TUESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2024
A good deed which never occurred: We first heard about the good deed on last Friday's Gutfeld! program.
Because we're familiar with the rolling (journalistic) fraud perpetrated by the Fox News Channel, it occurred to us that we'd better fact-check what we'd been told.
For the record, this journalistic fraud occurs under the radar as the New York Times and MSNBC choose to defer to Fox. We'll offer further thoughts on that deference as the week proceeds. More specifically, we'll offer further thoughts on the journalistic chaos which results from that long-standing act of avoidance.
First, though, let's establish what we were told about "the good deed" in question—about the "good deed" Candidate Trump was said to have once done.
We were told about the good deed in the penultimate segment of Friday's Gutfeld! program. The program aired at 10 p.m. in East (7 p.m. out on the coast), with a rebroadcast to follow.
The chronicler was George Murdoch, a former professional "wrestler" who goes by the journalistic stage name Tyrus. He's part of the ever-changing panel of (journalistic) clowns the Fox News Channel employs each night to air its preferred propaganda.
An angry fellow named Greg Gutfeld oversees this nightly act of fraud. Judging from appearances, decision-makers at the New York Times would jump off the George Washington Bridge before they'd choose to report and discuss this state of affairs.
(To appearances, no one wants to tangle with Fox. That includes Joe and Mika and their like-minded panels of guests.)
Back to Tyrus! In fairness, he's a skilled raconteur, but one who may perhaps be accustomed to pretense through his years of artifice in his previous profession.
Below, you see the leading authority's thumbnail about the Gutfeld! panelist. It's from this fellow that we first heard about the alleged "good deed:"
Tyrus (wrestler)
George Murdoch (born February 21, 1973) is an American cable news personality, actor, and former professional wrestler known by his ring/stage name Tyrus. As a wrestler, he was formerly signed to the National Wrestling Alliance (NWA), where he is a former NWA Worlds Heavyweight Champion. As a cable news personality, he appears on Fox News, and its sister streaming service Fox Nation, primarily as a co-host/panelist on the late-night talk show Gutfeld!, as well as a contributor/fill-in host on other programs. In 2024, Tyrus was named host of Maintaining with Tyrus on the streaming platform OutKick, which is owned by Fox.
The headline pegs him as a wrestler. The body of the thumbnail describes him as a "cable news personality," which could of course perhaps be seen as a contradiction in terms.
Once again, let's be fair. Tyrus is a capable raconteur—but as a panelist on a "news" program, he's a corporate-owned confection, as are the other panelists arrayed around him on a nightly basis.
On September 25, Candidate Trump appeared for the full hour on the Gutfeld! program. On that occasion, Tyrus engaged in submissive acts of butt-kissing which surpassed all human understanding.
Last Friday night, the big guy was at it again.
Incredibly enough, the candidate in question—Donald J. Trump—had appeared on this fellow's streaming program, Maintaining with Tyrus. As noted above, the program is offered by "the streaming platform OutKick, which is owned by Fox."
Remarkably, the nominee had agreed to be interviewed by the former professional "wrestler!" By Friday evening, the interview had apparently been available at Outkick for something like twelve hours.
Here's the way the Gutfeld! performance went down:
The fellow who hosts the Gutfeld! show asked the former professional "wrestler" what sorts of "odd things" he may have learned from his session with the candidate.
Gushing profusely, the big blob of (journalistic) Jello expounded on the main thing he had learned. Below, you see the way he started:
MURDOCH-TYRUS (8/17/24): The craziest thing that I realized is how much he doesn't want to talk about good deeds. He really fought me on that—you know, talking about a lot of the things that he's done in his life. Because we—
The media's done such a good job painting him as—the Hitler comments, and "He's a racist," and he's all these things. But you look at the deeds he's done—employees, his relationships with Muhammad Ali, Mandela. Things he's done in the community. But he never wants to talk about it.
Thus spake Murdoch-Tyrus—and we're willing to admit it! We ourselves had never heard about the "good deeds" the candidate had done for Ali and for Nelson Mandela, one of the last century's moral giants.
That said, we're familiar with the nature of this particular "cable news" program. For that reason, we decided that we'd better check it out.
Before we show you what we found, let's complete our account of what the "cable news personality" said last Friday on Gutfeld!
As a "rubber room roundtable" panel looked on—Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was there, plus Dagen McDowell of the Fox Business Network!—the wrestler explained that Trump doesn't even like to discuss how "devoted he is to his grandkids."
He doesn't even want to talk about that! The wrestler wrapped up with this:
MURDOCH-TYRUS: So that was the biggest thing. He will talk about anything under the sun, but getting him to talk about good deeds? He really didn't want to do it.
But once he started doing it, he was glad he did it, if that makes any sense.
So said the former champ. But actually, no! As things turned out, it didn't make any sense!
The wrestler's Outkick interview with Trump had long since been dispensed as part of the Murdoch empire's propaganda campaign. But what "good deed" had the candidate done for Nelson Mandela?
You can find several fact-checks through a simple act of Googling. But here's the simple, bare-bones way Newsweek laid it out:
Did Trump Let Nelson Mandela Use His Plane for Free?
Former President Donald Trump was asked on Friday about the time, in 1990, that he flew the late South African President Nelson Mandela and 80 others out to the U.S.
"The United States government wasn't helping him. No one was helping him," Fox News contributor George "Tyrus" Murdoch told Trump during a Friday interview on his show on the OutKick streaming platform.
"You chartered a 727 plane for their entire trip," Murdoch continued. "How is somebody...Why is it hard for you to talk about the things you've done? Why do we not know those things?"
"I just like helping people," Trump replied. "I help a lot of people, and I enjoy doing it, and I never talk about it's nice that you bring it up."
Trump did help fly Mandela, the revered anti-apartheid activist, to the U.S. in the summer of 1990. But as the Los Angeles Times reported, he charged the trip's organizers $130,000 to charter the plane.
So went the alleged "good deed." Several other fact-checks exist—and as the Newsweek report continues, it cites Glenn Kessler's fact-check, hidden away on X:
The Times also reported that Mandela had initially asked Trump if he could rent the real-estate mogul's private jet. Trump told Mandela that the jet was unavailable because it was being serviced, and he then offered Mandela a 727 plane from Trump Shuttle.
The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler also provided additional context for the story on Friday, after Trump's interview with Tyrus aired.
"The Trump Shuttle was in financial trouble because Trump made a bad deal and ended up with too many 727s," Kessler wrote on X, formerly Twitter. "He had already put the airline up for sale and would soon lose control of it to the banks. He didn't offer his own plane but charged Mandela $130,000 to borrow one of his unused jets."
No one heard about any of this on the Gutfeld! "cable news" program or during the Outkick "interview." Briefly, let's review:
The gushing about the candidate's "good deeds" started during an "interview" on a streaming platform which is owned by Fox.
Apparently, someone had prompted Tyrus to ask the candidate about the many good deeds he hates to discuss. There followed an absurd account of a good deed allegedly done for Nelson Mandela—a gushing account which jumped to that evening's Gutfeld! show, then on to Fox & Friends Weekend the next morning.
Millions of citizens heard this tale about the good deed and the candidate's giant modesty. Many fewer citizens will ever be exposed to the several fact-checks which followed.
Stating the obvious, this is part of an ongoing act of (journalistic) fraud being conducted by the Murdoch empire—an ongoing act which goes unreported and undiscussed by Blue America's most prominent and most trusted major news orgs.
Does Candidate Trump expect a particular type of "chaos" to occur on Election Day? As we noted yesterday, the candidate was asked that (highly specific) question by Maria Bartiromo on Sunday, October 13.
He proceeded to give an answer which is being "creatively edited" all over Blue America's cable channels. We'll offer more on that matter this afternoon, assuming the absence of power outages, WiFi blackouts or time-consuming Internet scams.
Will that particular type of chaos occur on Election Day? We know of no reason to think it will, though related types of chaos could certainly start soon thereafter.
That said, our nation's journalistic "chaos" has been general for a long time now. As a type of fraud is perpetrated by the Murdoch empire, the major orgs of Blue America have chosen to avert their gaze and to remain very still.
Tomorrow: The pro-life woman supposedly locked up (by Vice President Harris, no less!) for the act of praying? The truly ridiculous interview with the two college kids from Wisconsin-LaCrosse?
The journalistic chaos in question is endless, and it goes unremarked. To our dismay at this site, a cyberattack on the Internet Archive has made this other type of chaos much harder to track and report.
Karl Marx warned us about corporations over a century ago, but the Right's feelings get hurt when the government does good for black citizens, too. So here we are.
ReplyDeleteSomerby insists that Maria Bartiromo's question was "creatively edited" out of Blue news reports. Somerby himself quoted her question and Trump's answer here. From that, it can be easily seen that Trump did not respond to the specifics of her question. Why then does it matter whether the question was included or not, when Trump never answered it but instead used her question as a springboard to talk about whatever he wanted to say (another of his rambling responses)?
ReplyDeleteBut Somerby thinks this is the crime of the century by blue editors. He thinks it is more important to talk about today than any other issue in this waning election (only two weeks left to tell voters anything). This is how Somerby supports Harris, his nominal choice for president -- by not mentioning her at all.
There are so many things that make no sense in today's essay. One is why Somerby spent so much time discussing Tyrus if his main point was that Trump isn't as charitable as the anecdotes Tyrus pushing (which are standard right wing talking points)? The others on Fox tell the same stories. In fact, Cecelia here repeated the story about how Trump paid for the happy meals that were served in the drive thru at McDonalds.
