbs, I tell you.
Where do you see Hillary hate, Mr. GWash?
"the Public Image Ltd song ‘Rise’"
I could be wrong
I could be right
An idea from another time.
A master persuader uses anger in his act to impress the troops that he is serious.
The Enemymedia makes up NationalEnquirer level headlines about the Mad, Furious, Out of Control, Tyrant.
Hillary is assigned to the ash heap of history... she is in gahenna and is not bothering anyone... our current problems are in front of us...
You don’t get to cut the albatross off of your own neck. Sorry, but Hillary is the gift that you guys gave Republicans, and she keeps on giving.
"“a ban on all Muslims entering the United States” was fundamentally not legal"
Trump should have known that it says right there in the laws of the United States that the president cannot ban any large group for any reason, and that the First Amendment guarantee of equal protection for all religions applies to foreigners.
Or, wait ---.
Anyway, stupid Trump. Stupid, stupid Trump.
The MSM has been lying about Trump for almost 3 years now. (Yes Know, he started his run in summer of 2015).
Since Jan 2017, they've been using anonymous white house sources. Sometimes they use anon sources that are not in the white house but claim to be "familiar" with what transpired. AKA 2nd and 3rd hand gossip.
And they can lie all they want, because we can't fact check them.Even Reagan wasn't treated with this kind of dishonesty and hostility.
I think that looking at Obama being mellow being good is wrong. What it said to the world was that the US, on his watch could be pushed around. He drew a red line for the Syrians about them gassing their civilians, and they essentially ignored him. Contrast that with Trump dealing in that country. Several weeks ago, a brigade of Russian backed mercenaries went to attack a position there that had Americans. The White House got on the Red Phone with the Kremlin, made sure that the mercs were not officially sanctioned, and notifying them that their attack would be disfavored by the US. The mercs started their attack anyway, and the US obliterated them from the air, using everything from drones up to B-52s and AC-130s, the Buffs having been dispatched hours earlier (Diego Garcia?) and them and the gunships implying that complete air supremacy had been imposed over Syria for the length of the strike. Several hundred mercenaries died in a very short period of time. In response, it has been claimed that Putin went into hiding for a couple days. Who then thinks that it is safer for other countries to cross the US: Mellow Obama, who planned operations in the WH, or Cra Cra Trump, who tells his generals to make it happen, as they see best (which, inevitably means through the use of overwhelming force, regardless of non-American casualties)? I would suggest that you rationally fear the guy with the hair trigger temper more than the guy who acts half stoned much of the time
A perfect example of NPR dishonesty this AM.
A reporter says "The price of soup will go up, because Trump raised tariffs".
OMG - poor people won't be able to eat soup anymore!
Fact: The price of aluminium per can is 2 cents. For steel its even less. And the price of metals is set on the global market - not the USA market.
NPR knew that - but they had to lie.
And they wonder why Fox News is the most watched network.
Michael K here is the full quote from Trump. Not a question that he didn’t hear correctly; not a misquote of him by an unfair reporter; not words twisted by a political opponent; this was his own statement, read by him in public:
“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1401/establish-ban-muslims-entering-us/
Trump didn’t get that. He didn’t get anything like that. The adults among Trump’s legal team and among his appointees in the DoJ knew that they couldn’t even propose it. The fact that Trump said something so ugly, so bigoted and so devoid of legal basis made it hard for the serious people in the Administration to get a much more limited and more carefully-crafted orders past the scrutiny of the federal courts.
a ban on all Muslims entering the United States” was fundamentally not legal
Next thing you know, Trump will be restricting were foreigners can travel in the US.
https://blogs.loc.gov/maps/2017/08/restricting-soviet-travel-in-the-u-s-during-the-cold-war/
Obama was passive aggressive. Trump is aggressive aggressive.
Truman was a rageaholic.
Ike was known for his blazing temper. As he stated in his diary, he would get mad and "Blaze for hours" over some stupidity or careless act by a subordinate or superior.
JFK was jacked up on various drugs. LBJ delighted in "dressing down" people. Nixon ordered all kinds of illegal activities because he was mad at something.
Hillary was always angry - and still is. Bill Clinton - the same.
So if Trump gets angry - he's in good company.
Per rcocean: A perfect example of NPR dishonesty this AM.
