During "Meet the Press' interview James Comey dismisses report by House Intelligence Committee and suggests that Trump will lie under oath.

Courtesy of NBC News: 

Former FBI Director James Comey on Sunday dismissed the findings of a GOP report claiming there is no evidence President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russians during the 2016 election. He added that, as a former prosecutor, he has “serious doubts” about Trump’s credibility as a potential witness. 

Comey called the recently released report by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee “a political document” during an interview on “Meet The Press.”

“That is not my understanding of what the facts were before I left the FBI and I think the most important piece of work is the one the special counsel's doing now,” Comey added.

Asked whether the committee has served a good investigative purpose overall, Comey said, “not that I can see.” 

The former FBI director also said politicization has “wrecked the committee, and it damaged relationships with the FISA Court, the intelligence communities. It's just a wreck.”

Yeah it's hard to argue with Comey on this.

The House Intelligence Committee with Devin Nunes in charge was NEVER going to find anything problematic about Trump's interactions with Russia.

Comey also weighed in on Trump's seeming inability to tell the truth:

“I have serious doubts about his credibility,” Comey said of Trump, adding that he worries about whether the president would be truthful under oath or not.

“Sometimes people who have serious credibility problems can tell the truth when they realize that the consequences of not telling the truth in an interview or in the grand jury would be dire,” Comey said. “But you'd have to go in with a healthy sense that he might lie to you.”

In other words Trump will almost certainly lie under oath, and that will essentially be his undoing.

Which is something that probably EVERYBODY knows, with the possible exception of Trump himself. 

Rand Paul laments fact that it is hard to get anything done on immigration with everybody calling Donald Trump a racist.

Sen. @RandPaul: "You can't have immigration compromise if everybody's out there calling the president a racist." #MTP pic.twitter.com/2VW99zjER3

— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) January 14, 2018

Courtesy of Mediaite: 

Appearing on NBC’s Meet the Press this morning, the Kentucky lawmaker told host Chuck Todd that some people in the media have gone “completely bonkers” with “ad hominem” attacks on the president over his widely condemned remarks. Paul added that he wanted to see immigration reform but felt it was difficult if folks continue to criticize Trump. 

“You can’t have immigration compromise if everybody’s out there calling the president a racist,” Paul exclaimed. “They’re actually destroying the setting — and he’s a little bit of it — they’re destroying the setting in which anything meaningful can happen.”

You know he could tell Trump to stop being such a goddamn racist, instead of bitching about people acknowledging that fact on Meet the Press.

Donald Trump is a racist, and everybody knows it.

Which is why if there is any real progress made on immigration it will be made in spite of Donald Trump, not with Donald Trump's help.

On "Meet the Press" author Michael Wolff says the 25th Amendment is talked about all of the time. Update!

Courtesy of NBC News: 

Concern in the White House about President Donald Trump’s fitness for office has become so great that members of the president’s administration routinely talk about a constitutional solution, the author of an explosive new book claimed in an exclusive interview on “Meet The Press.” 

Michael Wolff, the author of “Fire and Fury,” alleged Sunday that the 25th Amendment, which would allow the president’s cabinet to remove him from office, is a concept that is "alive every day in the White House." 

Wolff said White House staffers he talked to would say things like "we're not at a 25th Amendment level yet." Others, he said, called Trump's behaviors "a little 25th Amendment."

Like I said, this is becoming more and more viable every day.

And if they are talking about it in the White House with this kind of frequency, they know it as well.

Update: As if to prove he is unfit for office Trump tweeted this out just tonight.

 Now if you are trying to figure out what an "enormously consensual presidency" is you are not alone, so was everybody on Twitter.

Trump later removed it and replaced it with one that made a little more sense.

“His is turning out to be an enormously consequential presidency. So much so that, despite my own frustration over his missteps, there has never been a day when I wished Hillary Clinton were president. Not one. Indeed, as Trump’s accomplishments accumulate, the mere thought of...

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 8, 2018

Because you know, quoting from articles by sycophantic reporters so that you can talk about yourself in the third person is SO MUCH saner. 