Has Somerby only just discovered that right wingers tell a stream of continuous large and small lies, including about Trump's charitable nature (when he is the cheapest man alive, by the account of those who know him from inside his faction). Trump stole from his own charitable foundation, which was shut down by court order.
“Cecelia here repeated the story about how Trump paid for the happy meals that were served in the drive thru at McDonalds.””
DeleteCut and paste those remarks I supposedly made.
I won't waste my time. Trump paid for no meals because there were no actual customers going through the drive-thru, no actual meals being made (including by Trump).
DeleteHere is the info missing from reports about Trump's stunt. The employees helping Trump and Trump himself did not wash their hands or wear hair coverings as mandated by health rules (also a previous health violation). Considering that Trump wouldn't wear a covid mask, I'm not surprised he wouldn't wear a hair net, but under those circumstances they can't serve actual food to paying customers either. It was all staged and no generosity was on display.
But let's talk about the stunt where Trump called out "free chicken for everyone" and people ate but Trump and his campaign didn't pay. That was the occasion where Trump pretended the people in the Chik-fil-A were black customers supporting him but they were actually paid shills.
The search function does not return anything in comments any more, apparently. I typed in Cecelia and got no entries back.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAnonymouse 12:46pm, in other words, you can not find a post from yesterday's two blogs where i wrote about what meals were paid by Trump.
DeleteThat’s because I didn’t. You pulled that out of your butt in the same manner that you do with Bob.
No, I am not going to search for anything you said in the hundreds of comments you wrote in the past few days, without a search function. It is a huge waste of time. You can say you didn't say anything about Trump's generosity. Because Republicans lie so much about everything, some may not believe you, but others might. Someone was here gushing about Trump's generosity paying for hamberders for his beknighted followers (whatta guy!). If it wasn't you this time, it will be you next time.
DeleteAnonymouse 1:40pm, in other words, you need a search engine to find nonexistent comments I made about Trump paying for MickeyD meals via two blogs written yesterday. You are unable to type my verified nym into the search bar at the top of your screen and find those nonexistent posts from YESTERDAY.
DeleteSo you resort to saying that reality/ accuracy doesn’t matter. No one finds that sentiment from you to be surprising. It’s the Anonymouse mantra.
right, I typed your nym and absolutely nothing came up
DeleteAnonymouse 2:17pm, does your device not have the ability to scroll downward? My nym is in bright green and it’s merely two blogs posted yesterday.
DeleteYou’re a clown.
And a liar.
Deletenot sorting through your debris
DeleteAnonhmouse 2:36pm, because you made it up.
Deleteso you say…
DeleteAnonymouse 3:29pm, what’s that you? You have lied about what I said yesterday, have lied that you can’t find those entries now, and refuse to check via scrolling thru Monday’s entries.
DeleteYou’re a singularly questionable person even for anonymices.
Cecelia did in fact say what the original commenter claims, I read it too. Maybe it got deleted, anything is possible.
DeleteCecelia is embarrassed because he made yet another false claim, because he’s just another sucker falling for all the Republican cons. But he shouldn’t feel too much shame because the circumstances that led him to believe such nonsense weren’t of his making, they were external factors imposed on him, warping his personality.
We should put more blame on the perpetrators than the victims, while also keeping in mind that these circumstances are cyclical and generational.
The real issues are systemic and institutional; Cecelia’s weirdness doesn’t really even amount to a hill of beans, but his suffering is real to him, and there should be a way to ease Cecelia’s suffering without spreading his misery onto others.
In a broader sense, what you say may be true, but it is hard to put any of this into practice in the confines of blog comments.
DeleteMeanwhile, someone claimed Trump had paid for drive thru customers' hamburgers during his stint pretending to work, but that act of supposed generosity never happened because the McDonalds was closed and the pretend customers were actually Trump campaign shills. It was all fake, including Trump's generosity.
Trump learned from his daddy how to be miserly. He doesn't treat anyone to anything, pay for anything he doesn't have to. His team of lawyers exist to talk his creditors into lower their invoices or accepting less payment. He has pretended to be generous but it hurts him to spend a cent so he promises gifts but doesn't follow through. That has gotten him charged with fraud several times.
Melania is doing the same thing. She mentions a charity she supposedly supports on her swag website, but there is no evidence any purchase made there ever goes to that charity. It all seems to go to Melania personally.
A normal person who didn't want to give to charity would contradict the misunderstandings when people claim they have made donations or done good deeds. Trump never does that. A normal rich person contributes to charities in order to reduce taxes, but Trump doesn't do that either. He has loopholes and fraudulent grifts to avoid taxes, so he just doesn't pay any, and then hires more lawyers to deal with reducing his debts once he is charged with them by the IRS.
It may be that the lack of charitable contributions may be one reason why Trump doesn't want to release his tax info, like normal politicians do.
As evidence of Trump's charitable nature, his supporters mention his connection to his grandkids, but all of his children are wealthy so he doesn't need to contribute anything to their upkeep. And it isn't as if he spends time with any of his kids. It is very odd that anyone would consider a relationship with loved ones to be an act of charity, so it is perhaps telling that Trump offers that up as evidence.
