Jump to content

Rhodes Scholar Reporting the News Show Discussion

So if Betsy DeVos can treat Donald  successfully with her Neurocore treatment for his mood and behavior issues, I'll vote for her.  Put up or shut up.

7

Share Post


Link to post

So the man who criticized President Obama for taking an afternoon off to go golfing last summer, is already taking a weekend vacation to Florida.

If two weeks is that exhausting, four years is going to be a personal hell.

7

Share Post


Link to post
6 hours ago, stormy said:

So the man who criticized President Obama for taking an afternoon off to go golfing last summer, is already taking a weekend vacation to Florida.

If two weeks is that exhausting, four years is going to be a personal hell.

That's also why he hung up on the Australian PM - so tired after a long day of phone calls.  All this, of course, after questioning Hillary's "stamina" for the job.

But, this isn't a vacation weekend.  It's a meeting/party with Republican donors...it's a fundraiser.  As Rachel said, that's why they aren't busy voting in Betsy DeVos today - the Republicans in Congress are in Florida, too, this weekend, for schmoozing and meetings with their yuuuge donors.  Can't wait to see what fuckery that means for next week, depending on what fuckery these yuuuuge donors want, i.e., deregulation of our financial industry, etc.

Edited by izabella.
4

Share Post


Link to post

Anyone notice how Rach snarkily refers to Jared as a "real estate magnate" (or is it merely the son of one)?  And particularly when she's driving the point on why the heck he's advising Trump on incredibly important decisions -- for matters he has absolutely no relevant experience.  So Jared was advising him to greenlight the raid in Yemen?  Thanks for the swell advice, Jared.  What's next?  That is, after you take your hand off Ivanka's butt in her next awesome "Let 'em eat cake" tweet pics.  So looking forward to more of those.

Love how Rach keeps refering to the Yemen raid as "disastrous".  Maybe cuz it was.  But it ain't how Trump's henchpeople & his ridiculous supporters are framing it.  But you'd have to go over to CNN or Fox to see that.  

Really surprised Rach hasn't mentioned Bowling Green.  Well, she was in a good mood.  That's nice.  Have more fish at lunch, Rach.  We might all be in a good mood Monday if DeVos doesn't get in.  I'm preparing to be in a shitty mood.  So we have to depend on one (count 'em, one) Rethug senator to do the right thing?  Um, OK.  Congrats on the gig, Betsy.  Protesters should start organizing against her immediately.

Edited by ScoobieDoobs.
5

Share Post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Love how Rach keeps refering to the Yemen raid as "disastrous".  Maybe cuz it was.  But it ain't how Trump's henchpeople & his ridiculous supporters are framing it.  But you'd have to go over to CNN or Fox to see that.  

That's because Rachel considers killing civilians, including children, plus dead and wounded American military, with zero gain, and ordered without adequate intelligence to be a disastrous raid.  Other media, apparently, considers that a success, maybe because the civilians killed were Muslims? 

7

Share Post


Link to post

Well, that idiot Kayleigh woman on CNN is blaming the media & fake news.  Insert one of Rach's exasperated breathless laughs & an eye roll here.  And CNN found some military Trumpers who say these kinds of raids are planned months in advance, so it's "laughable" (yes, these fools seriously said laughable) how this could in any way be Trump's fault.  They all blame Obama.

So I'm glad Rach had on Obama's former adviser, who verified Obama made no decision to raid Yemen, given the timing being the last weeks of his Presidency.  Nope, this was Trump's decision & all on him -- along with Jared, the real estate magnate (or rather, son of one) & Bannon, the white supremacist.

Edited by ScoobieDoobs.
4

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Anyone notice how Rach snarkily refers to Jared as a "real estate magnate" (or is it merely the son of one)?

What she actually said was "*thirty-five-year-old* real estate developer", and while age is not a criterion for wisdom (just look at the 70-year-old menace in the news), part of her point was that he lacks all kinds of experience that would allow him to contribute meaningfully, *if he were cleared to talk about this*.  She also made clear, as other have, that he did not have clearance to know or weigh in on this.  Who is supposed to be policing all these egregious violations? 

4

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, izabella said:

But, this isn't a vacation weekend.  It's a meeting/party with Republican donors...it's a fundraiser.  As Rachel said, that's why they aren't busy voting in Betsy DeVos today - the Republicans in Congress are in Florida, too, this weekend, for schmoozing and meetings with their yuuuge donors.  Can't wait to see what fuckery that means for next week, depending on what fuckery these yuuuuge donors want, i.e., deregulation of our financial industry, etc.

