He did this so that events of 25 years ago, i.e. the tape of Hillary laughing at the aquittal of a child rapist on a technicality is now fair game. 10 steps ahead of everyone else. Genius.
I saw that in another blog...with comment: KC's View: If the Washington Post plans to run exhaustive investigative pieces about all the things that Trump and Hillary Clinton would not want us to know about their lives and careers, I suspect they'll have a pretty busy five months between now and the election.
By the way, y'think maybe Rupert Murdoch created Fox News and bought the Wall Street Journal because he wanted to have some influence? Of course he did.
And hasn't Trump bragged about financially supporting both Democrats and Republicans over the years because he wanted to exert influence? Yup.
But let's not let the facts get in the way.
If WashPo ran those investigative pieces about all the things that Forrest Trump and Hillary Clinton would not want us to know about their lives and careers, that would mean that the paper was doing its job. Jeff Bezos does not control the Post's reportage or editorial content.
If Trump truly believes that Bezos is ordering the Post to do hatchet jobs on Trump to make sure that a President Trump doesn't order an anti-trust investigation into Amazon's dealings and market power, then he's an idiot who doesn't know much about anti-trust law, the limits of presidential power or the Department of Justice.
Trump is a typical thin-skinned cowardly bully. He thinks it's fine for him to lie and smear and insult all day long but he cries like a baby when people call him on his BS or investigate him or return the insult. Steely_D wrote:
"The point being that racists love Trump, and there are non-racists as well who want to vote for him. None of the article had anything to do with how good a President he would be."
I'll bet that most of Trump's supporters are good people without strong racist leanings. That line you quoted
"...before it’s too late, maybe it’s time to stop hysterically moralising and instead try to understand not just how mainstream US politics has so awfully failed, but how it might somehow be rescued"
is teling. If you think the GOP isn't going to do anything to help you economically or to help the middle class, you turn to the last resort—Trump. I appreciate that people are angry and desperate. I just wish that they would ask Trump to spell out exactly how he's going to help them and make America great again. Most Trump supporters, I suspect, wouldn't accept such a lack of details if they tried to buy a used car.
In an interview with Fox News last night, Donald Trump issued a thinly veiled threat against The Washington Post, suggesting that the paper’s investigations into his background were in fact part of a tax dodging scheme, and hinting that as president, he would crack down on such behavior. Trump’s remarks were a clear attempt to intimidate his political critics, and they should terrify anyone who is concerned about abuse of government power, executive overreach, or freedom of the press.
Trump’s threat came in response to a question about whether he was ready for the rigors of a campaign in which both his likely general election competitor, Hillary Clinton, and news outlets like The Washington Post would be digging into his past. Here is what he said:
Every hour we’re getting calls from reporters from The Washington Post asking ridiculous questions. And I will tell you, this is owned as a toy by Jeff Bezos, who controls Amazon. Amazon is getting away with murder, tax-wise. He’s using The Washington Post for power so that the politicians in Washington don’t tax Amazon like they should be taxed.
He’s getting absolutely away—he’s worried about me, and I think he said that to somebody, it was in some article—where he thinks I would go after him for antitrust. Because he’s got a huge antitrust problem because he’s controlling so much. Amazon is controlling so much of what they’re doing. And what they’ve done is he bought this paper for practically nothing. And he’s using that as a tool for political power against me and against other people. And I’ll tell you what, we can’t let him get away with it.
So he’s got about 20, 25—I just heard they are taking these really bad stories. I mean, they, you know, wrong, I wouldn’t even say bad, they’re wrong. And in many cases they have no proper information, and they’re putting them together, they’re slopping them together, and they’re going to do a book.
And the book is going to be all false stuff because the stories are so wrong. And the reporters—I mean, one after another. So what they are doing is he’s using that as a political instrument to try and stop antitrust, which he thinks I believe he’s antitrust, in other words, what he’s got is a monopoly. And he wants to make sure I don’t get in. So, it’s one of those things. But I’ll tell you what. I’ll tell you what. What he’s doing’s wrong.
I saw that in another blog...with comment: KC's View: If the Washington Post plans to run exhaustive investigative pieces about all the things that Trump and Hillary Clinton would not want us to know about their lives and careers, I suspect they'll have a pretty busy five months between now and the election.
By the way, y'think maybe Rupert Murdoch created Fox News and bought the Wall Street Journal because he wanted to have some influence? Of course he did.