Anonymouse 5:10pm, no, “in fact” I said nothing about Trump paying for people’s meal. I made no statement on that matter that could have been deleted.
DeleteI made a comment that made fun of anonymices acting affronted in order to suggest that Trump was pretending to pull a shift at McDonalds, rather than spoofing Comma La’s claim of being a former fry guy.
You’re lying.
Somerby debunks a few ludicrous stories, with the help of the press, but then complains that journalism is in disarray because lies are being told. It sounds to me like Somerby is just following the wrong press -- he has chosen to watch Fox (a known propaganda outlet) instead of MSNBC (which says things Somerby disagrees with), then he complains because he is served a stream of lies on Fox. But Somerby made his own choice. No one is forcing him to consume the crap served by Fox. Why anyone would think they should get solid reliable news from Tyrus is anyone's guess, but that is Somerby's strawman for the day.
ReplyDeleteanon 11:19, no one is forcing you to read TDH either. Yet you do. are you a masochist?
DeleteThat seems to evade the question posed about Somerby. I'm not the one here complaining about MSNBC, so my reasons for reading Somerby have nothing at all to do with Somerby's reasons for watching Fox.
DeleteAc/ma seems to want Somerby’s suffering to just continue, so ac/ma seems like a bit of a sadist.
DeleteLewis Black is angry. Gutfeld is not particularly angry. He does have those slanted eyebrows, like cartoon villains, that are used to denote anger in drawings, but his voice and the rest of his demeanor are not particularly angry -- more sarcastic (like Somerby's supposed tone, according to his supporters here).
ReplyDeleteIt isn't clear why Somerby then repeats so often that Gutfeld is angry, when he seems no more angry than Seinfeld used to be. And he isn't especially a complaint comedian. He spends his time attacking left wing targets, not talking about grievances. Old jokes about Biden, fat jokes about Behar, ho jokes about Harris, but not tirades like Lewis Black. Now there's any angry man!
So why is Somerby portraying Gutfeld, and by extension the right wing, as angry? Is Somerby trying to portray the right as justified in supporting a self-interested narcissist because of the injustices they have suffered? That doesn't especially work, at least using Tyrus and Gutfeld as victims. My sense of Gutfeld is not that he is portraying righteous anger, but more that he is a mean-spirited bully, like Trump, who thinks strength is displayed when someone picks on Biden for being old, or whatever it means when a man calls a woman fat. Yes, this is the kind of thing right-wingers will laugh at, but what does it have to do with anger?
anon 11:27, isn't the right wing angry about how lib politicians are trying to destroy the country. A near utopia brought about by trump, then an utter dystopia, almost overnight, brought on, apparently intentionally, by the evil side. And if and when Trump wins, back to paradise on earth, like a yoyo.I thought they were pretty angry about that.
DeleteAC/ MA,
DeleteThey're not at all happy about having to compete for jobs with immigrants, either.
Assuming that someone is angry about something is not the same as them saying what they are mad about. Attributing anger to white males is sort of a stereotype but how real are stereotypes? Someone really needs to check Somerby's work on this.
DeleteWhat IS Gutfeld angry about? For him, it can't be the things you mention because he is rich and above the fray. At least Lewis Black tells you what his beef is, in his rant. You don't have to infer it, the way Somerby does.
AC/MA makes an argument that Trump supporters In general are baselessly angry because they’re blinkered partisans who want their way and the anonymouse 1:36pm, replies that couldn’t be the case with Gutfeld because that mindset would be…illogical…
DeleteSomewhere, deep inside, Gutfeld is angry at himself.
DeleteAnonymouse 2:30pm, according to Anonymouse 1:36pm, that could be the only reason for rich people being angry. All those rich liberals pissed off about what they consider to be injustice? Fake.
DeleteIf Somerby is claiming Gutfeld is angry, he should say what about. He doesn’t.
DeleteAnonymouse 3:38pm, would anonymices have to specifically tell us that they are angry at Trump?
DeleteYes, if they specified that they were angry. Each of us has different reasons, all worth hearing. Why does Somerby keep calling Gutfeld angry, as if his reasons were obvious when they aren’t?
DeleteAnonymouse 4:03pm, you might as well argue that you couldn't be sure that your mother was angry after she said you stink and slapped you in the face. After all, she might have thought you were choking after eating your boogers.
Delete11:27 usually makes excellent comments and Cecelia is usually commenting as a way to ease her emotional discomfort, but in this case 11:27 seems a bit off base and Cecelia at 2:30 pretty much gets it right - right wingers and particularly Repubs are defined by their anger, borne from unresolved trauma, manifested through various oppressions.
