'Train Wreck'? Liberals Panic Early About White House Correspondents Dinner with Trump

Image result for liberal panic meme mediaPoynter’s James Warren (a former Chicago Tribune managing editor) has turned to the next press horror under President Trump: “What will the White House correspondents’ dinner look like under President Trump?” Warren admitted  “It seems way off — April 29, 2017 — but the election of Donald Trump is already raising questions and some fears among [White House Correspondents] association members.”

"This is unchartered [sic] territory," said a former WHCA board member who's discussed the matter with board members. "We've never had a businessman-reality TV star as president, somebody who understands the importance of this particular event."

That sounds a little odd, considering Obama and Bill Clinton understood this was an event where they could easily own the room. See the media adoration of Obama’s mic-drop routine earlier this year.

Liberal journalists now associate the dinner with journalists being too cozy with the power elite, and conservatives associate it with leftist comedians offering either a cauldron of acid for Republicans (Stephen Colbert trolling Bush) or a cauldron of acid for Republicans (Wanda Sykes sparing Obama).

Both these groups of critics would just call the whole thing off. Warren turned to the media to wonder about the future:

"Will this guy who sat here and took it in not altogether gracious fashion from President Obama sit there and take it as president of the United States while a comedian who is hired does what comedians normally do? Can he take it?" asks Bill Plante, just-retired CBS News White House correspondent and a former association president.

"And can he do (at the dinner) what presidents do, make fun of himself?"        

Plante asked exactly the wrong question. Trump came to the dinner and took his lumps from Obama and NBC's Seth Meyers in 2011. The better question is can the media take the ridicule? Can the media make fun of itself? 
read more:

Views: 481

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The question is being asked and answered everyday.
Liberal progressive democrat media sycophants are churning with (anger cum news) reports all attempting to hurt President Trump.
A media party would be a national Trump "bashional" ending in violence.
Cancel the stupid event and sponsor neighborhood get together cook out day for people to come together. The press does nothing but divide us.

Love it...was thinking the same thing...do something useful with the money and not feed the pariahical pirranahs. 

LOL This Fantastic!.....This out have the shrinks busy for years to come....Merry Christmas Everyone.

Trump  will  feign a National Issue that requires his immediate attention. He will send his wife, Ivanka, to replace him. As she speaks, her stunning beauty and confidence will leave all the liberals, who arrived in attack mode, tounge tied and drooling.

this is what is wrong with the media : they think it is always about them

The better question is can the media take the ridicule?

Can the media make fun of itself?

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service