And hasn't Trump bragged about financially supporting both Democrats and Republicans over the years because he wanted to exert influence? Yup.
In an interview with Fox News last night, Donald Trump issued a thinly veiled threat against The Washington Post, suggesting that the paper’s investigations into his background were in fact part of a tax dodging scheme, and hinting that as president, he would crack down on such behavior. Trump’s remarks were a clear attempt to intimidate his political critics, and they should terrify anyone who is concerned about abuse of government power, executive overreach, or freedom of the press.
Trump’s threat came in response to a question about whether he was ready for the rigors of a campaign in which both his likely general election competitor, Hillary Clinton, and news outlets like The Washington Post would be digging into his past. Here is what he said:
Every hour we’re getting calls from reporters from The Washington Post asking ridiculous questions. And I will tell you, this is owned as a toy by Jeff Bezos, who controls Amazon. Amazon is getting away with murder, tax-wise. He’s using The Washington Post for power so that the politicians in Washington don’t tax Amazon like they should be taxed.
He’s getting absolutely away—he’s worried about me, and I think he said that to somebody, it was in some article—where he thinks I would go after him for antitrust. Because he’s got a huge antitrust problem because he’s controlling so much. Amazon is controlling so much of what they’re doing. And what they’ve done is he bought this paper for practically nothing. And he’s using that as a tool for political power against me and against other people. And I’ll tell you what, we can’t let him get away with it.
So he’s got about 20, 25—I just heard they are taking these really bad stories. I mean, they, you know, wrong, I wouldn’t even say bad, they’re wrong. And in many cases they have no proper information, and they’re putting them together, they’re slopping them together, and they’re going to do a book.
And the book is going to be all false stuff because the stories are so wrong. And the reporters—I mean, one after another. So what they are doing is he’s using that as a political instrument to try and stop antitrust, which he thinks I believe he’s antitrust, in other words, what he’s got is a monopoly. And he wants to make sure I don’t get in. So, it’s one of those things. But I’ll tell you what. I’ll tell you what. What he’s doing’s wrong.
Just spent time in Paris and London. Uniformly, folks native to those countries and every USA citizen I spoke to are incredulous that Trump is even an option.
Folks with their blinders on, thinking he's a "good" choice, don't realize what a bad choice he is - not in terms of election but just in terms showing how "Americans" think. Elected or not, just implying he's a candidate for President has done the nation horrible harm.
I think a lot of Trump's supporters view him as an intelligent, successful and decisive leader. They're attracted to his blunt, straightforward and concise analyses of major current events. They see him as a guy who can cut through the BS, foot-dragging and happy-talk of politics to get things done. From what I can remember people liked Ross Perot in '92 for the same reason. One of my co-workers at a major Washington think tank, a guy who'd graduated from Harvard Business School, suggested during that year that maybe a business leader was what Washington needed to function. Same co-worker, for what it's worth, became the director of research for Kissinger and Associates in '92, and yes he was quite bright.
Perot disappointed his followers considerably by going off the rails a bit before that election, but I suspect voters look for someone who resembles a "born leader" when they have lost their faith in Washington. Certainly a number of rotekz's statements back me up on this. My guess is that the same loss of faith and rise in frustration helped get Reagan elected in '80. Bernie is probably riding the same wave.
The problem with Trump is that he's all hat and no cattle. As far as I can tell, his businesses today are largely about licensing his name to real estate projects without becoming legally or financially involved too much. Trump won't open up very much about his businesses, wealth or taxes. But his bluster and big promises have combined with voter frustration to short-circuit people's desire to look at Trump's claims with even a little bit of skepticism.
Location: Half inch above the K/T boundary Gender:
Posted:
May 12, 2016 - 2:27pm
VV wrote:
No need for a poll. Anyone with only a handful of sense would know to pick "A".
When someone makes such huge sweeping statements about their plan to "Make America Great"... they can duck the details for only so long....
A, in a heartbeat.
Government is most often best, and frequently necessarily, planned and executed in an "unbusiness like manner". Properly so. Option B is an invitation to demagoguery. Details now provides, among other obvious factors, a) evidence that there is comprehensive knowledge of the challenge, and the strategy & tactics to meet it., and, b) demonstrates the thought process of the candidate as well as illuminate core values and principles.
