Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

[Freddy Freaker]

I've noticed #TrumpMustResign and #ResignedOrBeImpeached trending on twitter lately
what's going on? All I'm seeing is just lefties flailing, but I feel like I'm missing something

#WeDontManipulateTags

#JustACoincidenceGoy

 

[Ghostse]

Speaking of Dawn Lamon he might be the next CNN fire-ee. Just another story the left won't cover and hilariously ResignorBeImpeached started trending just after I saw this story for the first time.

‘TOO PARTISAN’: New York Times Bans Reporters From Certain CNN, MSNBC Shows

The New York Times has started cracking down on the shows that its reporters can appear on as the newspaper has recently decided to ban reporters from multiple shows on hyper-partisan cable news networks CNN and MSNBC. Vanity Fair reported that New York Times finance editor David Enrich recently...

www.dailywire.com

What worries me is that Fox News has become the source of truth against the rest of the Main-Screed Media.
I was also going to say "I can see this being used in the other direction", but then I remembered no conservative show has bothered with anyone from the NYT or vice versa. So yeah, blacklist away.


Also even if it generates sensible chuckles now, this is just the NYT trying to reestablish journalistic credibility after being attached to Maddow getting btfo.
As they try this shit, this is your daily reminder that New York Times already said "fuck impartiality".

If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him?

Because if you believe all of those things, you have to throw out the textbook American journalism has been using for the better part of the past half-century, if not longer, and approach it in a way you’ve never approached anything in your career. If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. You would move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional. That’s uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, nonopinion journalist I’ve ever known, and by normal standards, untenable.

But the question that everyone is grappling with is: Do normal standards apply? And if they don’t, what should take their place?

Covering Mr. Trump as an abnormal and potentially dangerous candidate is more than just a shock to the journalistic system. It threatens to throw the advantage to his news conference-averse opponent, Hillary Clinton, who should draw plenty more tough-minded coverage herself. She proved that again last week with her assertion on “Fox News Sunday” that James Comey, director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, had declared her to be truthful in her answers about her decision to use a private email server for official State Department business — a grossly misleading interpretation of an F.B.I. report that pointed up various falsehoods in her public explanations.

And, most broadly, it upsets balance, that idealistic form of journalism with a capital “J” we’ve been trained to always strive for.

But let’s face it: Balance has been on vacation since Mr. Trump stepped onto his golden Trump Tower escalator last year to announce his candidacy. For the primaries and caucuses, the imbalance played to his advantage, captured by the killer statistic of the season: His nearly $2 billion in free media was more than six times as much as that of his closest Republican rival.

Now that he is the Republican nominee for president, the imbalance is cutting against him. Journalists and commentators are analyzing his policy pronouncements and temperament with an eye toward what it would all look like in the Oval Office — something so many of them viewed as an impossibility for so long.

You can see it from the minute the television news day starts, on the set of “Morning Joe” on MSNBC. A few months ago media writers were describing a too-cozy relationship between Mr. Trump and the show’s hosts, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski.

Yet there was Mr. Scarborough on Wednesday asking the former Central Intelligence Agency director Michael V. Hayden whether there were safeguards in place to ensure that if Mr. Trump “gets angry, he can’t launch a nuclear weapon,” given the perception that he might not be “the most stable guy.”

Then Mr. Scarborough shared an alarming conversation he said he had with a “foreign policy expert” who had given Mr. Trump a national security briefing. “Three times he asked about the use of nuclear weapons,” Mr. Scarborough said, describing one of the questions as “If we have them, why can’t we use them?”

Speaking with me later, Mr. Scarborough, a Republican, said he had not contemplated sharing the anecdote with the audience until just before he did.

“When that discussion came up, I really didn’t have a choice,” Mr. Scarborough said. “That was something I thought Americans needed to know.”

Mr. Trump has denied Mr. Scarborough’s account. (He told The New York Times in March he would use nuclear weapons as “an absolutely last step.” But when the MSNBC host Chris Matthews challenged him for raising the possibility he would use them, Mr. Trump asked, “Then why are we making them?”)

Mr. Scarborough, a frequent critic of liberal media bias, said he was concerned that Mr. Trump was becoming increasingly erratic, and asked rhetorically, “How balanced do you have to be when one side is just irrational?”

Mr. Scarborough is on the opinion side of the news business. It’s much dodgier for conventional news reporters to treat this year’s political debate as one between “normal” and “abnormal,” as the Vox editor in chief Ezra Klein put it recently.

In a sense, that’s just what reporters are doing. And it’s unavoidable. Because Mr. Trump is conducting his campaign in ways we’ve not normally seen.

