The reverse ferret

At a Saturday night rally in Fairfield, Connecticut, Trump went so far as to say that his race is not against the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, but against journalists. “I’m not running against Crooked Hillary,” he told a crowd. “I’m running against the crooked media.”

Well, that’s true of course. But this is delicious:

On Sunday, the nominee challenged the application of first amendment rights: “It is not ‘freedom of the press’ when newspapers and others are allowed to say and write whatever they want even if it is completely false!”

For 90% of the US press is saying exactly that about The Donald. He shouldn’t be allowed to say that because he’s lying.

24 thoughts on “The reverse ferret”

  1. Bloke in North Dorset

    Trump’s crime appears to be one of commission, whereas for the press its one of omission.

  2. The press are cunts, Hillary’s a cunt and Trump’s a cunt. Ted Cruz would have walked this – but the Republicans didn’t want him. So the Republicans are cunts, too.
    I think that about covers it (though I expect a few of the blogs resident deluded Trumpistas to arrive in a moment to tell us he’s as ‘alpha male’ or somesuch bollocks).

  3. I’m just wondering what lies Trump is telling. We know (some of) the lies Hillary is telling and we know some of the lies the press is telling, but much of what I’ve seen described as lies from Trump appear to be either differences of opinion or flat out inventions.

    I’m sure there are plenty of Trump lies out there; he is, after all, a businessman mutating into a politician; but saying, for instance, that the press are as crooked as Hillary doesn’t seem to me to be a lie.

  4. Donald Trump has some big ideas about Social Security. Happily, he is almost certainly lying about them.

    That ‘almost certainly lying’ doesn’t bode well for the evidentiary value of your cite, Interested.

    But what Williamson cites is mostly the political differences he has with Trump and the issues he has with the typical hyperbole and grandstanding that all politicians come out with.

    Williamson is a conservative, (probably a neocon), whereas Trump isn’t. Who is right and who is wrong is a different question from who is lying and who isn’t.

    But I conceded earlier that Trump is a lying politician, as are they all. What I’d like to see is the evidence of him standing in front of the TV cameras and saying things like ‘The FBI cleared me of any wrongdoing in the e-mail affair’ in the way that Hillary did.

  5. Trump lies.

    Hillary lies.
    Hillary sold influence as Sec State.
    Hillary leaked national secrets and got people killed.
    Hillary refused to protect an embassy and got people killed.
    Hillary is a selfish, vile, unhealthy old witch.

    Trump lies. Uhhh . . . what’s your point?

  6. The US media is in the tank for the Democrats and has been for the last 40 years at least. They said all the same things about Ronald Reagan.

  7. Ted Cruz would have walked this

    Absolutely not. Where would he have got his support from?

    Trump/Clinton is highly depressing prospect for sure, but at least we’ve spared Cruz. The sick-bag makers alone will be disappointed.

  8. If Gamecock were picking the President, it would be Ted Cruz. But I’m not, so I have to agree with Jack C’s question about from where Cruz would get support.

    The Dems/legacy press hate him.

    Establishment Republicans hate him. So he’d get maybe 35% of the vote, even against a selfish, vile, unhealthy old witch.

  9. Interested: Ted Cruz?

    You must be joking. Another “right-winger” who–even if he could have beaten Killery thro’ the blizzard of press lies–would have spent four years in the Oval office with his lips wrapped around the left’s dick.

  10. Kevin B

    ‘Williamson is a conservative, (probably a neocon)’

    No he’s not. He’s tough to pigeonhole – he’s some kind of a libertarian conservative mix. I don’t think you can knock his thesis on the basis that he’s only predicting future lies – he could scarcely do much else. He mentions past ones, too.

    Ecks – no, I’m not joking. I’m not saying he was the messiah, but he was the best of a bad bunch IMO (though he had nutty views of his own). Your trouble is excessive ideological purity. You’re a right wing version of these mad Corbynistas who would rather spend their lives in opposition than get 60% of what they would like. Fact is, unless you get to be dictator 60% is the best you’re ever going to get.

  11. @Jack C

    ‘Absolutely not. Where would he have got his support from?’

    No-one wants to vote for Clinton. Pretty much anyone other than Trump would have walked it.

  12. Sorry Interested but 60% of what’s possible? Cruz was just another tough-talker who would have done nothing except let the left do what it wanted. 60% of nothing is still nothing.

    Of course I don’t know Trump will be any different. But the kick to the lefts “balls” that him winning is equal to is worth it just for that alone.

    BTW compromise is OK in minor situations. There can be no compromise with evil. It must be victory or defeat. There is nothing else.

    “Have lived life free from compromise. And step into shadows now without complaint”. Rorschach

  13. @Interested

    “No-one wants to vote for Clinton. Pretty much anyone other than Trump would have walked it.”

    No. Trump is the only one that can actually inspire people to turn out and vote. Jeb Bush, Cruz, Kasich – all a waste of space who’ve done nothing to stop the onward march of leftism in the US.

  14. The media represents the Truth in our society but the Truth lies.

    The news media lie by omission, by change of emphasis, by distortion, or just outright lies.
    Putting words and images into your mouth and eyes that were never there.

  15. ‘Pretty much anyone other than Trump would have walked it.’

    Jonathan is correct. If the others were such hot stuff, why couldn’t they win the primary against Trump?

  16. ‘Cruz was just another tough-talker who would have done nothing except let the left do what it wanted.’

    No. Cruz stood up to the establishment; that’s why they hate him.

  17. Jonathan – Trump will inspire some people, but not enough. He’s going to get absolutely mashed.

    Gamecock – there’s a difference between winning the primary and winning the general.

    Everyone – I loathe Clinton and the left and pinko conservatives/Republicans. I’m not saying I wanted anyone else (Cruz I would have been okay with), just that (OK, virtually) anyone else would have beaten the very weak Dem candidate.

    Astonishing to me that intelligent people hear only what they want to hear from Trump. The bloke’s an unutterable shithouse. I wouldn’t go within a mile of the cunt, much less vote for him.

  18. Interested,
    I’m not pro-Trump either, but I can’t see that Cruz would have fared better in the general.

    The lesson of the election is that the two parties are both getting a serious kicking, and have 4 years to put things right.

    The Republicans, aware that the base were sick and tired of them, made things progressively worse by provoking the base further.

    The Democrats didn’t come up with any suitable candidates at all.

    Clinton may well win, but if she does, she will spend 4 years answering and denying a variety of charges. She’ll have little time for anything else.

    I work in the States: there’s general embarrassment all round. The hope is that this will force the establishments on both sides to get a grip in future.

  19. ‘anyone else would have beaten the very weak Dem candidate.’

    You underestimate the power of the legacy press.

  20. ‘Astonishing to me that intelligent people hear only what they want to hear from Trump. The bloke’s an &^&*^$%E%%^$^(&&(*((*&(*, much less vote for him.’

    Rather decadent of you. The reality is Trump or Hillary. That’s it, thems the choices. Hillary is evil. You support evil. Call Trump anything you want, Hillary is still evil. Stalin grade evil.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *