vaknosh:

itsalburton:

thefingerfuckingfemalefury:

dr-archeville:

Sebastian
Gorka, deputy assistant to President Donald Trump, said Monday that the
administration will continue using the term “fake news” until the media
understands that their “monumental desire” to attack the President is
wrong.

“There is a monumental
desire on behalf of the majority of the media, not just the pollsters,
the majority of the media to attack a duly elected President in the
second week of his term,” Gorka, a former Breitbart editor who also
holds a PhD in political science, told syndicated conservative radio
host Michael Medved.  “That’s how
unhealthy the situation is and until the media understands how wrong
that attitude is, and how it hurts their credibility, we are going to
continue to say, ‘fake news.‘  I’m sorry, Michael.  That’s the reality,”
he added.

Trump and his staff have repeatedly used
the term “fake news” to discredit reporting on the presidential
administration from mainstream outlets such as CNN and The New York
Times, often offering no evidence to back up their disputes with those
outlets’ stories.

Earlier in the
interview, Gorka was asked by Medved whether he would acknowledge that
the administration’s controversial statement on Holocaust Remembrance
Day was “at least questionable in being the first such statement in many
years that didn’t recognize that Jewish extermination was the chief
goal of the Holocaust.”

Gorka
replied by calling criticism of the statement “asinine,” arguing that
it was motivated by the media’s desire to attack Trump.

“It’s
a Holocaust remembrance statement,” Gorka said.  “No, I’m not going to
admit it.  Because it’s asinine.  It’s absurd.  You’re making a statement
about the Holocaust.  Of course it’s about the Holocaust because that’s
what the statement’s about.  It’s only reasonable to twist it if your
objective is to attack the President.”

Gorka
also sparred with a caller who contended that “every time you call
everything fake news, it just turns everyone except your hardcore fans
off.”

“Not everything’s fake news,” the caller added.

“You
know, I would beg to differ,” Gorka shot back.  “Every single organ that
generates these kinds of stories comes from the same clique of media
organs that predicted that Hillary (Clinton) would win and that Brexit
wouldn’t occur.  I know what fake news is.  And it’s coming from those
organizations. It’s time that you yourself understood that as well.“ 

So the Trump Administration outright says they’ll continue to de-legitimize the
media until they toe the line and stop “attacking” (i.e. disagreeing
with, or presenting facts that disagree with) the President and his
agenda.

THIS IS NOT NORMAL!

“Comrade Gorka” here is deeply upset about the way the media insists on reporting the TRUTH instead of only saying the things that won’t hurt the precious feelings of the Adulterer in Chief Donald Trump…

Who is apparently a special little snowflake who just can’t handle it when people say MEAN THINGS about him…let me go get the wolds tiniest fucking violin to play the worlds saddest song…in fact the violin will be so tiny it will perfectly fit in those troll doll hands that Trump has

This delusional fuckwit piece of garbage (Who looks like he shouldn’t be allowed to live within five hundred yards of a school) is exactly the kind of filthy sub-human TRASH I’d expect to see supporting VERMIN like Donald Trump and I hope that the media ignores his PATHETIC bitching and whining about how MEAN it is of them to be so HARSH on poor little Special Snowflake Donald Trump

Reminder that criticizing the President (or the government as a whole) is permitted under the 1st Amendment, something our Founding Fathers were persecuted for doing before the Revolution and what they intentionally wanted to avoid happening again in making the Constitution.

Also, fucking Republicans did it for 8 fucking years and now they’re being hypocritical fucks about respecting a disgraceful character like Donny McFuckface.

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” – Theodore Roosevelt

WH official: We’ll say ‘fake news’ until media realizes attitude of attacking the President is wrong

justinspoliticalcorner:

Jessica Mason Pieklo at Rewire:

Over the weekend, President Donald Trump launched into another Twitter rant, this time attacking the legitimacy of a “so-called” federal court judge who on Friday issued a nationwide injunction blocking the Refugee and Visa Order cooked up by Trump and his wingman Steve Bannon.

Federal District Court Judge James Robart is a 2003 George W. Bush appointee. Like Sally Yates—the former acting attorney general who also disagreed with the constitutionality of the order, known as the Muslim ban, and who was then promptly fired by Trump—Robart is a civil servant widely respected by Republicans and Democrats alike. In fact, the likely future Attorney General Sen. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III (R-AL) voted for his confirmation.