A reporter says "The price of soup will go up, because Trump raised tariffs".
OMG - poor people won't be able to eat soup anymore!
Fact: The price of aluminium per can is 2 cents. For steel its even less. And the price of metals is set on the global market - not the USA market.
NPR knew that - but they had to lie.
NPR can feel safe from the iron and aluminum workers'. sentiments but other liberal networks cannot. As Althouse once brilliantly said, they didn't know which way to tsk
The fact that Trump said something so ugly, so bigoted and so devoid of legal basis made it hard for the serious people in the Administration to get a much more limited and more carefully-crafted orders past the scrutiny of the federal courts.
I know you don't like it Chuck, but what exactly makes it illegal, beyond the fact that a judge also didn't like it. Its obvious that a lot of judges think it is their job to make political decisions, which they dress up as legal rulings. That is not a situation that can continue indefinitely.
I don't think Trump is an angry person. He puts on an angry act from time to time but I think he is deeply at peace with himself and is not easily riled. History has it that subordinates have enjoyed working for him and were never afraid of his temper.
The price of metals goes up and then it goes down. It always has and it always will.
I don't think Trump is an angry person. He puts on an angry act from time to time but I think he is deeply at peace with himself and is not easily riled.
I did see him appear to be angry on the original Apprentice, before it became Celebrity Apprentice. He raised his voice to a contestant who was supposed to be getting a ride for him and a woman (don't remember if it was Marla Maples or someone else) and the contestant wasn't doing anything when the ride didn't appear when it should have. On the other hand, he seems to be able to be charming too. In the first season one of the judges was a rather attractive looking woman, slender and blond, and Trump would tell her that she looked like Princess Di. You could see her practically purr.
Scott Adams says that acting angry and irrational is a keen negotiating tactic. The irrational person is in a better negotiating position. Look at how the Iranians played Obama in the Iran deal. They were doing their usual crazy schtick and Obama couldn't stop giving away stuff, even going so far as to break the law, to get a deal.
Obama was too shiftless to get angry, but he was certainly passive aggressive.
"devoid of legal basis"
You mean, like:
Section 212(f): “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”
Whenever. Any class. He may. Any restrictions. He may deem appropriate.
Stupid Trump. Stupid, stupid Trump.
rcocean said...
Fact: The price of aluminium per can is 2 cents. For steel its even less.
Aluminum tastes better than steel, but a couple of days later you're hungry again.
“But there must be some truth in it.”
Seriously? Exactly what the MSM fake news industry wants. It worked with Roy Moore. They keep trying different innuendo with Trump to see what sticks.
Funny that virtually all of the reports of Trump being angry (or my personal favorite-furious) are based on anonymous sources. I particularly like the ones involving Trump's reactions while watching TV. (Apparently there is only one TV in the White House and it is in a public place.)
So the only real basis to believe any of these reports is not any concrete proof or the credability of the actual sources, who are in fact unnamed, but the credibility of the reporters and the media.
It's almost as if someone is funneling salacious and unverified information through the media in order to give it a veneer of credibilty.
Now where have I heard that before.
If Trump's comments on the immigration ban are valid reasons for overturning it, what Obama-era laws and EOs can be overturned because of his "typical white person" and "clinging to their guns and religion" comments?
(eaglebeak)
So far this week John Brennan, Eric Holder, and Michael Hayden have savaged Trump--the first two being Obama guys, and the third a Bushie.
Holder's fame goes all the way back to the part he played in the Marc Rich pardon. Brennan is a former voter for Gus Hall (CPUSA), a fan not of Russia but of the Soviet Union, promoter of the theory that Islamic radical terrorism has zero to do with Islam, and possessor of pronounced supraorbital brow ridge.
I think there's some pretty palpable anger on the Obama/Clinton side of the great divide, and they just won't let go. (Oh, and Brennan gave his interview to MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace, former campaign aide to McCain who has become a professional Never Trumper).
All in all, a week of particular viciousness aimed at Trump.
Best thing that happened for him this week from the punditry side is that Condi Rice said to Adam Schiff: Why don't you drop the Russia thing? and told the ladies of The View that her father saved their lives from the Klan with unregistered firearms and told Nicolle Wallace that, while she couldn't look into Trump's heart on the issue of racism, he was very nice to her when they met.