Delete@5:17 But what are they angry about? Anger requires an object -- it isn't a free-floating emotion like anxiety. Similarly fear requires an object -- people are afraid of something specific. So, what is Cecelia angry about? If she doesn't have an object for her anger, then she is being irritable, grumpy, rageful, but anger requires some thing or some person who harmed you or committed a wrongful act against you, that you are angry about.
DeleteFrom the American Psychological Association: "Anger is an emotion characterized by antagonism toward someone or something you feel has deliberately done you wrong."
Cecelia is angry about the trauma they have suffered and at those that perpetrated it. Furthermore, those circumstances have led Cecelia and the like to become ruled by an obsession with hierarchy and dominance, and folks like that get angry at having their perceived dominance challenged.
DeleteFor sure Cecelia externalizes that onto innocent folks because they are handy scapegoats, libs, Blacks, etc.
5:29 you may correct in some technical way I’m less aware of, I find your thoughts to be insightful, perceptive, and interesting, so I am open to missing the precise point you’re making.
This is anonymice thinking from two nutshells.
DeleteOne anonymouse states that I am angry and says that this anger comes from past trauma because anger comes from such experiences.She states that I am angry and without knowing me, she concludes the source is trauma.
The other anonymouse differs and says that it’s not enough to conclude that I’m angry, unless there’s a known and specific reason, her anonymouse friend (and more pointedly Bob) is only guessing and should be specific as to what has caused said anger.
Meanwhile, there are anonymices on the board who are roundly insulting David and conservatives general for harboring political positions with which they disagree.
Anonymices, let us know when you figure out if we can deduce that someone is angry without an exposition into its personal cause or if we must simply assume that trauma has made us so remiss as to disagree with your specious butts.
"there are anonymices on the board who are roundly insulting David and conservatives general for harboring political positions with which they disagree."
DeleteThere may be a germ of truth in what you say but David says thinks that are just jaw-droppingly stupid. He gets abused because he's obsessed with things like whether Harris worked at McDonald's or that scam a few weeks ago about Harris getting interview questions ahead of time. He asks to be abused.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAnonymouse 9:13pm, right… But when Gutfeld gets angry because he thinks that liberals say and believe stupid things, Bob is remiss in not calling him up in order to convey the details to you.
DeleteKevin Drum today argues that Harris has been less clear about her positions on issues than Trump, echoing a right wing talking point about Harris's unwillingness to provide details (also pushed by Somerby here). But Trump has been vague and nonspecific, avoiding talking about abortion, a liability now for the right:
ReplyDelete"Trump tried to frame abortion as a states' rights issue, arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling of 2022 (which overturned Roe v. Wade after 49 years) sent abortion back to the states where it belonged. But Harris — an attorney since 1990 and former California attorney general — maintained that Dobbs was a horrible, badly reasoned decision that endangered the health and wellbeing of American women. And according to debate analysis on MSNBC and CNN, it was obvious that Trump really didn't want to be talking about abortion.
In an op-ed published by the New York Times on October 22, Matthew Walther (editor of the Catholic publication The Lamp) argues that although Trump and other Republicans "would like the issue of abortion to disappear," it isn't going away.
"Donald Trump, who only eight years ago called for 'some kind of punishment' to be meted out to women who procured abortions, now speaks of 'reproductive rights,' a formulation preferred by proponents of legal abortion," Walther explains. "References to abortion have been all but eliminated from the party's platform. Even JD Vance, whose opposition to abortion is perhaps his most firmly established political position, now says that the oral abortifacient mifepristone should remain accessible."
Walther continues, "This retreat is, of course, understandable. For years, abortion appeared to be a mobilizing issue for Republican voters, particularly the evangelical base. But ever since the Supreme Court eliminated the constitutional right to abortion in its Dobbs decision in June 2022, the issue has become a liability, and a serious one, for the GOP."
The Lamp's editor goes on to note that Democrats "cautiously" voiced their pro-choice views in the past but are "now inclined to speak of abortion rights in sweeping moral terms as the very foundation of women's freedom and equality."
"Republicans now find themselves seeking compromise," Walther observes. "Strident talk about 'the unborn' has given way to muddled debates about the relative merits of six-week and 15-week thresholds and the applicability of the Comstock Act of 1873, which may or may not prohibit the mailing of abortifacients. At a Fox News town hall last week, Mr. Trump criticized abortion restrictions in some states for being 'too tough' and assured his audience that 'those are going to be redone.'
Even Trump knows that abortion has become a losing issue for the right because of their extreme positions. Why does Somerby not mention this glaring point?
https://www.alternet.org/trump-abortion-harris-walther/
Lordy, did Drum really claim Trump is more clear on issues than Harris?
DeleteIf so, that ranks as one of the dumbest claims ever.
If so, it’s somewhat unsurprising since Drum is a centrist right winger that tends to offer little more than rehashes of work others have done.
