God Emperor Trump?
It's stuff like this that will get Trump elected again...
Literally anything to make a story about trump. It’s ridiculous how much they focus on him cause they don’t like him
@Richard Cypher, they kind of have to focus on him, him being the president, but I can understand being annoyed at making a mountain out of a molehill, suck as this pic
@Nosferatu Zodd, yeah if it’s something important sure. But you have to admit the amount of negative attention to him simply for breathing is not on par with any other president, especially on non-issues
@Richard Cypher, yeah i get that, but part of that is the fact he is very out there and somewhat confrontational when it comes to media stuff, and part of that is advances in tech too, as only Obama had similar levels of tech and social media society wise
@Nosferatu Zodd, most of it, let's face it, is that the cable media is blatantly biased and overtly went in for Hillary Clinton, so now it's trying to save its credibility by doubling down with endless histrionics until a narrative sticks.
@Doctor Krieger, perfect example is the ice cream incident. Trump got two scoops and everyone else got one. Or covfefe
@Richard Cypher, does The Hill not like Trump? I thought they leaned a lot more right than left
@Dan S Krieger, Wait, what? Was that a real thing? People got upset because the President of The United States got an extra scoop of ice-cream? He’s the fücking President, he can have two scoops! (If you like him, it’s because he deserves it. If you don’t like him, it’s because it increases his chances of early death & keeps him off twitter for a couple of extra minutes. If you don’t care either way, it’s because one scoop is pointless and so the second scoop was necessary. Everyone should want him to have a second scoop).
@Nosferatu Zodd, ah the glory of 24hr news stations
@Doctor Krieger, I mean, if you have the President of the United States calling you "fake news" all the time you'd probably be pissed too.
@Danger Noodle, maybe they, uhhh shouldn't be fake news.....
@Craiger, maybe you, uuhhh, should actually do your research and then come back when you're more educated on these matters.
@Danger Noodle, spoken like a true Democrat, if I disagree I must be uneducated... p8ss off loser
@Nosferatu Zodd, there's a reason all news reports are like this. It's hard to get real information that isn't about just one orange man but about real people in real life news stories around the world
@Craiger, lol actually, you're the loser. What's your basis for claiming that "fake news" is actually "fake news?" I have not had a single person give me substantial evidence proving themselves right. And I never said I was a Democrat either. Did you want to attach that label to me because that's what you do to people who shoot you down for making baseless assumptions? Hey, I am completely up to being proven wrong if it lets me be less ignorant. I will need your sources, however.
@Danger Noodle, brace yourself because, some people might just take you up on the challenge.
@anal muffin, like I said, I'm totally up for it lol If there's something I hate, it's ignorance. I, myself, am not exempt from that.
@Danger Noodle, I mean, they could always try being honest. It's not like Donald Trump is totally wrong. It's not his fault that they're blatantly lying and manipulating to political ends or that they're losing ratings because of it.
@Doctor Krieger, I can agree with Trump not being totally wrong. However, he does tend to yell "fake news" at anything that doesn't fit his agenda. Also, while difficult to tell, not all news outlets are bad as you seem to be implying. I, myself, don't trust most of it as it is.
@Danger Noodle, my basis for "fake news" being fake news is when outlets come out making assertions that later are found to be totally deceitful or otherwise incorrect, like when it was claimed that there was conclusive evidence that Trump colluded with Russia and that impeachment was imminent or like when they paraded a picture of a crying Honduran girl kidnapped by her mother and claimed that she was separated from her mother at the border, even putting her picture on the cover of Times.
@Danger Noodle, name an outlet that isn't totally corrupted by party politics.
@Doctor Krieger, the issue that Trump keeps trying to create enemies is still there. That's not wise for any leader. And yes, news outlets should not be doing things like that. That I agree with. The fact that not all outlets are bad is also there.
@Doctor Krieger, I would except you likely wouldn't care anyways. Anything that gets political almost never actually goes somewhere.
@Danger Noodle, again, name the "not bad outlets".
Also, what relevance does Trump making enemies with the media have to the lack of an honest press? If anything, I prefer it that our president isn't buddy-buddy with the press. We have conclusive evidence that the last administration was and that collusion took place.
@Danger Noodle, so, you can't actually name any, can you? Don't be dishonest here, if you had compelling examples you would list them.
@Doctor Krieger, hmm, nah. All fvcks I had have gone out the window.
@Nellybert , yes, people actually got upset because he ate two scoops of ice cream. They also threw a fit because he made a typo in a tweet ("covfefe" instead of "conference"), insisting that it was some sort of Russian or fascist code word.
@Danger Noodle, and yet you're still here?
@Doctor Krieger, uh, yes? I have pictures I want to be looking at. And yourself?