Also, I don't think Trump is any more angry than any other high-expectation, high-drive, successful, A-type personality. Do we have reports of him throwing things at people, or just saying mean things?
I think the DC press is just a bunch of lazy rumor mongers at this point. Everything is off the record; everything is vague as to timing. They're all various iterations of Michael Wolff trading gossip. Megan McArdle, for example, used to be a serious journalist. At the beginning of this year she published a piece that used Michael Wolff's book as one piece of evidence, combined it an Axios article that said that the departure of six or seven Trump senior advisors was imminent, and forecast anarchy for the Trump administration. In the nearly two months since, Wolff has been shown to be a fabulist; Hope Hicks is the only notable Trump adviser to have resigned (and I doubt she was considered to be one of the people keeping Trump on the rails); and I have stopped reading McArdle.
Meanwhile, we may or may not have killed more than a few Russians in Syria; China's Xi is now apparently President for life, to pick two huge underreported stories.
(Which is to say, I don't think his default state is 'angry,' but he is very willing to go to 'angry' to get results or to express frustration in subordinates that are failing. You know. Like most high-profile executives.)
Also: The media telling me Trump is irrationally angry would have more meaning if I hadn't heard the same stock description of every high-ranking Republican I can think of since Reagan.
Hell, they tried to sell me that Romney and Paul Ryan were angry, hate-filled people! Mitt Romney -- who closed his business to find a missing girl and sat with a dying kid to write the kid's will pro bono!
So, excuse me if I don't immediately say: "Of course the media is telling me the truth this time!"
Chuck has discovered one of the many versions of TRump's comment about Muslim immigration.
What he said, and I agree with it, is that we should stop until we can figure out what needs to be done about vetting these people.
The political left and LLRs are all about letting Muslims come here en mass with their villages like in Britain.
I like the merit-based approach.
Matthew Sablan3/3/18, 9:25 AM
If Trump's comments on the immigration ban are valid reasons for overturning it, what Obama-era laws and EOs can be overturned because of his "typical white person" and "clinging to their guns and religion" comments?
Notice that I did not comment on whether I liked or supported the various District Court rulings on the Trump travel bans. I have commented previously in this blog’s comments pages that I thought that those judges were producing bad law on Executive Branch powers regarding immigration.
However I have also repeatedly made the point that Trump’s statement was a grossly stupid unforced error. He didn’t announce a realistic policy; he didn’t even advance the cause of a worthy policy goal. If you were a serious lawyer/strategist and trying to advance conservative and restrictive immigration goals, you would have forbidden Trump from releasing that idiotic statement.
Why should we value Trump's random statements more than the actual policy recommendations?
"By the way, Michelle says the food at the White House is better than the food at Buckingham palace."
Doubt if they serve watermelon and fried chicken at Buckingham Palace.
So Michael you are one of the ignorant rubes who bought into the Trump statement. But it doesn’t matter if it is for a day or a month, or for 90 days until somebody can figure out what the hell is going on.
You can’t do a broad-based ban on all categories of immigrants, some of whom are availed of federal due process for a variety of procedural reasons, using a religious test for that discrimination.
It is a legal non-starter. Trump was a fool for saying what he did. He looked like a legal nincompoop. Like saying, take the guns first and have due process second.
Apparently Trump is the first black woman President.
Historic!
"So Michael you are one of the ignorant rubes who bought into the Trump statement."
Chuck working hard on getting More Trump.
"using a religious test for that discrimination."
By the way, chuck, religious tests are not legal when running for office.
I'm unaware of an issue on the Constitution but you could certainly educate me.
After all I'm an ignorant rube.
Notice that I did not comment on whether I liked or supported the various District Court rulings on the Trump travel bans
No, you just said it was illegal.
And then Sebastian posted this.
Section 212(f): “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”
And of course the ruling was pretty much, "the president can't do that because I think he is doing it because of malice, not in the interests of the country" using the super-secret "judges get to over rule the president if they don't like his policies" article of the Constitution.
The IRS makes you pay before you litigate and you can give gag orders while litigating what can be published. So, given our legal system, why can't guns be temporarily confiscated until mental competency is determined? We do it with adults' bank accounts during competency hearings too.