For Drum to say that Harris is less clear than Trump, even on Trump's main issues, is idiotic and wrong. It signifies that Drum hasn't bothered to pay close attention to Harris's statements. There may be other liberals who are for Harris without paying much attention to her positions, then blame her for being non-specific. I think that is exactly what Somerby did, then blamed Harris for. Drum says:
Delete"There are obviously also issues where Trump tries to either stay quiet or fudge his position: Israel, abortion, and climate change, for example. But for the most part, every human being in the country knows at least the direction of his main positions.
This is less true of Kamala Harris. Partly that's because she's been on the national stage for only three months compared to Trump's ten years. But there's more to it than just that. She's certainly in favor of abortion rights. Everyone knows that. She supports Obamacare and believes in climate change. But take a look at that list of nine Trump positions. Harris is a little fuzzy on every single one of them.
I'm obviously extremely pro-Harris, but this doesn't blind me to the way she comes across. Most people know she's generally liberal and will do liberalish things as president, but that's about it. "
“But Harris — an attorney since 1990 and former California attorney general — maintained that Dobbs was a horrible, badly reasoned decision that endangered the health and wellbeing of American women.”
DeleteThat’s not even logical. It’s fallacious. It’s like arguing that it should be ok for parents to abandon their children because rearing and financing them may endanger their emotional and physical health.
Here is the bigger picture that Somerby is either ignoring or missing:
ReplyDelete"Last week, Trump claimed that Kamala Harris
“has imported an army of illegal alien gang members and migrant criminals from the dungeons of the third world … from prisons and jails and insane asylums and mental institutions, and she has had them resettled beautifully into your community to prey upon innocent American citizens.”
On Sunday, Trump told Fox News host Maria Bartiromo that the biggest problem on Election Day will “not be the people who have come in, who are destroying our country,” but, rather
“the people from within — we have some very bad people, sick people, radical left lunatics. And it should be easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military.”
On Monday, he closed his remarks to a crowd in Pennsylvania by saying his political opponents
“are so bad and frankly, they’re evil. They’re evil. What they’ve done, they’ve weaponized, they’ve weaponized our elections. They’ve done things that nobody thought was even possible.”
These are echoes of the Nazism that flourished in Europe 90 years ago."
https://www.alternet.org/trumps-fascism/
If Trump is offering fascism, why does Somerby pretend that it is the left that is frittering away our democracy by fomenting chaos? We have our ducks in a row and we know what we are fighting to oppose and what we are working hard to maintain. The appearance of chaos may be a right wing talking point, but it is not reality on the left. We know that our choice is Harris. No one over here in Blue America is tempted by Trump's promise to take away the onerous burden of freedom.
Somerby rests his case on the fact that we are divided, dumbly ignoring what we are divided over.
DeleteThis is braindead analysis from Somerby.
Humans have been divided for the last 10-12k years, broadly over the same fundamental issues.
"Because we're familiar with the rolling (journalistic) fraud perpetrated by the Fox News Channel, it occurred to us that we'd better fact-check what we'd been told."
ReplyDeleteAnd yet, not a word about the actual journalistic fraud that was committed by the "journalists" at 60 minutes over their editing of the Harris interview and their refusal to release the entire interview.
What's the matter Somerby, got no musings on the mainstream "press corps" and the american discourse to share with us?
You have a burning desire to hear Kamala Harris adjust her microphone and thank the network for inviting her to participate, ask for a sip of water before continuing, and thank the interviewer again at the end of the Q&A? What do you think would be revealed by those edited-out routine interactions?
DeletePerhaps you think Kamala said "Oh, my God! Now they'll know I'm actually a Reptilian! Can we do that one over?"
Playing gotcha is a stupid waste of everyone's time.
If that's all the entire interview would show, then why the refusal to release it and clear their "good name" and expose us as the rubes we are?
DeleteBut, hopefully, you're not too stupid to realize that's not what the interview would show and they know it. Do you?
You I have no idea what you’re talking about, 12:59.
DeleteThey should release Trump’s 60 Minutes interview.
DeleteOh wait. He backed out of it.
Given the disingenuous editing of the Harris interview, it was smart of Trump to back out of it.
DeleteTrump needs editing since he has no filter any more.
DeleteWhy not release the unedited Harris interview?
Delete1. It wasn't the agreement with Harris, so they cannot do that unilaterally.
2. It would set a precedent for releasing unedited tapes and then others might refuse to sit down with them.
3. It would create the impression that CBS is unprofessional because viewers who didn't realize the tape was unedited would think it was their normal work product.
4. It isn't fair to Harris showing her sneezing, coughing, adjusting her mic, getting up for a bathroom break, chatting about other people not present, mutual acquaintances, without their permission.
5. Harris might have behaved less openly if she knew there was no editing happening, so it is unfair to show her coughing or asking for coffee in a situation where she thought she could do such things freely because of the editing.
6. Editing doesn't mean anyone is hiding anyone, just that they are skipping the wasted moments when people are doing irrelevant things.
7. There may have been technical difficulties that CBS wouldn't want to share with the world, unrelated to Harris or anyone's need to know.