@Danger Noodle, that's cute. You get caught out talking bullshìt and then you flee the conversation by pretending it's not worth your time all of the sudden. Yet, you still respond. It's like you're a stereotypical 12 year old. Incredibly pathetic and intellectually laughable.
@Doctor Krieger, sure.
@Doctor Krieger, fine, I'll bite. All fvcking news outlets have their biases. It's their own fault that Trump can call them "fake news" and have it be effective when they screwed up their own credibility. However, what one has to do is read various news sources and come up with their own conclusion from there. Everyone can try and be as empirical and objective as they'd like but it's virtually impossible due to us being human. You may think that all your information is correct until paired with someone of equal knowledge but of the opposite bias.
@Danger Noodle, you've still failed to list a single uncorrupted outlet. Don't tell me that you're changing the goalposts on me now.
@Doctor Krieger, I'm not changing goalposts at all because this isn't a game. And I'll tell you that in my statement "corrupt" and "screwing up their credibility" can be used interchangeably. That's why I'm not listing one. Unfortunately, the meaning of "corrupt" is subjective to interpretation for some people.
@Danger Noodle, no, you are changing the goalposts here. We were talking about outlets that deliberately spread falsehoods. There's nothing subjective about that and you've yet to name any that don't. Stop being such a fücking weasel and either concede or provide examples, don't just sit there and try to wiggle out of this with sophistry.
@Doctor Krieger, if you mean moving them, sure. Also, I already told you why I'm not naming one because there isn't one. Did you miss that part of my comment? I'll add this to see if it'll make you happy: their biases are due to corruption. Did I cover all your bases already? This is third time I've tried getting this message across. Jesus.
@Danger Noodle, and so you double down yet again, like a cretin.
I implied that the media is being dishonest for political gain.
You stated that not all outlets are as bad as I implied.
I challenged you to name examples.
You refused to.
I challenged you again.
You responded by saying that no outlet is free from bias (distinct from being free from dishonesty) while continuing to refuse to name examples.
It's really cut and dry for all to see here.
@anal muffin, took him up on the challenge. He spent the entire time trying to avoid making an actual argument. Complete sophistry. Intellectually pathetic.
@Doctor Krieger, That’s nuts - is there some context behind it? Was he doing a meet & great with dairy-allergic diabetics, or just having lunch?
Conspiracy theorists will see ‘codes’ and ‘symbols’ everywhere, I alternate between amusement and despair on that topic. The dude does need to slow down on twitter a bit though - I don’t think he always does full justice to the dignity of his office on there. All policies etc aside, making personal insults on twitter should be beneath the guy at this stage in his career.
@Nellybert , literally the only context is that there was an ice cream party for the Whitehouse staff and nobody asked for two scoops but Trump. Apparently that's an abuse of power now.
Also, what do you expect from a guy whose campaign was basically one big reality TV showdown? The guy won because he's bombastic, has no filter, and doesn't apologize. Why would he drop the act when the hostility of the media is still at fever pitch? That'd kill his momentum outright. He relies on baiting the media to engage in reality TV showdowns with him in order to keep the attention of the public and refresh his voter base's desire to turn out.
Should we talk about the fact that the organization reporting this, The Hill, leans center-right? Or should the circle jerk continue?
@Fac3pa1m, yeah I really hope people don't think CNN reported this. As popular as bashing CNN seems to be, this wasn't their doing
@SkizleDNizleS, wouldn't be surprised if it was CNN. I watched them today and they literally admitted the recent shooting at the newspaper had nothing to do with Trump while in the next breath implied it was trump's fault for his rhetoric and he must be held to account for saying mean (mostly true) things about the media
@Oujosh29, it says The Hill. Right up at the top.
@SkizleDNizleS, didnt dispute that. Said wouldn't be surprised
@Oujosh29, it's hard to say whether it really was or wasn't. The reality is that someone (Milo I-cant-remember-for-the-life-of-me) did advocate violence on journalists and that shortly thereafter 5 journalists were killed. You may not be able to link it directly, but it is a fact that a high profile person advocated such behavior. Of course, Trump doing it on the reg as well doesn't help.
@Danger Noodle, yeah but even that isnt what it seems. Milo Whatshisface never called for violence. He sent a private text to a journalist who was hounding him, and the journalist published the text. There was no public advocating of violence, unless maybe from the journalist who published
@Oujosh29, and so because it was a private threat it makes it ok? The journalist Milo threatened published the text as it was within his right and because it was a threat to his life. As far as anyone should be concerned, his advocacy is legitimate.
@Oujosh29, and no, he may not have publicly advocated the violence, but it can't be completely disregarded since it's something that can circulate the internet quickly and can convince like-minded individuals to take action regardless of the legality of things.