Matthew Sablan3/3/18, 9:36 AM
Also: The media telling me Trump is irrationally angry would have more meaning if I hadn't heard the same stock description of every high-ranking Republican I can think of since Reagan.
That is so true. I totally agree. Well said.
In fact there are lots of times property can be seized or rights abridged by the government, especially in ticking time bomb situations. So while I may not like them or think they're a dangerous precedent, Trump's idea is perfectly within main stream legal proceedings when it comes to confiscate then litigate.
Ron.. good point but even though many here would like to crown the president, he still must abide by the constitution.. and just because you disagree with a particular ruling doesn't mean it was well thought out by the jurist and can't be appealed... it think there is NO DOUBT that the current (or former since they move through this admin. so quickly) people in power that wrote this for Donald J. were not that talented in making law that would be upheld by most courts not to mention the general public...
etbas - nice racist comment... crawl back in your hole...
Trump remains remarkably composed in the face of all the anger and vitriol directed at him. I'm often amazed that he is so happy. Happiness is a choice. Obviously Trump chooses to be happy. Even his "angry" tweets usually have a humorous "wink" embedded. Some people believe he and Sessions cooked up the call and response tweets the other day to highlight the IG's work, and lure liberals into defending the IG prior to his report.
by the way, just read roy moore is looking for money for his legal defense against the 14 year he allegedly molested... so anyone so inclined or convinced that he was railroaded by the MSM, put you money where you beliefs are...
I'm waiting... didn't think so...
Watch your wallets.. they are looking for your piggy banks...
Glad to know that you can see the 'real trump'... kind of like the happy buddha... lol on your reverse psychology trump/sessions phone call gambit... you really like the koolaid...
Con men really count on people just buying into what they are selling... you would make a great 'mark'...
these observations are coming from witnesses on the inside of the WH and people in contact with the president and his advisers
Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence. SIXTEEN anonymous sources for the NYT and WaPo anger articles. Really? After a year of spectacularly wrong anonymous reporting you're going to hang your hat on THIS? We don't know if ANY of the sources actually see, talk to, or otherwise engage with the POTUS. And I don't assume good intentions when it comes to the Fake News Mafia (formerly known as the MSM).
I stopped paying attention to articles presuming to tell us what Donald Trump is thinking or feeling. I wonder how many Americans have done the same.
Boxty observes: Look at how the Iranians played Obama in the Iran deal. They were doing their usual crazy schtick and Obama couldn't stop giving away stuff, even going so far as to break the law, to get a deal.
Sounds a little like Li'l Kim, doesn't it? He's probably super-pissed because it hasn't worked for him.
Con men really count on people just buying into what they are selling... you would make a great 'mark'...
GWash, I am sympathetic to your attempt to recover from Hillary's loss by snarking around here but I would remind you that, if you don't know who the "mark" is by the second hand of poker, you are.
♫ The hurt never stops with the butt-hurt factory ♫
I intended the above to be recited to the same tune as the old "Fun Factory" jingle.
When I went to find supporting material for this comment, I googled the phrase "The fun never stops with the fun factory." To my amusement -- perhaps Althouse will be amused as well -- the sole hit was a comment made long ago by Bissage: link.
After I post this, that lone google hit will be corrupted by this one. How meta.
Matthew Sablan3/3/18, 10:11 AM
The IRS makes you pay before you litigate and you can give gag orders while litigating what can be published. So, given our legal system, why can't guns be temporarily confiscated until mental competency is determined? We do it with adults' bank accounts during competency hearings too.
What?!? You’re going to start excusing due process violations on Trump’s part because others in government have?!?
I don't mind an angry President who gets good things done. Remember he is the CEO of an America that needs to get moving, not Mr. Rogers.
I'm saying it isn't a crazy idea. It is fairly main stream and approved by courts for other uses. It may be a bad idea. But it isn't off the wall crazy pants.
Just surprised at the level of trumpathy here.. even normal, supposedly intelligent people get sucked into the vortex and can't escape... interesting and sad all at once..
We've seen before where the 16 anon sources turn out to be:
two people who heard something from someone in the White House
fourteen people who heard the first two repeat the same thing.