"Covfefe."

"Stable genius."

"Enormously consensual presidency."

It's like with every tweet Trump just makes a 25th Amendment solution all the more viable.

Donald Trump Jr. promotes silencers on guns in order to get more "little kids into the game."

So @DonaldJTrumpJr appears in this commercial praising silencers as wonderful and for kids then pushes the Silencer bill! How much💰💰 Junior? pic.twitter.com/liofkmQ2mx

— Olga_Lautman NYC ✨ (@olgaNYC1211) October 3, 2017

This of course happened before this most recent mass shooting, but still....it happened.

Of course what could we actually expect from this guy?

You can read more about this over at the Washington Post.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions to crack down on the real problem with the Trump Administration. The journalists who keep reporting on its incompetence.

Courtesy of The Independent:  

Attorney General Jeff Sessions says that the Department of Justice (DoJ) is reviewing policies for subpoenaing reporters during investigations of federal intelligence leaks, an indicator that the US government may consider more aggressive tactics to try and force journalists to identify their sources. 

"One of the things we are doing is reviewing the policies affecting media subpoenas," Mr Sessions said, announcing his administration's crackdown on leaks during a press conference. "We respect the important role that the press plays, and we will give our support. But, it is not unlimited. They cannot place lives at risk with impunity." 

Mr Sessions said that he had instructed his Justice Department to review its leak prosecution policies earlier this year, and that the results "concerned" him. There were too few referrals for prosecution over classified leaks, too few investigations, and an insufficient amount of resources dedicated to those investigations, he said. 

"We will not allow rogue anonymous sources with security clearances to sell out our country," Mr Sessions said. "These cases, to investigate and prosecute, are never easy. But cases will be made and leakers will be held accountable."

Yeah well the thing is that the leakers are not so much trying to "sell out our country," as they are trying to "rescue our country from the clutches of a mad man."

Of course the truly pathetic part of this, besides you know the whole attack on our first amendment, is that Sessions is totally doing this just to save his job.

He knew he was next on the chopping block so he pulled out some bullshit like this to hold on for a little bit longer.

Kellyanne "Oh god I woke in a pool of my own vomit again" Conway has also suggested that the White House staff might be forced into taking lie detector tests.

Because nothing says we are one big happy family, like strapping somebody to a machine and then drilling them under hot lights for an hour.

Chuck Todd has already essentially declared what the media's response will be to any subpoenas from the Justice Department concerning their sources.

If DoJ media source threat is real (I assume it's not; just a show presser to please WH) then I look forward to ignoring that subpoena

— Chuck Todd (@chucktodd) August 4, 2017

Well played.

On Meet the Press Secretary of State Rex Tillerson all but reveals himself to be a Russian operative.

Okay take a look at this from the MTP transcripts: 

CHUCK TODD: 

Can you get on a better footing with them if you don't address this issue of the Russian interference? I mean your counterpart, the Russian foreign minister, Mr. Lavrov, said that you guys didn't even talk about this issue of Russian interference in our election because, as he put it, President Trump himself says it's fake news, so it's not an issue. Why haven't you brought it up with them? 

SECRETARY REX TILLERSON: 

Well, Chuck, I think we have such a broad range of important issues that have to be addressed in the U.S.-Russia relationship. Obviously the interference in the election is one of those. I think it's been well documented, it's pretty well understood, the nature of that interference, here and elsewhere. And you know, these are not new tactics on the part of the Russian government, directed not only at us but at others. But again, I think we have to look at this relationship in its broadest contours, and there are many, many important areas which require our attention if we are to bring it back to a relationship that we believe is necessary for the security of the U.S. 

CHUCK TODD: Mr. Secretary, though. This is fundamental. They interfered with our democracy. I just don't understand how this is not a top issue for you to deal with with them in order to, essentially, start with a clean slate. Can't start with a clean slate until maybe they either own up to what they did, or we punish them in a way that they're not going to do this again. 

SECRETARY REX TILLERSON: Well, Chuck, I think it's important to understand we're not trying to start with a clean slate. I think terms like having a reset are overused. You cannot reset. You cannot erase the past. You cannot start with a clean slate. And we're not trying to start with a clean slate. 