And I believe there are a lot of protestors ready to greet them there. Make every day of his presidency miserable!

6

Share Post


Link to post
2 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Anyone notice how Rach snarkily refers to Jared as a "real estate magnate" (or is it merely the son of one)?  And particularly when she's driving the point on why the heck he's advising Trump on incredibly important decisions -- for matters he has absolutely no relevant experience.  So Jared was advising him to greenlight the raid in Yemen?  Thanks for the swell advice, Jared.  What's next?  That is, after you take your hand off Ivanka's butt in her next awesome "Let 'em eat cake" tweet pics.  So looking forward to more of those.

Love how Rach keeps refering to the Yemen raid as "disastrous".  Maybe cuz it was.  But it ain't how Trump's henchpeople & his ridiculous supporters are framing it.  But you'd have to go over to CNN or Fox to see that.  

Really surprised Rach hasn't mentioned Bowling Green.  Well, she was in a good mood.  That's nice.  Have more fish at lunch, Rach.  We might all be in a good mood Monday if DeVos doesn't get in.  I'm preparing to be in a shitty mood.  So we have to depend on one (count 'em, one) Rethug senator to do the right thing?  Um, OK.  Congrats on the gig, Betsy.  Protesters should start organizing against her immediately.

I want Devos head on a platter.  After her disastrous hearing, where the Democrats made mince meat out of her. How can any decent Republican vote for her.   Since they have no decency and morals, they will fall in line and do that. I can only imagine, the invectives that the right would have thrown at Obama, if Devos was a woman of color and was nominated by Obama. I remember how they went after Sotomayor for a benign statement that she said as Latina, when it came to White men, not having the same life experiences, as people of color.  Fox news painted her as a virulent racist.   I am Black and I knew exactly what she meant. I hated that she was made to disavow her statement.

8

Share Post


Link to post

I loved the story about people starting a fund drive to buy votes from members of Congress.  It's about time this is made clear - in politics today it is all about the money. Thanks Supreme Court!  And IMO neither side is an angel on this particular issue.  I also love all the stories about how members of Congress are being made uncomfortable by hearing the voices of their constituents via phone calls, letters, faxes, online campaigns and pizza deliveries. It's about time they realize "we the people" means something.  Ultimately, we are their employers and we should put them on notice about their performance on a regular basis. 

I amazed that the reports that members of Congress - both Repubs & Dems - have had to reach out to the Australian Ambassador to assure one or our strongest allies we have not all gone batshit crazy has not gotten more attention.  When are the Republicans going to grow a spine and speak out in the strongest terms possible about how inappropriate and dangerous Trump's behavior is?  I don't expect it out of all of them (Jesus, if Paul Ryan ever had a Profiles in Courage moment, I  am pretty sure I would drop dead from shock), but can they all be so cavalier about what is happening to this country, to our standing in the world?  Perhaps 2 senators voting against DeVos is a teeny tiny first step.  I know, I'm clinging to the smallest shred of hope, but it's what keeps me going. 

6

Share Post


Link to post
5 hours ago, jjj said:

What she actually said was "*thirty-five-year-old* real estate developer", and while age is not a criterion for wisdom (just look at the 70-year-old menace in the news), part of her point was that he lacks all kinds of experience that would allow him to contribute meaningfully, *if he were cleared to talk about this*.  She also made clear, as other have, that he did not have clearance to know or weigh in on this.  Who is supposed to be policing all these egregious violations? 

It's only part of what I find extremely disturbing about Kushner.  That & his lack of any acknowledgement of Bannon's anti-Semitism.  Kushner's silence when Trump didn't mention ANYTHING about Jews when he discussed the Holocaust, given his grandparents were Holocaust survivors, was truly reprehensible.  Speaks volumes about who Kushner is & the depths he'll sink to for the power & influence he clearly must crave.

Btw, Kushner just turned 36.  So hopefully Rachel's staff will correct her on his age.  Best to get even minute facts correct.  Otherwise she'll be accused of spreading fake news -- by Smellyanne, moron Spicer or that idiot Kayleigh woman on CNN.  Or maybe even her good pal, icky Greta.  Sorry, Rach, but watch your back with her -- icky Greta looks like she'd turn on you on a dime.

3

Share Post


Link to post

Given the leaks that come out of this administration every damn day, I'd love for Rach to give some snarky theories on who could be doing the leaking.  Nate Silver tweeted his theory on who could have leaked the story on Jared & Ivanka supposedly saving the gays.  