And while it would be easy to write off Trump’s latest Twitter tirade as just that—Trump’s latest Twitter tirade—it would be exceedingly foolish to do so. After all, each one aims to stifle opposition and dissent. So when those temper tantrums are directed at the federal courts, and specifically federal judges who issue orders in opposition to Trump’s policies, we must pay attention to them.

Trump’s latest outburst matters for several reasons. First, it is part of an ongoing effort by the administration to de-legitimize the institution of the federal courts. This is important, because we’ll likely see a lot of Trump’s agenda end up in federal litigation.

Look at the challenges to the Muslim ban alone. In addition to the numerous other petitions filed on behalf of individuals immediately affected by the ban, Trump’s executive order is already in front of a federal appeals court. Almost immediately after Robart issued the injunction, the Trump Department of Justice asked for a stay of that order from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the federal appellate court that hears cases from, among others, Robart’s district. The Ninth Circuit refused that request immediately and entirely. It follows, then, that while we are many steps from getting there, Trump’s Muslim ban is likely to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court at some point. Given the fact we’re not even a full month into Trump’s presidency, and the additional campaign promises he clearly intends to keep—like signing unconstitutional abortion bans—there will almost certainly be more of Trump’s policies before the Court too.

This is important because President Trump has sent a very clear message to federal judges: Try and block my policies and find yourself on the receiving end of executive-branch wrath. Trump didn’t send one stray tweet, after all: He launched into a series of tweets suggesting that should another foreign terrorist attack happen on U.S. soil, it would be the fault of the courts for disobeying Trump and blocking the executive action. This is unchartered waters for our democracy; it has the potential to undermine the necessary check the federal courts serve on the executive branch. Quite simply, Trump is trying to bully federal judges out of ruling against him and suggesting those who do are not “legitimate” members of the federal courts.

Second, Trump’s attacks on the federal courts matter because those attacks have the power to influence the culture and composition of the courts themselves. Last week, Trump nominated federal appeals court judge Neil Gorsuch to fill the seat left vacant by Antonin Scalia’s death. It’s not enough for Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask Gorsuch during his hearing if he disagrees with Trump’s comments; Senate Democrats need to ask him point-blank if he’s independent from the president, or if he was nominated because Trump and Bannon feel confident he will rule as they need him to.

And this approach needs to extend to all of Trump’s other court nominees. By suggesting that the federal courts are illegitimate because they disagree with his policy, Trump makes suspect every single one of his nominees moving forward. Why would Trump nominate a judge he thought for a second would not move his agenda along, Constitution be damned?

Then there is the possibility of impeachment. After all, every day Trump remains in office he’s violating the Constitution because he hasn’t fully divested of his private business dealings, including dealings in places specifically left off Trump’s Muslim ban.

So let’s say it happens. Let’s say somehow, Republicans in the House find some courage and actually do draft Articles of Impeachment. That impeachment trial will happen in the Senate, where Chief Justice John Roberts will preside over the proceedings.

And let’s say those proceedings end up with Trump impeached. Will Trump, Bannon, and his supporters accept that ruling and leave office? Or will this “so-called federal judge,” aka Roberts, be attacked, and the order removing Trump from office ignored?

Like Trump’s attacks on the media and the “fake news” narrative, the attacks on the federal courts are designed to both chill opposition to Trump’s policies and to call into question the institutions set up to check the power of the presidency. Trump can’t fire Judge Robart the way he did Sally Yates, so instead he’s attacking Robart’s legitimacy. We’ve seen this, too, with Trump’s approach to the New York Times, CNN, and any political reporting or polling that shows disagreement with his agenda.

That’s also why the press and the courts are more critical than ever. Because Trump can’t fire them, they are the two institutions which have the greatest ability to act as the firewall to Trump and Bannon completely laying waste to our democratic ideals.

Just like his war on the media that don’t 100% worship him, he’s leading a war on our court systems.

Trump Is Declaring War on Our Federal Courts, and We Must Pay Attention – Rewire

positivethinkingforlosers:

gallifreyburning:

“Our men and women in uniform, our intelligence and homeland security professionals, and our citizens should feel secure in their knowledge that the critical decisions made by the NSC are free from political considerations. The American people deserve a national security policymaking process that inspires confidence, not cynicism,” said Murphy in a House floor speech.

CALL THIS WOMAN’S OFFICE AND SAY THANK YOU. ENCOURAGE HER TO PUSH HARD FOR THIS BILL. CALL YOUR LOCAL CONGRESSPEOPLE AND ASK THEM TO SPONSOR/SUPPORT IT!

Find your representative
Find your senator

winter park Fl represent!

Stephanie Murphy files bill that would remove Stephen Bannon from National Security Council