Fleet you sound like you would like a benevolent dictator not a president who represents only 1 of the branches of govt... he is NOT like a CEO in any respects...that is one of his main stumbling blocks... he thinks he is and every thing is easy and we as employees all owe allegiance/loyalty to him...
Trump may be angry occasionally, but over the years I've seen far more anger from the left.
Reagan was never portrayed as angry. Instead the Liberal MSM portrayed him as a out-of-touch dummy, know-nothing who needed to be coached about everything.
Reagan fought back with humor:
"I have left orders to be awakened at any time in case of national emergency, even if I'm in a Cabinet meeting."
I bet Obama would get angry if someone copped a sample of his DNA and proved he doesn't have any close relatives in Kenya.
To the Liberal MSM all Republican Presidents (since 1920) come in two flavors:
Evil Ones - Nixon, Hoover, Trump
Stupid Ones - Everyone one else.
I bet Obama would get angry if someone released his college records.
I have it on good authority that those same anonymous sources have reported - with the same level of credibility - that Harvey Weinstein's limo was parked outside of Chuck Schumer's house last night.
“I'm thinking maybe Obama was worried that his party was in danger of losing the White House and that he actually had to activate himself to generate support for Hillary Clinton.”
I’m puzzled by the idea that It was in Obama’s financial and emotional interest to see Hillary elected President. It decidedly wasn’t and isn’t. There’s no way Obama and Michelle weren’t chortling on Election Night.
I bet Obama would get angry if someone walked up and grabbed him by the pussy.
It would be worth some personal abuse 2 clarify the nature of your presenting a passage written in the third person as a quote of Donald Trump's actual words. However, ticklish to tell you what one really thinks of you, because then you go crying to the hosts. So I will merely say that it is either intellectually dishonest or a sign of low cognitive abilities.
“Trump may be angry occasionally, but over the years I've seen far more anger from the left.”
If you want to know about the left, just look at what they accuse Trump of. Projection is what they do.
GashWash speaks trooth to power.
The mainstream media appear to have settled on two words to define Trump. One, of course, is "trump"; it's not coincidence that the verb's use has shot through the roof in the last couple of years. The other is "chaos," a word I see everywhere daily now. Are they coordinating this, or is everyone at WaPo, NYT, NPR, the big three networks and CNN just listening to/watching the others, so that each imitates everyone else?
or could there just be an angry president (frustrated authoritarian) presiding over a chaotic WH?
I think the jury is in on this... just read the words of his staff and the number of people coming through the turnstiles in the oval office... we were promised he would hire the best people and everything would be easy because you know 'i'm good at this'... instead we get incompetence and buffoonery... just like a reality show... unfortunately lives are at stake here ..
Has Tillerson resigned yet? Because the MSM had lots of anonymous sources saying that was imminent.
"But there must be some truth in it."
No. Poorly sourced malign speculation does not gain credibility through repetition. Unless you are a gullible fool.
But it is the M.O. of the press, and has been for many decades.
Oh how I miss the bleating scold of Obama...
Obama's temperament is remarkably cool, and Trump's remarkably hot. That statement may be made without value judgment. You seem to think that calling Trump "angry" is some kind of insult, but I'm not convinced Trump would see it that way at all. You also seem to think journalists covering the White House have no way of knowing Trump's moods, when in fact Trump and Trump's people talk constantly and candidly with journalists in a way no other administration ever has.
My strong opinion is that Obama gets tremendously angry but keeps appearances under control. He actually has the heart and soul of an assassin and is remorseless in destroying anyone or anything that threatens or upsets him.
If there was ever any doubt on that score, the actions of his followers and him toward Trump since the 2016 election prove it to me, at least. He and they will destroy the country if that is what it takes to get their revenge on Trump; they know it and they don't care.
Obama's temperament is remarkably cool, and Trump's remarkably hot.
Obama's [public persona] is remarkably cool [due to media manipulation], and Trump's remarkably hot [according to the same idiots who wrote the first clause].
There. FIFY.
Is this the same Obama who showed tremendous pique in saying "I won" to silence Republicans invited to his lunch meeting? The same guy who grows extremely miffed when his beloved Muslim religion is allegedly disparaged? The same angry rant who declared Pennsylvania voters too stupid to vote for him because they were "clinging to guns and their religion"? The same one who angrily called Trump a "whiner" because Trump would not declare his acceptance of the election results ahead of time?