We're starting with the slate we have. And all the problems that are on that slate. We don't dismiss any of them. We don't give anyone a free pass on any of them. They're part of the entire nature of the discussion we're having with the Russians. And yes, there are a large number of issues that we have to get around to addressing in order to put this relationship back together, if that is indeed possible. 

CHUCK TODD: During your confirmation hearings you made clear you didn't have-- obviously you hadn't been briefed on the intelligence reports, the 17 different agencies that came to the conclusions that the Russians did make an effort to interfere in this election. Obviously there's an investigation going along to see if there was any collusion in this interference. Since you've become Secretary of State in February, have you been briefed? Have you seen this intelligence now? Is it clear in your mind that it is a fact the Russians interfered in our elections? 

SECRETARY REX TILLERSON: I have seen the intelligence reports, Chuck, and yes, I don't think there's any question that the Russians were playing around in our electoral processes. Again, as those intelligence reports also have indicated, it's inconclusive as to what, if any, effect it had. 

CHUCK TODD: I understand about the impact, but the fact that they got into it, what should the repercussions be now, in your mind? 

SECRETARY REX TILLERSON: Well, they're just part of that broader landscape of conversations, Chuck. And I think, you know, the real impact is it serves yet again to undermine the trust between the United States and Russia. And as I have said, and the president has said, you know, we're just at a very, very low level of trust between our two countries right now. And so what we're exploring is how do we begin the process of restoring that trust. And ultimately it will touch on all of these issues.

Yes, that "low level of trust" is directly related to the Russians hacking our election, and restoring that trust means that THEY do something to make amends and promise to stop screwing with out democracy.

Until that happens all America should be doing is thinking up ways to make Russia pay for their meddling, with sanctions and refusals to allow drilling in the Arctic. 

Time and time again Chuck Todd gives Tillerson the opportunity to condemn Russia for interfering in our election process, and to identify some consequences that we are prepared to use to punish Russia for that interference.

And EVERY SINGLE TIME Tillerson minimizes the impact that the Russian hacking had on our election, and on elections around the world, and continues to suggest that we should work to repair our relationship with them.

I swear a Kremlin spokesperson could not have done a better job of defending Russia.

I watched this with my mouth hanging open.

Tillerson did not even TRY to portray himself as anything other than Putin's poodle.

Chuck Todd refers to Donald Trump's "lame duck presidency." Trump fires up the Twitter machine in response.

Courtesy of Real Clear Politics:  

Friday on MSNBC, Chuck Todd said unless and until President Trump accepts "the fact that Russia interfered in this election," it will "plague him."

CHUCK TODD: You have a presidency right now that I think is, it's beyond saying it's in crisis mode, it's, you know, it's on the brink, the question is on the brink of what? Is it on the brink of collapse? Is it on the brink of being a temporary lame duck presidency? Maybe it feels lame-duckish temporarily right now. 

You've got a stalled agenda. Republicans who have no fear of this president right now. They don't think there's a political penalty to buck him.

As you might imagine this did not sit well with a certain stubby fingered vulgarian. 

When will Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd and @NBCNews start talking about the Obama SURVEILLANCE SCANDAL and stop with the Fake Trump/Russia story?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 1, 2017

It is the same Fake News Media that said there is "no path to victory for Trump" that is now pushing the phony Russia story. A total scam!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 1, 2017

Yeah according to CBS News that "total scam" has narrowed its focus a little: 

CBS News has learned that U.S. investigators are looking into whether Trump campaign representatives had a role in helping Russian intelligence as it carried out cyberattacks on the Democratic National Committee and other political targets in March 2016. 

This new information suggests that the FBI is going back further than originally reported to determine the extent of possible coordination. Sources say investigators are probing whether an individual or individuals connected to the campaign intentionally or unwittingly helped the Russians breach Democratic Party targets.

It would appear that everybody has a job to do.

The investigators are going to keep investigating, the journalists are going to keep reporting on those investigations, and Donald Trump is going to keep firing off desperate tweets to distract from those stories. 