Er, could it have been Jared & Ivanka themselves?  Especially given Ivanka's horrible "Let 'em eat cake" tweet a few days earlier?  Hmmmm.

Edited by ScoobieDoobs.
7

Share Post


Link to post
On ‎2‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 4:38 PM, ScoobieDoobs said:

I don't trust Ivanka or Jared for a second.  They sure enjoy their luxury lifestyle.  And they're both greedy as hell & extremely calculating.  Jared is clearly willing to publicly ignore Bannon's well-known anti-Semitism.  It's not known why he's doing this.  We can be sure he has his reasons & his own agenda.  Is he motivated by power, greed & influence?  Ya think?

And Ivanka?  She has her own reasons for pushing against slashing LGBT rights.  If Daddy Dearest does this, as we know Bannon & Pence will push hard, hard, hard for him to do, poor widdle Ivanka can kiss her fashion brand buh-bye.

I've heard Joy Reid say specifically she's not thrilled with Ivanka.  Almost nobody criticizes Ivanka.  The "Let 'em eat cake tweet" was the first time Ivanka actually got some flack -- almost on the level of what Smellyanne gets every day.

 Never heard Rach get snarky about Ivanka.  I'd be surprised & disappointed if she isn't on this tonite.

Quote

Major companies appear to be re-evaluating their relationship with the Trump brand, which, in some instances, does not appear to have benefited from Mr. Trump’s presidency. Hinting at lackluster sales, Neiman Marcus confirmed on Friday that it had dropped Ivanka Trump’s jewelry line from its website. A day earlier, her brand disappeared from Nordstrom.com. News that the retailers had dropped Ms. Trump’s brand had earlier been reported by Racked.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/early-signs-suggest-trump’s-actions-are-taking-a-toll-on-trump-brand/ar-AAmCuD5?li=BBnb4R7

Edited by suomi.
1

Share Post


Link to post

Rachel asked if we should be wondering if Gorsuch misrepresented some of his history and discussed with Dahlia Lithwick from Slate.

... no one seems to remember the Judge’s volunteerism.

Yet for roughly three dozen students who participated in the two programs while Mr. Gorsuch was at Harvard Law School from 1988 to 1991,” they have no memory of Gorsuch ever being involved, according to an article by The Wall Street Journal.

http://abovethelaw.com/2017/02/judge-gorsuchs-law-school-resume-under-scrutiny/

(mods: I don't see a MSM link for this yet and I hope this source is considered OK)

0

Share Post


Link to post

Atta' Girl, Rachel, for commenting tonight on something that I just read about in a NY Times article that had me deeply disturbed.  Much like the Mattis situation where he felt uninformed about material contained in an executive order he was witnessing as it was being signed, apparently our new commander is feeling the same effects being brought upon him by his chief strategist/manipulator.  In the Times article entitled "Trump and Staff Rethink Tactics After Stumbles", this passage leapt off the page as I was reading: 

Quote

Mr. Priebus bristles at the perception that he occupies a diminished perch in the West Wing pecking order compared with previous chiefs. But for the moment, Mr. Bannon remains the president’s dominant adviser, despite Mr. Trump’s anger that he was not fully briefed on details of the executive order he signed giving his chief strategist a seat on the National Security Council, a greater source of frustration to the president than the fallout from the travel ban.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/05/us/politics/trump-white-house-aides-strategy.html

Our great commander has made it clear that he prefers to receive his information in bullet points and small doses, and it's apparent that Bannon is the culprit who is writing all these executive orders that Trump signs with such a grandiose flourish.  It confirms the fear I feel in the pit of my stomach as I watch him quickly review the portfolios, that he doesn't have a shred of understanding about that which he is about to sign.  His level of trust in Bannon is frightening, to say the least. 

It is quite comical, however, to watch as he signs these orders.  The impression he emits is that this is all that he thought the presidency is about...sign your name while looking "presidential".  I truly think he approached his new job with the thought that it was really just all that easy - nothing to it, everyone else is there to do the actual work, what's the big deal?   God help us all when he finds out there much more resting in his pawing little hands.

How fitting it is that a man who depends so much on the adulation of screaming crowds now finds himself isolated in his Pennsylvania Avenue palace.  The freedom of being the Trump Tower Tycoon who can roam and wander about the City at will is now shackled by the Secret Service and hibernates in his new locale without even the benefit of his window-dressing wife.  It's lonely at the top, eh Donald?
 