No living journalist has ever seen a major party nominee put financial conditions on the United States defense of NATO allies, openly fight with the family of a fallen American soldier, or entice Russia to meddle in a United States presidential election by hacking his opponent (a joke, Mr. Trump later said, that the news media failed to get). And while coded appeals to racism or nationalism aren’t new — two words: Southern strategy — overt calls to temporarily bar Muslims from entry to the United States or questioning a federal judge’s impartiality based on his Mexican heritage are new.

“If you have a nominee who expresses warmth toward one of our most mischievous and menacing adversaries, a nominee who shatters all the norms about how our leaders treat families whose sons died for our country, a nominee proposing to rethink the alliances that have guided our foreign policy for 60 years, that demands coverage — copious coverage and aggressive coverage,” said Carolyn Ryan, The New York Times’s senior editor for politics. “It doesn’t mean that we won’t vigorously pursue reporting lines on Hillary Clinton — we are and we will.”

You can fairly say about Mrs. Clinton that no presidential candidate has secured a major party nomination after an F.B.I. investigation into her use of a private email server for, in some cases, top-secret national security information. That warrants scrutiny, along with her entire record. But the candidates do not produce news at the same rate.

“When controversy is being stoked, it’s our obligation to report that,” said the Washington Post managing editor Cameron Barr. “If one candidate is doing that more aggressively and consistently than the other, that is an imbalance for sure.” But, he added, “it’s not one that we create, it’s one that the candidate is creating.”

Some of it was baked into the two candidacies. Mrs. Clinton has been around so long that voters can more easily envision what her presidency would look like. And to say she hasn’t been amply scrutinized is to ignore the fact that there are more “gates” affixed to her last name — Travelgate, Whitewatergate, now Emailgate — than there are gates in the Old City of Jerusalem.

Mr. Trump is a political novice who has spent his career running a private company and starring in a hit reality show. He’s hardly an unknown, but there is so much we still don’t know about his views and his familiarity with the major issues. His positions would be big news even if they didn’t so often seem to break with decades-old policy consensus (which they do).

The media reaction to it all has been striking, what The Columbia Journalism Review called “a Murrow moment.” It’s not unusual to see news stories describe him as “erratic” without attribution to an opponent. The “fact checks” of his falsehoods continue to pile up in staggering numbers, far outpacing those of Mrs. Clinton. And, on Sunday, the CNN “Reliable Sources” host Brian Stelter called upon journalists and opinion makers to challenge Mr. Trump’s “dangerous” claims that the electoral system is rigged against him. Failure to do so would be unpatriotic, Mr. Stelter said.

While there are several examples of conservative media criticism of Mr. Trump this year, the candidate and his supporters are reprising longstanding accusations of liberal bias. “The media is trying to take Donald Trump out,” Rush Limbaugh declared last week.

A lot of core Trump supporters certainly view it that way. That will only serve to worsen their already dim view of the news media, which initially failed to recognize the power of their grievances, and therefore failed to recognize the seriousness of Mr. Trump’s candidacy.

This, however, is what being taken seriously looks like. As Ms. Ryan put it to me, Mr. Trump’s candidacy is “extraordinary and precedent-shattering” and “to pretend otherwise is to be disingenuous with readers.”

It would also be an abdication of political journalism’s most solemn duty: to ferret out what the candidates will be like in the most powerful office in the world.

It may not always seem fair to Mr. Trump or his supporters. But journalism shouldn’t measure itself against any one campaign’s definition of fairness. It is journalism’s job to be true to the readers and viewers, and true to the facts, in a way that will stand up to history’s judgment. To do anything less would be untenable.

Remember, one candidate was under FBI investigation for proven breaches of classified data, and the other candidate said some naughty words that are extra naughty when we report them out of context. One candidate said some kind words about Russia, the other as secretary of state oversaw 80% of the US uranium mining placed under majority Russia Government control.
Obviously a candidate being under federal investigation (AGAIN) is no where near as news worthy as the candidate who is being sued by a porn star.

fake edit: Man this flailing NYT apologetic gets more and more hilarious as we go along.
" And, on Sunday, the CNN “Reliable Sources” host Brian Stelter called upon journalists and opinion makers to challenge Mr. Trump’s “dangerous” claims that the electoral system is rigged against him. Failure to do so would be unpatriotic, Mr. Stelter said."
Man how that narrative has turned.

 

[It's HK-47]

Remember, one candidate was under FBI investigation for proven breeches

 

[Ghostse]

View attachment 779392

Sorry you're right. Bill not Hilary was the one caught with classified breeches.

 

[Iwasamwillbe]

View attachment 779392

What do you think will happen to all the big time mainstream media outlets like CNN and the New York Times after Trump?