Chuck Todd points out that right after the press reports on ties with Russia, Donald Trump increases his attacks on the media. Things that make you go, "Hmmm."

Courtesy of Mediaite: 

“One issue that doesn’t seem to hurt the president right now, at least in the eyes of his supporters, are the reported ties he and his aides may or may not have with Russia,” Todd said. 

He continued, “And whenever stories break on that subject, press bashing — which is always part of the president’s arsenal — seems to escalate.” 

Todd then played a prepared clip detailing numerous instances where Trump went on the attack against the media directly after mainstream press reports related to potential Russian ties. The MTP host pointed to tweets, news conferences, and speeches that were devoted almost entirely to media attacks following damning Trump-Russia stories.

You know subconsciously I think I noticed this, but having it laid out like this is very enlightening.

Clearly Trump is terrified of where this reporting will lead and is desperate to undermine the credibility of the press before it blows his presidency out of the water.

Donald Trump watches his interviews with the sound off. Yep, nothing creepy about that.

Courtesy of Mediaite:  

During an interview with POLITICO’s Glenn Thrush, NBC’s Chuck Todd pondered some of the more striking observations he has made about Donald Trump after covering the mogul as much as he has. 

The wide-range interview covered a variety of topics, but when the president-elect came up, Todd said there were a few ticks he noticed about Trump where “[It] drives me crazy.” According to Todd, Trump is so concerned about his visual image that he will frequently watch clips of himself with the sound off. 

Todd quoted a source close to Trump who said that whenever the mogul finishes an interview, he’ll ask about how he looked, but not as much about how he sounded or what he said. 

“The amount of time he spends after the interview is over with the sound off — he wants to see what it all looked like. He will watch the whole thing on mute,” said Todd. “He’s a very, visual guy. He thinks this way, and look, it’s an important insight in just understanding him. The visual stuff is very real beyond just himself.”

Hey look, there is something that I have in common with Donald Trump.

I also turn off the sound when I see him on TV.

Maybe he hates the sound of his voice as much as I do.

The article suggests that the reason might be based on advice that Roger Ailes gave him as he used to also watch potential hosts give interviews with the sound off. Probably so he could imagine them saying things like "Oh Roger it's so big," or " I find a man with six chins and the body of Jabba the Hut to be such a turn on."

Personally I think it is because Trump is more concerned about the camera capturing an unflattering image of him, like this one:

Or this one:

Or this one:

Than he is that he might say something stupid.

Which of course explains every interview and tweet he has ever sent.

Forty members of the Electoral College demand an intelligence briefing before casting this vote, while Trump campaign threatens members with a "political reprisal."

Courtesy of The Hill:  

Forty members of the Electoral College on Tuesday signed a letter demanding an intelligence briefing on Russian interference in the election ahead of their Dec. 19 vote. 

Ten electors originally signed the letter when it was published Monday, and 30 more have since added their names. 

The open letter — led by Christine Pelosi, the daughter of House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) — urged Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to give a detailed briefing on President-elect Donald Trump's ties to Russia. 

“We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as President of the United States,” the letter read. The Clinton campaign applauded the effort Monday, saying it had repeatedly warned about Russian interference aimed at swaying the election in Trump’s favor.

Now there are 538 electors altogether and it only requires 270 electors to give Trump the presidency, however if enough of these electors receive a briefing and then decide that they cannot in good conscience cast their ballot for Donald Trump that could throw a monkey wrench into this whole thing.

And as unlikely as that scenario might feel, there is at least some concern on the part of the Trump campaign.

Courtesy of Salon:

Donald Trump’s campaign is pressuring Republican electors into voting for them under “threats of political reprisal,” according to a member of the Electoral College who spoke to Salon under the condition of anonymity. 

“We have gotten reports from multiple people,” the elector said, “that the Donald Trump campaign is putting pressure on Republican electors to vote for him based on . . . future political outcomes based on whether they vote for Donald Trump or not.” 

The elector emphasized that these reports had come straight from the Republican electors themselves, with the threats steering clear of violence but instead focusing on “career pressure.” 

“It’s all political, basically,” the elector said. “If Trump becomes the president, he’s going to be able to put pressure on the state parties and they won’t be involved anymore.”

Sounds like somebody might be a little worried.

Interestingly enough I happened to catch a little of MTP Daily on MSNBC the other day, and after discussing the fact that the Electoral College was created in order to protect America from a candidate put in place and controlled by another country, Chuck Todd made this statement:

"If we are not going to use the Electoral College we should abolish it."

His point being that if the Electoral College was created to prevent the very thing we are witnessing right now, and it fails to stop it, then what use is it?

And while I rarely agree with Chuck Todd on anything, I thought that was a very valid point to make.

Chuck Todd is not even pretending to be nonpartisan anymore.

If Clinton campaign was happy with last night's forum, they wouldn't be looking to do a presser this morning to provide new Clinton sound

— Chuck Todd (@chucktodd) September 8, 2016

I don't know what forum ole Chuckie was watching but on the one that I saw Hillary came off as smart and prepared, while Trump came off as evasive and incoherent.

By the way Todd is not alone, somebody else also agrees with his assessment.

Hillary just gave a disastrous news conference on the tarmac to make up for poor performance last night. She's being decimated by the media!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 8, 2016

Gee, that's awfully similar.

This is the "presser" Todd is referring to during which Clinton tears a huge chunk out of Donald Trump: 

Hillary Clinton unleashed a torrent of attacks against Donald Trump's preparedness to be commander in chief and questioned his patriotism Thursday morning, hours after an NBC forum exposed her opponent to criticism on multiple fronts. 

"It is a game to him. Everything is a game. It is like he is living in his own celebrity reality TV program," Clinton said at a campaign rally in Charlotte Thursday afternoon. "You know what Donald, this is real reality, this is real people, these are real decisions that have to be made for our country."

"Last night was yet another test and Donald Trump failed yet again. We saw more evidence that he is temperamentally unfit and totally unqualified to be commander in chief. He trash talked American generals," she said.

Yeah I can see why that might get Trump all riled up, but why would it agitate an actual journalist focused on the facts?

After being interviewed by FBI Hillary Clinton calmly answers questions posed by Chuck Todd while reports she will not face charges causes a Right Wing freakout.

So yesterday Hillary was finally interviewed by the FBI, so the question that needs to be asked is what now?

Well first off Hillary gave MSNBC's Chuck Todd an interview almost immediately afterward: 

"Why do you believe you did not violate the law?" Todd asked, referring to rules regulating government employees' handling of classified information. 

Clinton reiterated that she "never received nor sent any material that was marked classified" while she was secretary of state. 

Some of the emails that had not been considered classified during Clinton's tenure were labeled as such after the fact. 

Clinton dodged Todd's question about who gave her permission to operate a private email server to conduct government business. She insisted that no wrongdoing was committed. "I've released more than 55,000 pages of my emails for the public to read for themselves," she said, adding "I will continue to be as forthcoming as I can." 

The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee said that she was "eager" to meet with officials handling the case, and said that she was pleased to "assist the department in bringing its review to a conclusion."

I listened to that interview yesterday and I have to say even as a Hillary supporter I found some of her answers a little evasive.

But then again considering the scrutiny that every one of her answers to ANY question receives perhaps that should not be unexpected.

However she also, in no way, sounded as if she was worried charges against her are imminent.

And probably for good reason.

Right around the time of this interview CNN was announcing that its sources were telling them that there would be no charges filed by the FBI.

Sources tell CNN's Evan Perez: expectation is that there will be announcement of no charges in Clinton email probe w/in next two weeks or so

— Edward Mejia Davis (@TeddyDavisCNN) July 2, 2016

Vice President Joe Biden also expressed strong doubt that Hillary had done anything criminal.

As you might imagine this did not go down well with those on the Right.

For one that crazy ass Judge Jeanine Pirro simply lost her every loving mind over that possibility.

And of course Donald Trump now adds it to his ever growing list of conspiracy theories.