11

Share Post


Link to post

I found it refreshing that the writer from Slate kept pushing back on the question of whether Gorsuch had done the volunteer work at Harvard that was listed on his resume.  It was a little surprising that someone we would expect to agree with Rachel, instead was suggesting, "maybe we need to let this go."  I suspect this is one of those situations where there is are a couple of grains of truth on both sides:  he was not deeply involved, but was not completely uninvolved.  I do agree that he should not list the organizations if he was not fully involved (that is, really spent time on volunteer work, versus had good intentions of volunteering more than he ended up doing).   We don't want the Democrats getting stuck on "does spending time talking about one case make you eligible to list that organization on your resume?".  That's missing the forest for the ants. 

6

Share Post


Link to post

Wait, did Rach do a quick riff from the Three's Company theme?  Oh look, I know things are nuts with Trump & his evil bunch, but please, Rach, keep it together will ya?  I mean, if I see you in a Chrissy wig, Rach, I'll know Putin really has taken us over . . .  

0

Share Post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Tunia said:

His level of trust in Bannon is frightening, to say the least. 

It does at least confirm that the whole "President Bannon" thing is effective. Of course he was less angry about the travel ban reaction (who cares if people are hurt or you might have done something unconstitutional?) than Bannon not telling him how big of a deal it was to put him on the Security Council--that makes him look powerless.

I was fascinated by her tracking down the source of that "Poland is invading Belarus" tidbit. It's terrifying that he's still getting briefed on fantasy news, and that news is coming from the Kremlin. 

4

Share Post


Link to post

Oh Rach, ya got really shitty news to talk about tonite.  Please just don't be giddy.  Please?  I totally don't care about Brady or the Pats.  So glad you held back on your glee over that irrelevant crap last nite.  

At least Dems held together against the enemy.  So that's something Rach can focus on.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I'd heard of the ridiculous libertarian 'sea-steading' thing before, but last night's segment caused my jaw to drop in amazement at the depth of the stupidity of it all.  We all move to floating shipping containers and become immediately healthier! Because no access to fresh water is always so conducive to long life! But we're motivated, so that's all that matters!  And free markets equal Magic!

Boy, I wanted to punch that frat-boy asshole in the neck. I still do.

1

Share Post


Link to post

I was glad Rachel brought up the incursions-into-Belarus thing, which I read a few mentions of on Twitter over the weekend but didn't seem to be making many waves.  It seems a little too close to a Gleiwitz radio station incident (providing an excuse for the Nazi invasion of Poland) for my liking.   

5

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Oh Rach, ya got really shitty news to talk about tonite.  Please just don't be giddy.  Please?  I totally don't care about Brady or the Pats.  So glad you held back on your glee over that irrelevant crap last nite.  

At least Dems held together against the enemy.  So that's something Rach can focus on.

The democrats were strong in their fight.  The Republicans as usual just fell in line and put Party over country.  I have a lot of admiration for the two who sided with the Democrats. They will be remembered for their bravery.  The others will pay for being on the wrong side of history.

5

Share Post


Link to post
1 hour ago, attica said:

I'd heard of the ridiculous libertarian 'sea-steading' thing before, but last night's segment caused my jaw to drop in amazement at the depth of the stupidity of it all.  We all move to floating shipping containers and become immediately healthier! Because no access to fresh water is always so conducive to long life! But we're motivated, so that's all that matters!  And free markets equal Magic!

Boy, I wanted to punch that frat-boy asshole in the neck. I still do.

She's discussed this lunatic before.  And yeah, this one is particularly crazy.  It's so easy to get lost in the sea of insane & dangerously unfit picks.  Glad Rach singled this lunatic out to put a spotlight on.  He wants to just put drugs out with no FDA approval & see how the market reacts?  Um, what the what?

Guess Putin really is high-fiving his cronies & shouting a Charlie Sheen "winning" non-stop right about now, eh?

So if Trump & Bannon & Putin are good with destroying us, why are the coward Rethugs helping them?  What is their excuse?  Ryan is such a phony poser, I can't stand looking at him.  Pence oozes slime.  And McConnell?  As Rach likes to point out, history will remember him for what he is.

6

Share Post


Link to post
5 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

And McConnell?  As Rach likes to point out, history will remember him for what he is.

Apparently the biggest idiot in the world.  Trump got 8% of the African American vote in November.  And what does the Republican Senate leader do to try to win back these voters?  Announce that the words of Coretta Scott King, the widow of Martin Luther King, Jr., are inappropriate to be read on the Senate floor.  The words of a woman, being read by a woman.  Yes that's the image you want to go out to American - trying to muzzle women.  And they wonder why thousands and thousands of women are marching in the streets.   They've attacked women, Muslims, installed an anti-Semite as the power in the White House, and now this.  Who is next?  Will they go after Asians?  Latinos?  LGBT Americans? 

