Thanks for the moving music, brings tears st times like these, and as for press coverage of these briefings, I personally cannot be the only person who finds them so offensive , the sounds of that man reading so much as the phone book so repugnant, I quite literally run for the remote, and then go doing something life affirming like taking out the trash or scrubbing toilets.....

Expand full comment

The networks also refused to show Obama’s immigration reform speech live because it was deemed “too political”. No double standard here.

Off topic but I just finished reading David Ignatius’s article about Trump’s new Space Force. Call me crazy but it sure seems that Ignatius is acting like a cheerleader not a journalist. He describes how the Air Force chief of staff “...said that a key moment on his “journey” to embracing the new force came when he visited Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama and talked with a group of young officers training for space operations. He asked how many favored a separate service, and every hand went up but three.” What a shock! People who volunteered for the new Space Force say it should be a separate force? That settles it, then.

Ignatius also describes how the new chief assured him our new military branch will be lean and agile, clearly not wasteful and expensive the way the other branches are. Then he goes to tell us that the space business is really hot right now and that:

“ One creative idea is allowing lateral transfers from the space business — recruiting a vice president at a fast-growing technology company, say, to become a part-time colonel, sharing his expertise.”

What could possibly go wrong if we let corporate executives become temporary officers? They won’t have any incentive to advocate for their own company’s goods and services so that they will get rewarded after they return to that company, right? And we all know that if the Space Force starts out small it will stay that way.

Ignatius describes the threats we face in space from Russian and China. He tells us that in March the Space Force deployed its first offensive weapon, a jamming system. That seems a bit odd since the Space Force is launching this week. Are we supposed to believe that this weapon was developed overnight? Or that before this we had no defensive or offensive capability in space? Clearly the Air Force Space Command, which has existed since 1981, was the entity that developed and deployed this weapon. The Space Command has been doing this kind of thing for years.

Ignatius offers no proof that our existing Space Command is too expensive, inefficient, inept, etc. and therefore needs to be replaced. Instead he gives readers the clear impression that because Trump has gotten his Space Force we will finally be protected.


Expand full comment

‪CNN and all MSN are allowing Trump to run the most visible Crime Spree in American History. Trump has conquered America’s best bet on telling the Truth. Browbeaten American Publishers and Editors are so afraid to standup to Trump, almost like Republicans in the Administration

Expand full comment

Another Suggestion: If major networks choose to keep Trump's newsconferences on air, simply grant the opposition equal time. When he goes off topic, which topic should be the federal response to COVID19, and utters anything of a political nature; put a clock on him and provide that cumulative time to a spokesperson from the opposition candidate(s) (or, in some cases, to qualified physician/researchers/fact-checkers not on Trump's oftimes intimidated "team").

If all networks airing these "briefings" are held to that standard, they will either be forced to offer opposition candidates equal time, edit out tangential political statements to air the residue topical information later, or stop broadcasting these altogether. As far as I know the "equal opportunity provision remains an enforceable congressional statute." https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/949/equal-time-rule

Expand full comment

OK, I'll go there. Does ANYBODY remember Nixon and Agnew slandering the press? They did it because they knew it would be popular with the public, but also to try to force the press to be biased in their favor.

The alleged people--I tend to prefer Woody Allen's definition of someone as "undefined protoplasm"--who run these networks are afraid of the far right. They are not afraid of others.

So, here's the deal. I guarantee you that if we all organized a boycott of these networks, and informed them and their advertisers that we would neither watch them nor, far more importantly, buy the products of their advertisers, and there were enough of us and we made a dent, the networks would end up looking like the video version of The Nation or a Communist Party meeting. Remember: Fux Noise got rid of Bill O'Reilly not because he was a sexual harasser and a bigot, but because he lost advertisers when he went too far.

Expand full comment

As I read your piece I kept thinking of how the press covered his every clownish utterance prior to the election. He was a side show, a buffoon, someone to generate ratings while the press snickered and laughed. But they gave him valuable air time which helped elect him.

Expand full comment