It was just announced-by sources-that no charges will be brought against Crooked Hillary Clinton. Like I said, the system is totally rigged!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 2, 2016

So to the question of "what now?"

Well Hillary supporters will respond with "I told you so," while the anti-Hillary folks will say "No we told YOU so," as the Right Wing tries to find ways to keep this issue alive until November, and once she wins use it against her during her entire presidency.

In short, much like Vince Foster, Whitewater, and Benghazi, this will continue to be a cudgel to beat Hillary over the head for as long as she remains in politics.

It is going to be a long, and fairly brutal, four years my friends. 

New Libertarian party VP candidate drops a truth bomb about a possible Hillary Clinton indictment.

Courtesy of Law Newz: 

“I will give you one news tip,” he said. “All this stuff about Secretary Clinton’s use of email accounts and the report that came out, how she might get indicted, I’m not buying it. I used to be head of the criminal division of the Justice Department of the United States.” 

Todd pressed Weld on why he wasn’t buying the rumors. 

“I’m not buying it, you can’t indict somebody if there is no evidence of intent, and I don’t see it, I don’t see any evidence of criminal intent,” Weld said.

Yeah, no shit.

One of my favorite responses by the trolls lately is 'Well just wait until your queen is indicted, we'll see who laughs then."

Well they cannot see it at the time, but I am usually already laughing myself while I read that.

No, that is not what is going to happen no matter how hard the Right Wing conspiracy theorists and Bernie Bros may pray that it will.

Here was a simple step by step explanation that I actually found in the comment section for this article: 

1. Even now, there is NO LAW that says an SoS can't have and use a private cell phone for private purposes. 

2. Until 2013, there was NO LAW that said an SoS could not have and use a private cell phone thru private server she owned or controlled. 

3. DoS POLICY "required" an Sos in 2009 and after to advise Dos of her wish to use a private phone for personal purposes. But there was no criminal enforcement of that, All possible sanctions THEN were internal, and only applied so long as the person remained in the dept.

Yes I know there is an FBI investigation, but if you really think that is going to lead to criminal charges, then you are a victim of the Right Wing media whether you realize it or not.

Even IF Hillary's e-mail server was hacked it would still not be a big deal because so was the State Department's, which takes the air right out of any argument that her e-mails would have been safer if kept in house.

And if she was never hacked the fact that she had a private server (Which by the way she has had since she was a Senator from New York) kind of makes her look like a genius.

So no, Hillary Clinton is NOT going to be indicted over Benghazi. She is NOT going to be indicted for killing Vince Foster. And she is NOT going to be indicted for using a private e-mail server.

Wait, I thought the media were in the pocket of Hillary Clinton?

Anti-Hillary MSNBC Chuck Todd's wife, co-founder Maverick Strategies and Mail, got $1,342,293 from Sanders Campaign: https://t.co/0S7B5pTocN

— ABetterDay (@StudioChira) May 28, 2016

Well now isn't THAT interesting?

On Meet the Press Chuck Todd wonders out loud if he just conducted the Bernie Sanders exit interview.

Wait, poor people don't vote? And why does Sanders automatically assume that if there were more poor people voting that they would vote for him?

But it was that last bit that really interests me.

Here it is courtesy of the Meet the Press transcript:

CHUCK TODD: Let me wrap up the question this way. Do you feel as if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee and you're not, but Donald Trump is the opponent, do you have a responsibility to do what it takes to get your voters to support Hillary Clinton? 

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: I will do everything that I can to make certain that Donald Trump is not elected president. But if that scenario plays out, the major responsibility will be on Secretary Clinton to convince all people, not just my supporters, that she is the kind of president this country needs to represent working people in this country, to take on the big money interests who have so much power, to fight for what the American people want. 

CHUCK TODD: Your supporters are, for the most part, very skeptical of Hillary Clinton. Very, very skeptical. Tougher on her, frankly, than you ever are. You know, people talk about all this back and forth. What do you think she-- what's your advice to her on winning your voters over? 