Edited by Calvada.
9

Share Post


Link to post

And now Rachel is reading the actual letter on the air.  So, got the letter about Session a much broader audience than it ever would have had if McConnell had just let it be read on CSPAN by Senator Warren.

The thing is, these tactics have worked, and are working. 

7

Share Post


Link to post

McConnell shutting down Warren over her quoting Coretta Scott King's words from 30 years ago is really a shocking development.  Good for Rach for being all over this & having Warren on.  Let's see where this goes.

I'm a lawyer & I'm really baffled by the discussion of the appeals panel.  Not a fan of that journalist Molly.  Rach always has her on & seems to love her, but she doesn't seem to explain anything -- not clearly anyway.  There's also something very cloying about her that really bugs me.

5

Share Post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

McConnell shutting down Warren over her quoting Coretta Scott King's words from 30 years ago is really a shocking development.  Good for Rach for being all over this & having Warren on.  Let's see where this goes.

Honestly, I think this is a huge story.  I hope it is broadcast loud and clear, far and wide, that these cretins in Congress are just as bad as the ones in the White House, and worse in some ways.

I don't think it wouldn't have changed Senate votes if Warren had read Coretta Scott King's words.  I doubt there are any minds in that Senate that can be changed at this point about Sessions.  He is not an unknown to the Senate!  Sessions even gets to vote for himself!  All McConnell had to do was let the Democrats have their say, and then vote him on through like all the others.  But his misogynist, racist heart couldn't let it happen, and he revealed himself for what he is.  I hope it is one of the things that brings him down when this shitshow implodes.

10

Share Post


Link to post

I'm following the appeal pretty closely for work (WA State), and am glad Rachel made some time for this, but agree about that particular commentator.  If you want a good, quick play-by-play of the hearing today, see this live blog at the New York Times -- they were commenting in real time, which I was following like a baseball game while in a meeting!  https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/02/07/us/ninth-circuit-oral-arguments-trump-immigration.html

2 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

I'm a lawyer & I'm really baffled by the discussion of the appeals panel.  Not a fan of that journalist Molly.  Rach always has her on & seems to love her, but she doesn't seem to explain anything -- not clearly anyway.  There's also something very cloying about her that really bugs me.

1

Share Post


Link to post

Just reading about what happened and witnessing the aftermath, I honestly wondered whether Warren purposely pushed up against the rules for publicity,  but in her interview with Rachel, I could tell she was piiiiiissed.

1

Share Post


Link to post

And Senator Merkley was allowed to read the letter so it was just Senator Warren who wasn't allowed to and is now barred from participating in any further debate.  Rachel spoke for a few minutes at the beginning of Lawrence's show.  She thinks that McConnell was planning something but isn't sure why this is the path he took.  Because it makes no sense. 

Also, Cruz was allowed to insult a fellow Senator on the floor and he wasn't punished.

4

Share Post


Link to post

Wonder if she'll bring up trump's tweet today bashing Nordstrom for dropping trust baby daughter's stuff?

2

Share Post


Link to post

I'm surprised Rachel hasn't gotten into the paid ads promoting, at first, DeVos, and now the remainder of Trump's cabinet nominees.  Truly, I don't remember ever seeing anything like it in the past, and it just shouts desperation on the part of the Trump administration.  The first one for DeVos was bad enough, but last night another appeared begging for citizenry to contact their senators to vote for approval of the remaining nominees.  WTF?

Here's the link explaining the funding behind the ads:  https://www.publicintegrity.org/2017/02/06/20674/secret-money-fueling-pro-betsy-devos-ad-campaigns

and here's a link to the ads themselves: http://www.wfmynews2.com/news/local/2-wants-to-know/2wtk-whats-with-the-political-ads-for-cabinet-nominees/402603634

Seems like it would be a topic right up her alley.

Edited by Tunia. Reason: typo
2

Share Post


Link to post

Joy just tweeted that TJ Maxx  & Marshalls are backing away from her line as well.   

  #SAD. 

Karma is a helluva thing.   

9

Share Post


Link to post

Rachel has to end tonight's show (unless something major happens ) with this Trump tweet. 

“Big increase in traffic into our country from certain areas, while our people are far more vulnerable, as we wait for what should be EASY D!”

Just so we can hear the crew laughing off camera. 

2

Share Post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.