8. The industry standard is to edit such interviews, so why should CBS do it any differently compared to their competitors?
"If that's all the entire interview would show, then why the refusal to release it and clear their "good name" and expose us as the rubes we are?"
DeleteI have only a few minutes, because I have to get back to combing through Trump's tax returns and health reports, but I want to thank you for your sincere calls for transparency about the candidates.
How could Harris have an agreement with 60 Minutes about how the footage? What agreement?
DeleteCBS said it did not deceitfully edit the interview but made cuts for succinctness and to fit a time slot.
Delete"If that's all the entire interview would show, then why the refusal to release it and clear their "good name" and expose us as the rubes we are?"
DeleteTrust me Clyde, you guys were exposed as rubes a long, long time ago.
Then vote for somebody else and stop your incessant whining.
DeleteSomerby raises the topic of lies about Trump's generosity, but the Blue press is investigating the pressure put on Trump's donors to contribute more than they can afford, including seniors who have given Trump very large sums ($350,000, 580,000) without intending to, depleting their life savings and source of support in retirement:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.alternet.org/cnn-trump-seniors-gop/
Somerby might spend some time worrying about his neighbor, described in the article:
"On X, formerly Twitter, Politico's Nicholas Wu highlights one of the examples described in the report: an 82-year-old woman "who wore pajamas with holes in them because she didn't want to spend money on new ones" and "didn’t realize she had given Republicans more than $350,000 while living in a 1000-square-foot Baltimore condo since 2020.'"
The lies about Trump's generosity are obscene in the context of this ongoing high-pressure grifting targeting the elderly. Then juxtapose Gutfeld's jokes about old people pooping their pants, which Trump's campaign is raking it in from people who cannot afford their contributions.
The Harris Cheney campaign is starting to seem a little desperate. That would be really embarrassing if they were to lose to Trump. Does anyone think they will lose? I could see them getting crushed. But it's impossible to predict.
ReplyDeleteI hope a large amount of blame will be placed on Joe Biden if they do lose.
When a person endorses a candidate, it means that person is supporting the candidate's views, not vice versa. Except in Trump's case, when his endorsement by Nick Fuentes means Trump is a white supremacist too.
DeleteThank you for summarizing Somerby's position so succinctly (although that is atypical for Somerby).
It is hard for European troll farm workers to master English spelling but the VP's name is spelled W-A-L-Z not C-H-E-N-E-Y. Don't worry -- even Americans are bad at spelling.
It got Harris right.
DeleteNate Silver says it’s a toss up
ReplyDeleteNate Silver said there was a 99% chance Hillary would win in 2016.
DeleteDavid in Cal,
DeleteI'm not worried.
The economically anxious Republican voters, who aren't at all just a shit pile of bigots (hat tip, mainstream media), will crossover and vote for Harris, because Trump gave that HUGE tax break to corporations and the rich.
In fact, I'll bet you that not one economically anxious Republican voter will cast a vote for Trump.
Nate Silver was working for Peter Thiel, JD Vance’s billionaire “mentor”.
DeleteWord is Vance, Thiel’s boy toy, wears eyeliner at Thiel’s behest.
DeleteHe isn't working for Thiel any more?
DeleteI have a Spanish surname. I was born in IL and my parents are both US citizens. I do not want some random racist to pull my voter registration because of the lies being told about immigrant voting. I am a legitimate voter and have been all of my life. This interference with my right to vote is a minor inconvenience escalating to a potential disenfranchisement, but what if Trump is elected and gives orders to round up people with suspicious sounding Spanish surnames? Will I have to start carrying my passport? Will I be detained on my way to work or some important activity while someone checks to see if I am legit, or will they put me in a camp first and straighten it out later (as Joe Arpaio did when he imprisioned Latino citizens)? Will they know on my door at 3 am demanding to see proof of my right to live in the USA? These are the things Nazis did to their "enemies" but there is no reason why Trump or anyone else should be singling me out or anyone else with a Spanish surname, especially in states that was once owned by Mexico and then allowed free interchange of citizens for hundreds of years. I belong here. That's why I will never vote for Trump or anyone like him.
ReplyDelete"James Womack, the Chairman of the Lee County, North Carolina Republican Party, was caught on camera telling poll watchers to be on the lookout for local voters with "Hispanic-sounding" names.
CBS News reports that Womack's remarks were made during a virtual meeting of 1,800 poll watchers in North Carolina.
"If you've got folks that you, that were registered, and they're missing information… and they were registered in the last 90 days before the election, and they've got Hispanic-sounding last names, that probably is, is a suspicious voter," said Womack.
"It doesn't mean they're illegal. It just means they're suspicious."
Womack is the founder of the North Carolina Election Integrity Team, which CBS News describes as "a group of self-described patriots dedicated to investigating the election for what they perceive as incidents of fraud." Womack told CBS News that the group is mostly made up of retirees working at home with their computers to analyze voting records.