 

[BR55]

At this point the Impeachment shrieking doesn't even annoy me anymore. I just find it fascinating.
They truly honestly believe that this is a thing thats going to happen. Although to get technical Trump could 100% be Impeached but just like Bill it would be meaningless and pointless.
Being a TDS sufferer must be pretty scary. The raging paranoia. The raw delusion. The inability to think about anything the fuck else.
To be honest I pity them.

 

[It's HK-47]

What do you think will happen to all the big time mainstream media outlets like CNN and the New York Times after Trump?

Couldn't say, really, but I'm sure at some point their investors are going to stamp a foot down and go, "Hey. We need to make money again." If not, they're going to have a rough time making it through six more years of Trump, especially since they've already had to run through so many layoffs and "buyouts."

 

[CheezzyMach]

At this point the Impeachment shrieking doesn't even annoy me anymore. I just find it fascinating.
They truly honestly believe that this is a thing thats going to happen. Although to get technical Trump could 100% be Impeached but just like Bill it would be meaningless and pointless.
Being a TDS sufferer must be pretty scary. The raging paranoia. The raw delusion. The inability to think about anything the fuck else.
To be honest I pity them.

That's how I felt about Obama Derangement sufferers a decade ago.

It's been fucking fascinating to see the entire MSM and DNC get just as retarded as Fox News and the Tea Party did.

 

[Ruin]

That's how I felt about Obama Derangement sufferers a decade ago.

It's been fucking fascinating to see the entire MSM and DNC get just as exceptional as Fox News and the Tea Party did.

I think TDS is worse. I don't remember Tea Party folks shitting on the floor and smearing their faces with menstrual blood to protest Obama.

 

[CheezzyMach]

I think TDS is worse. I don't remember Tea Party folks shitting on the floor and smearing their faces with menstrual blood to protest Obama.

Wait...what?

 

[Ruin]

Wait...what?

Yes exactly.

 

[Jigglyjogglers]

Fox News also didn't say half the shit that Obama and his fanboys claim they did. Despite Obama himself mewling that they were constantly accusing him of being a Double Secret Muslim, absolutely no one has been able to provide a clip of it happening even once, which you'd think would be easy if it was happening constantly like they said it did. I mean I don't doubt they said some wacky shit, especially on some of the blatant opinion shows, but the idea that they were as deranged as the other side is now is more one of the impression that the left was trying to create of them to discredit them, rather than the reality.

 

[BR55]

That's how I felt about Obama Derangement sufferers a decade ago.

It's been fucking fascinating to see the entire MSM and DNC get just as exceptional as Fox News and the Tea Party did.

The difference is that people opposed to Obama didn't even have a fraction of the cultural and institutional power that these assholes have.
When Silicon Valley, Hollywood, the Mainstream Media and even government officials all collude to push this bullshit it's really hard to ignore it.
Fox News and some Tea Party Boomers doesn't even come close.
Of course the fact that their still getting their shit pushed in by Orange Man betrays the fact that their the biggest fuck ups in existence.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Fox News also didn't say half the shit that Obama and his fanboys claim they did. Despite Obama himself mewling that they were constantly accusing him of being a Double Secret Muslim, absolutely no one has been able to provide a clip of it happening even once, which you'd think would be easy if it was happening constantly like they said it did. I mean I don't doubt they said some wacky shit, especially on some of the blatant opinion shows, but the idea that they were as deranged as the other side is now is more one of the impression that the left was trying to create of them to discredit them, rather than the reality.

Yeah, this. I mean, social media wasn't quite as big then, but you didn't have facebook and twitter pushing #Birthers and #ObamaIsAMuslim.

The whole birth certificate nonsense seems so weird to me now. Like... I had to provide my birth certificate to get the docs to work, why shouldn't the president? I have never had to give employers previous tax returns, why should the president?

The mainstream media reported all the anti Obama stuff as the work of terrible racists. They report all the anti-trump stuff as the work of heroes.

 

[SmileyTimeDayCare]

I think TDS is worse. I don't remember Tea Party folks shitting on the floor and smearing their faces with menstrual blood to protest Obama.

TDS sufferers don't just go after Trump. They go after Trump supporters and those who won't denounce Trump hard enough.

You didn't see that out of people who didn't like Obama. Maybe you saw some hick with a racist sign or someone burning an effigy(which would then be painted as racism because that shit never happened before).

You didn't see repeated incidents of violence against people tangentially associated or completely unrelated to Obama.

You didn't see violence on campuses against speakers who were perceived as supporters of Obama.

You didn't see teenagers being assaulted in a fast food joint for wearing an Obama hat.

You didn't see the media lynching teenagers for doing nothing wrong other than wearing Obama hats.

You didn't see mainstream outlets publishing endless stories to push a narrative that changes with every disproving of the rotten core.