Because if it is the same Obama we are talking about, he also scolded Trump and said that "no foreign country" could ort would meddle in our elections. He said this knowing his own FBI was in fact at that moment spying on Trump and trying to prove Russian meddling. But man how calm a hater he is!
I’m puzzled by the idea that It was in Obama’s financial and emotional interest to see Hillary elected President. It decidedly wasn’t and isn’t. There’s no way Obama and Michelle weren’t chortling on Election Night.
I agree. If Hillary had won, as the president she would have become the de facto leader of the Democrat party. Having crashed and burned, that honor now falls to Obama. Obama is far more radical than Hillary, who appears to be in it for the graft and so she can be the first woman president. The activist who are taking over the Democrat party are also far more radical than Hillary, and see her for what she is.
Hillary called young black criminals "super predators" back in the day. Activists hold her and Bill responsible for the school to prison pipeline that the Obama administration was trying to shutdown by bribing municipalities to not arrest minority kids who were committing crimes.
Obama's [public persona] is remarkably cool [due to media manipulation], and Trump's remarkably hot [according to the same idiots who wrote the first clause]. There. FIFY.
You're being complicit with the values of the media. Obama was cold, cerebral, and distanced, much like Michael Dukakis (you'll remember he couldn't be bothered to work up any human emotion when he was asked during a Presidential debate to imagine his own wife being raped and murdered). Trump is intuitive and emotional. You, like the media, seem to think that's a bad thing. Half the country disagrees.
actually less than 1/2 of the country when you start counting...
The left ... pointing out how angry Trump is?
That just makes my day.
Anger wasn't really Obama's thing; arrogance and condescension were.
Exactly.
Especially the condescension.
Nothing more than a finger-waving scold.
It decidedly wasn’t and isn’t.
Bold words, please defend them.
“Just surprised at the level of trumpathy here.. even normal, supposedly intelligent people get sucked into the vortex and can't escape... interesting and sad all at once..”
Indeed it is. Pathetic the level to which these cultists go to remake Trump in the image that their psyches can tolerate. Makes one wonder how they will react when the shit hits the fan. Will they lose their minds enmasse? Will the more normal, balanced ones be able to accept the reality of the failed Trump presidency, when it comes crashing down, which seems to be coming sooner than later. Interesting and dangerous times ahead.
*waves to Inga*
"sooner than later."
Might just coincide with CAGW.
"instead we get incompetence and buffoonery... just like a reality show... unfortunately lives are at stake here .."
I think you might have that spyglass reversed.
That guy with the pencil neck is not Trump or any of his staffers.
actually less than 1/2 of the country when you start counting...
Sure, if you use the media's math rather than Trump's alternative way of counting . . .
We love to compare and judge
compare to predecessor - temporal proximity
If only that lovely man the press said was so mild was here
How sedated we could be
Except for the horribly biased and unhinged press coverage, I think any president would love to have Trump's first year, and Trump even likes the crazy press coverage, using it to reinforce his base. I've never seen him obviously angry, and like many, I just assume this story line is the Left's wishful thinking and projection.
It's worth remembering that guys like Trump don't get mad. They get even.
Obama's words may have been "soft"
but he was a despot in action
Ask the Little Sisters of the Poor
Mr Pen and Phone is the reason for Trump
Does Trump seem angry to you? Not to me.
-sw
So I'm thinking, what about President Obama? Was he portrayed as angry? No, Obama had to be the never-gets-angry man, perhaps because he actually did not get angry (behind the scenes or in public) but perhaps because advisers and the media believed they had to mollify Americans who were believed to harbor racial stereotypes.
The problem Obama faces is that he's an America hating leftist.
Terrorists murder Americans? No problem. Russians hack US gov't, steal US Gov't secrets? No problem.
Trump correctly identifies Islamic terrorism as a bad thing? Problem.
"Russians help Trump"? Now THAT is a problem.
Obama couldn't get publicly angry because the things that got him angry , and the things that didn't, would destroy his public image.
gregq said...
The problem Obama faces is that he's an America hating leftist.
3/3/18, 10:12 PM
The problem America faces is that such a man was elected president- twice.
Post a Comment