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: Well, I think she's going to have to be very explicit about supporting a program, which stands up for the needs of the middle class and working families, which, most importantly, makes it clear that she is prepared to take on Wall Street in a very clear way, take on the billionaire class, come up with a program that makes health care for all in this country a right within the next several years. I think those are some of the issues she's going to have to bring forth. 

(END TAPE) 

CHUCK TODD: So did we just hear, intentionally or not, the Bernie Sanders exit interview? We'll get to that later in the show.

I do not like the fact that Sanders lays out a laundry list of items that he suggests that Hillary MUST do in order to win over his supporters. I would think that for real progressives simply stopping Donald Trump would be more than enough.

I am also not convinced that this will be Sanders' last interview on MTP or that he is preparing to close up shop anytime soon.

Personally I think he should but obviously the Sanders' campaign is not soliciting my advice.

(H/T to Raw Story.)

Chuck Todd finally acts like a newsman and calls Donald Trump out over his claims of seeing Muslims celebrating 9-11.

Courtesy of the New York Post:  

On “Meet the Press” Trump again insisted he saw celebrations in New Jersey following the terrorist attacks– despite no video coverage backing up that claim and police denying it happened. 

“I saw it. So many people saw it, Chuck. So why would I take it back, I’m not going to take it back,” Trump said. 

Todd pounced: “Just because somebody repeats something doesn’t make it true. And I guess, that’s actually, that’s the worst — ” Todd said shaking his head with a look of disgust. 

Trump cut in to say people were saying in Sarasota, Florida over the weekend they were in New Jersey at the time also saw Arabs cheering the deadly terrorists attacks. 

“People were saying,” Todd chimed in. “Mr. Trump, if I said, “Well people have said, Mr. Trump is not worth $10 billion and people were saying …’ you would say that was crazy. You wouldn’t make a business deal based on retweets and based on hearsay. You’re running for president of the United States. Your words matter. Truthfulness matters. Fact-based stuff matters, no?” 

“Take it easy. Chuck, just play cool.” Trump retorted. 

“I have a very good memory, Chuck.,” Trump added. “… I saw it somewhere on television many years ago and I never forgot it.”

Well good for Chuck Todd for holding Trump's feet to the fire over this BS claim. 

And fuck Trump for continuing to report this lie which can only cause more divisiveness and animosity towards American Muslims.

Rick Santorum agrees with Mike Huckabee that the Supreme Court is not the boss of him.

Rick Santorum and his family, the LAST time he lost the GOP nomination.

As many of you no doubt remember recently Mike Huckabee claimed that the President did not have to do what the Supreme Court told him to do.

Well today on MTP Chuck Todd asked for Santorum's response to the idea that the President did not have to do what the Supreme Court mandated on gay marriage:

“I think it’s important to understand that the supreme court doesn’t have the final word. It has its word. Its word has validity. But it’s important for Congress and the president, frankly, to push back when the supreme court gets it wrong.”

Now of course this only seems to pertain to gay marriage, as Santorum has no  problem with the incredibly damaging Citizens United ruling or striking down the Voting Rights Act.

Nah Santorum is really only concerned about gay people getting the right to marry like everybody else.

Now while Santorum  did not go quite as far as Huckabee in calling for civil unrest, he did suggest that there was a blueprint for action if the Supreme Court dared to defy the will of the religious conservatives:

“Of course I’d fight it. Roe vs Wade was decided 30-something years ago [in fact 1973, 42 years ago] and I continue to fight it because the court got it wrong. 

“And I think if the court decides this case in error I will continue to fight, as I have on the issue of life. That’s the role of a citizenry. We’re not bound by what nine people say in perpetuity.”

So according to Santorum if SCOTUS decides to rule in favor of allowing marriage equality, which of course most of the country agrees with completely, then that just means that the conservatives will spend the next 30 or 40 years chipping away at it. Just like they have Roe vs Wade.

Motherfu.......

You know I actually think that Rick Santorum gives a "frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter" a bad name..

Chuck Todd admits that he does not ask tough questions because if he did he would no longer be able to book certain guests.