You didn't see completely fabricated stories about ships being hidden from Obama.

The things that came out of birthers/tea party are incomparable to what is going on right now. It is fun to laugh at but the longer it goes on the more and more concerned I am become about where it is actually heading.

Sure right now it is people who overdose on Twitter and CNN but there are a lot of people out there who have been given smaller doses over a very long period of time and that is fucking terrifying.

 

[Billy_Mays_SixPack]

Only veterans vote Democrats dont you know. If you have a family member that served you dont respect them even though they voted for Trump themselves.. SMH

 

[Some Random Soul]

TDS sufferers don't just go after Trump. They go after Trump supporters and those who won't denounce Trump hard enough.

You didn't see that out of people who didn't like Obama. Maybe you saw some hick with a racist sign or someone burning an effigy(which would then be painted as racism because that shit never happened before).

You didn't see repeated incidents of violence against people tangentially associated or completely unrelated to Obama.

You didn't see violence on campuses against speakers who were perceived as supporters of Obama.

You didn't see teenagers being assaulted in a fast food joint for wearing an Obama hat.

You didn't see the media lynching teenagers for doing nothing wrong other than wearing Obama hats.

You didn't see mainstream outlets publishing endless stories to push a narrative that changes with every disproving of the rotten core.

You didn't see completely fabricated stories about ships being hidden from Obama.

The things that came out of birthers/tea party are incomparable to what is going on right now. It is fun to laugh at but the longer it goes on the more and more concerned I am become about where it is actually heading.

Sure right now it is people who overdose on Twitter and CNN but there are a lot of people out there who have been given smaller doses over a very long period of time and that is fucking terrifying.

You also didn't see people (or at least not as many) openly calling for Obama's assassination, wanting to blow up the White House under him, or any of that shit.

 

[SmileyTimeDayCare]

You also didn't see people (or at least not as many) openly calling for Obama's assassination, wanting to blow up the White House under him, or any of that shit.

Or people showing up at a TV personality's home and breaking the door down because that person supported Obama.

Oh and the restaurant shit...which stopped pretty quickly which really makes me think it was all orchestrated and when the desired result wasn't achieved they backed off.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

View attachment 779517


Only veterans vote Democrats dont you know. If you have a family member that served you dont respect them even though they voted for Trump themselves.. SMH

Just remember this stuff if/when you consider voting democrat ever in the future. They are keeping grudges over their warped perception of a strawman they use in place of you. You don't deserve to be an American, only the people who legally aren't americans deserve that.

He's a disabled vet alright. I suspect he must have taken a number of head wounds.

 

[MirrorNoir]

Speaking of Dawn Lamon he might be the next CNN fire-ee. Just another story the left won't cover and hilariously ResignorBeImpeached started trending just after I saw this story for the first time.

‘TOO PARTISAN’: New York Times Bans Reporters From Certain CNN, MSNBC Shows

The New York Times has started cracking down on the shows that its reporters can appear on as the newspaper has recently decided to ban reporters from multiple shows on hyper-partisan cable news networks CNN and MSNBC. Vanity Fair reported that New York Times finance editor David Enrich recently...

www.dailywire.com

Don Lemon is probably safe from being fired right away. He's a gay black man, plus CNN has invested so much into shilling him, he won't be fired because they've pretty much made him (and Anderson Cooper) the face of CNN.

Or people showing up at a TV personality's home and breaking the door down because that person supported Obama.

Oh and the restaurant shit...which stopped pretty quickly which really makes me think it was all orchestrated and when the desired result wasn't achieved they backed off.

I think on some level the lunatic left, their backers in particular, probably regret not going hard to crush right during that window they had from 2010-20013 when they could have gotten away with it. Then again, I'm pretty sure the elites also are pissed no one actually DID assassinate Obama during that 2013 time frame. Or that they didn't do it themselves, as part of their acceleration.

Martyring Obama would have let them wipe out modern conservativism in the US for at least 1-2 generations. And irrevocably neuter the Republicans for said period. Had they killed Obama in 2013 in a manner that made it look like the far right did it, they would have irrevocably radicalized everyone left that eventually moved center-right/right wing during Gamergate/Trump, blinding them to left wing corruption due to anger at Obama's death and wanting to avenge him. And let the elites use the murder of Obama to accelerate even FURTHER to the left than they did accelerate, not to mention allow Hillary to use Obama's dead body to glide into the White House with Trump not even factoring into the equation, due to him being destroyed before he even announced he was running, when the Democrats destroyed anyone who ever preached anything remotely resembling birtherism.

A lot of people on the left probably, hindsight filtered through their own warped nhilistic lens of history, are going to eventually start harping that Obama failed as a President BECAUSE he didn't take a hard line against the right and crushed them when he could have.