@Danger Noodle, those are different things. Sure Miko is an a hole for texting that, but you were talking about him advocating violence and the effects on that has. You cant say that when he didnt publicly say anything. it couldn't have been circulated without the journalist. sure the journalist could do that but cant blame milo for that
@Oujosh29, if you yourself threaten someone, you advocate violence. And yes, you can blame Milo. He is a public figure and anything he says or does is under scrutiny. He has influence and is irresponsible with it.
@Danger Noodle, you cant say he is advocating violence and he has influence about a private text message. Maxine waters saying to run all Trump employees out of everywhere in a speech is an example if advocating an action. Milo sending a private text message to an individual isnt
@Oujosh29, I don't see how that makes sense. As an example, when Trump made his "grab'em by the pvssy" statement, would that also fall under "he's not advocating sexual harassment because he made the comment in private?" (I will admit I don't remember the exact circumstances for this scenario, but for this argument's sake, let's say it was in private)
@Danger Noodle, not really. The discussion is about advocating to the public, saying something in private isnt that.
@Oujosh29, ok, now I feel like you're trying to play devil's advocate by being extremely specific and technical. If I'm wrong, I apologize. It doesn't matter whether it's public v. private. These people are representing themselves via their behavior both private and public. Whether they publicly advocate these or not does not matter. People will be looking at them as a whole. That's why so many people are jumping down their throats. They see their private interactions to be as important their public ones. In a sense, their private interactions ARE more important.
@Danger Noodle, I'm not playing devils as advocate but I am confused. How can what they say in private matter?
@Oujosh29, well, the short answer to that is that the way a person behaves in private is likely who they really are.
@Danger Noodle, no, Milo Yiannapolous made an edgy joke in a similar vain to his earlier jokes about "right wing death squads". You're a fücking liar.
@Doctor Krieger, yeah, he said it was a "troll" too. Not really making shjt up here. I don't see how it's alright to joke about "right wing death squads." It's a display of who he is unless he's simply young and reckless with no understanding of the consequences.
@Danger Noodle, it wasn't a threat. Not a private threat, nor a public threat. It was a joke. It was blatantly a joke and obviously so. You're willfully misconstruing it to be otherwise as a form of slander.
@Danger Noodle, it isn't Milo's fault that you lack the will or intelligence to understand facetious humor.
@Doctor Krieger, I can understand facetious humor. And sure, we can call it a joke, if you'd like. Doesn't change the fact there will be people "misconstruing" it because that is just the fate of high profile people.
@Danger Noodle, I'm sorry, but you don't have any evidence that anyone will misconstrue this joke to be a call to violence, nor any principle by which Milo would be morally responsible if someone did. All you have is feigned outrage and wilfull ignorance.
@Doctor Krieger, that's because it's too difficult to get that evidence even if it did exist.
And sure, why not?
@Danger Noodle, hey, it's funny that you changed goalposts yet again from "it was a threat" to "it wasn't a threat, but he's still responsible for something bad". It's almost like you have no clue how to form logical arguments.
Also, any sources for Trump advocating for violence against the press "on the reg"? Any whatsoever?
It's sad that a good president and a well-behaved gentleman like Barack Obama get so much shjt, while President Orange doesn't go a day without being an absolute moron.
@Awesome Naked Taco, Well it’s a damn good thing he’s open about the things he talks about. Obama has done a lot behind the curtains during his stay in office, as it has been found out after he’s left. Bond villains were gentlemen, but they were still villains. It’s fine and dandy that you believe that Obama was a good president, but I do not feel that way.
@TerryColdfire, I get what you mean, but Obama was a leader. He lead the country, he is and was an amazing diplomat, he is a respectful, educated and intelligent man who knew exactly how to lead to world's biggest country. Donald Trump, on the other hand, can't even manage sounding like an adult. He has sent more companies to bankruptcy than he has said something intelligent. He's married to a bimbo, his kids are involved in things they shouldn't, he never takes responsibility, he contantly changes out his team, he is a sleazy businessman whereas Obama is an academic, a diplomat and a born leader. Donald Trump couldn't even lead a kindergarden. He calls his entire opposition corrupt, liars, fake news etc. He blames everyone else and up until now, he hasn't done anything benefitial at all. Obama fought to create a health care system that took better care of those in need, he wants to make sure everybody can afford to be alive, he recognized the criminality, he recognized the horrors.
@TerryColdfire, Donald Trump has done nothing but divide the country and sugarcoats everything, manipulates the media and has failed to comment appropriately on tragedies as wells as failed to take action. He is all talk and no action.
To comment on the secretivity of Obamas preidency, he isn't supposed to tweet about everything he does. Obama was involved, he was involved with military operations, with politics, with everything. Donald Trump seems to not even know what is going on in his own backyard. Obama shares only what is necessary. Being the president was his profession, his job. He owned up to this responsibility. His #1 priority was the success of his country. Donald Trump's #1 priority is his twitter account and golfing.
I’d say it’s the twitter ghost he has living in his phone, the same one that did covfefe