Click sell out in order to play video

Courtesy of Politicususa:  

During a roundtable discussion with several comedians Meet The Press’s Chuck Todd made excuses for why he lets Republicans get away with saying things that aren’t true. Lewis Black asked Todd how he put up with guests who babble on with their talking points without barking at them, and Todd’s answer revealed why people don’t trust the media. 

The Meet The Press host said, “We all sit there, because we all know, the first time we bark is the last time that they do the show. You say something, and sometimes it is last time they will ever come on your show. There is that balance.”

To be fair Todd does not identify Republicans as the people he is unable to "bark" at but it is quite obvious.

Especially since comedian W. Kamau Bell follows that up by saying this:  

"Comedy gets to bark. But the weird thing is that Fox News also gets to bark. And I think sometimes the Left, you know the left leaning media, is afraid of barking."

That is so well put, and so absolutely true.

So in other words Fox News gets to tear into politicians (I think all of us remember how disrespectful Bill O'Reilly and Bret Baier were to President Obama when he subjected himself to Fox News interviews.), while more mainstream media types tiptoe around conservative politicians as if they are afraid that they won't like them on Facebook after the show if they dare to ask them a tough question.

And that's why once great shows like MTP are a joke these days. Because they are filled with bullshit softball questions that never challenge the conservative interviewee in any way.

President Obama takes those "disrespectful" daughters of his shopping.

Courtesy of Steven Garcia: 

President Obama, went shopping Saturday at Politics and Prose, an independent bookstore in the capital, joined with his daughters. Going out the Saturday after Thanksgiving has become a Thanksgiving weekend tradition for the first family. 

The president and his daughters, Sasha and Malia, chatted with customers before buying 2 bags full of books from the local store. This is the same store that they shopped at this time last year.

In the video you can hear the President talking about Chuck Todd's new book. In response Malia, the eldest, calls Todd  "sad" and the President jokingly agrees.

This was reported on by the New York Post:  

“Oh, Chuck Todd!” Obama exclaimed. “Let’s see what Chuck has to say here!” 

“How is he writing a book already? asked his 16-year-old daughter, Malia. “Sad.” 

“He’s just sad,” the president joked in response.

However the Post also goes on to say that the President has every right to be frustrated with Todd's book which paints the President as "detached" and characterizes him as a "flip flopper" as well as blaming him for his inability to work with Republicans.

Of course that last part seems incredibly unfair as the Republicans gathered on the night of Obama's inauguration to plan how they would undermine his presidency and ensure his defeat in 2012.

Really not much the President could do in an environment like that, as I think most rational people would agree.

Gee I wonder if the ways the two girls are dressed, and conducted themselves, finally meets with Elizabeth Lauten's approval?

Chuck Todd clumsily blames the fact that he gave ammunition to the Mitch McConnell campaign on opponent Alison Lundergan Grimes.

Courtesy of Egberto Willies:  

Chuck Todd does not get it. Once he becomes the news in this manner he has failed as a journalist. A few days ago Alison Lundergan Grimes was interviewed by the Louisville Courier-Journal editorial board. They asked her whether she voted for president Obama in 2008 and 2012. She justifiably refused to answer. 

The talking heads and pundits claimed she was not prepared for the question. The lack of sophistication of the traditional media is astounding. It was evident that she was prepared for the question and she intended not to answer it. It was evident that her team likely thought the downside was worse if she answered. 

How does Chuck Todd respond to this journalistic mistake? He blames the candidate. “I think that is one of those situations where she invited this on herself,” Chuck Todd said. “It feels like she had a lot of consultants whispering in her ear, ‘Whatever you do don’t give Mitch McConnell a line for a TV ad.'” Alison Lundergan Grimes did her part. Chuck Todd failed as a journalist. He became the news. He gave Mitch McConnell a line for a TV ad.

Exactly! Grimes understood that she was standing in a minefield and she stepped cautiously.

Todd on the other hand gave McConnell the gaffe that she was too intelligent to provide.

And then, as if that wasn't enough, he essentially blames Grimes for stepping around the traps that he carelessly stumbled right into. Pathetic!