There has never been any evidence of undocumented immigrants voting in large numbers and Juan Proaño, the CEO of the League of United Latin American Citizens, told CBS News it would make no sense for such immigrants to take such a massive risk to vote in an election when many of them are in the United States to make money to send to their families in their home countries.
"It's very much a myth," he said. "But the campaigns have essentially used it as rhetoric, again, to try and suppress and intimidate the Latino vote."
knock on my door
Deletehttps://www.rawstory.com/gop-county-chair-tells-poll-watchers-to-flag-hispanic-sounding-voters-as-suspicious/
DeleteYou're afraid Trump will give orders to round up people with suspicious sounding Spanish surnames?
DeleteYes, since that is what happened under Eisenhower, and in other countries not least Nazi Germany, and in Arizona under Joe Arpaio (Trump pardoned him). Some of my friends are worried about being arrested for BLM demonstrations or helping Dreamers or writing lefty substacks. Why? Because that is what Trump says he will do if elected. I may move to Iceland myself.
DeleteThis is nothing new. Trump has a history of taking credit for other peoples' philanthropy. Back in 1995, he turned up at a ribbon cutting for a nursery school for children with AIDS:
ReplyDelete"Trump was not a major donor. He was not a donor, period. He’d never given a dollar to the nursery or the Association to Benefit Children, according to Gretchen Buchenholz, the charity’s executive director then and now.
"But now he was sitting in Fisher’s seat, next to Giuliani."
There was also the time when he promised donations to veterans organizations and reporters found he hadn't given anything. Also, he has claimed many times that he was helping on the ground after the 9-11 attacks. No one can remember seeing him there.
OTOH there was Harris almost boast about the killing of terror master Sinwar in Rafah. If Israel had followed Biden-Harris's order, Israel wouldn't have gone into Rafah, and Sinwar would still be alive.
DeleteWhat does "almost boast" mean? It sounds like it is not a boast that David is trying to pretend is a boast.
DeleteIs David really equating an act of war with philanthropy, such as helping children with AIDS?
DeleteIf Israel hadn’t gone into Gaza, then 40k+ innocent civilians wouldn’t have been murdered, half of whom were children.
DeleteOf course, blaming the victim is de rigueur for Republicans, business as usual.
David, in all likelihood you are a psychotic individual, you should seek professional help for that before you hurt someone.
"If Israel had followed Biden-Harris's order"
DeleteWhat Biden-Harris order?
According to Woodward’s new book, Biden was fuming at Netanyahu, and it was only through Biden’s relentless efforts that Netanyahu agreed to any humanitarian aid AT ALL into Gaza.
DeleteOK, but Dickhead says the Biden-Harris would have kept Israel out of Gaza. You don't mean to tell me Dickhead has his facts mixed up again, do you?
DeleteI'll bet there are a lot of these kinds of stories about Trump:
ReplyDelete"Former President Donald Trump offered to cover funeral costs for a soldier murdered at Ft. Hood — then furiously backed out when the family sent a $60,000 bill to the White House, according to a bombshell report published Tuesday in The Atlantic.
Among the stories in the report was that Trump volunteered to pay for the funeral of Vanessa Guillén, a 20-year-old Army private who was beaten to death and burned by a fellow soldier.
“If I can help you out with the funeral, I’ll help—I’ll help you with that,” Trump reportedly told the victim's family. “I’ll help you out. Financially, I’ll help you.”
But his tone changed when the bill was sent." [Rawstory]
Mexicans deserve second-class funerals, in Trump's world:
Delete""It doesn’t cost 60,000 bucks to bury a f---ing Mexican!” shouted the angry president.
He reportedly told chief of staff Mark Meadows: “Don’t pay it!"
Trump remained agitated about the funeral the following day, according to the report.
"F---ing people trying to rip me off," Trump ranted.
The story came from staffers who were taking "contemporaneous notes of the meeting."
The report follows a September 2020 report in The Atlantic, which reported Trump told families "he has received the bodies of slain service members 'many, many' times," when in reality, he had traveled to Dover Air Force Base, "the transfer point for the remains of fallen service members, only four times since becoming president."
These types of stories don't move the meter politically. The question is what will Democrats do differently from what they have been doing the last 4 years.
DeleteThe platform of 'We are slightly better than Trump' isn't working. As you are about to see.
I like the last 4 years so I am voting for Harris. I think Trump is horrible but I thought that after the last ugly story too, but maybe some Republican somewhere will reach their limit and get fed up with him. Some have switched to Harris already so I know it can happen.
DeleteA lot of republicans are scared that Trump will be a dictator, based on his statement … that he wants to be a dictator. And so they won’t be voting for him.
DeleteAmericans don't want an inarticulate, cackling alcoholic to lead the country. Better luck next time.
ReplyDeleteYou hang in there buddy and maybe you can win your primary in two years.
Delete