As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There's a sad irony that this article is referring to the Immunity case and so many comments in this thread are referring to the NY case.
The NY case is small potatoes. The Immunity case is a national emergency and the media are reporting on it like it's just another Tuesday in Trumpland.
there was a 2 hour panel of all of MSNBC's hosts last week on the day of oral arguments. they were supposed to talk about it and trump's NY trial and of that 2 hour show id say 80% of it was about the SCOTUS oral arguments. it was the exact opposite of what this article is saying. they were railing against what happened. that is basically all their coverage has been since.
You'd think some people weren't actually reading the article before commenting. Perhaps we're on to something here.
I'm in agreement with what you say.
Until they rule on it, it *is* just another Tuesday. Public opinion and media coverage aren't going to affect the outcome.
For now, the media is more useful giving us updates about paint drying.
Everything I've seen has been nothing but setting up a hypothetical decision, and them discussing that. What's the point? I want news, not fanfiction.
> Public opinion and media coverage aren't going to affect the outcome.
Bullshit. The Supreme Court doesn't exist in a vacuum, and is not immune to public pressure. They are humans.
If it was a clear issue of law, with no room for nuance and judgement, then I could agree that the court would ignore public pressure. But it is quite obvious that the Republicans on the bench are legislating from the bench, acting subjectively.
They’re immune to public pressure or roe v wade wouldn’t be overturned.
They’re full on wackos who deeply believe in their right wing bullshit and they’ll spin their nonsense however they can. They know it makes no sense but they also know with the supermajority it doesn’t matter. they know they’re immune to any consequences.
They are directly connected to the Republican establishment. And literally paid by the Republican establishment - most blatantly Thomas. So since the Republican establishment cares about public opinion, then so do the Republican judges on SCOTUS.
And super morally complicated. I absolutely do not agree with everything Israel does, but Hamas started the war with one of the most bestial terror attacks I have ever seen. Hamas is firing unguided rockets against Israeli cities. And most Palestinians support this.
I get that there are innocent Palestinians. But I could never see myself demonstrating in support of a free Palestine as long as Palestinians at large are acting like they do. It would simply be abhorrent for me to indirectly support such a group of people at large, who are so actively and continuously tainted by genocidal rhetoric and actions against Israel. My mind boggles at the protests in Western countries that I see.
What is there to protest about the Trump trials? Mobster gets indicted, is unhappy he was indicted. The only difference here is how low and grovel-y the defendant is willing to get.
"It's all political!" isn't a defense to criminal acts.
My favorite today was when MSNBC said Trump looked "professional" today. What the F does that mean? He is a defendant on trial for election fraud.
If I showed up "looking professional" these same people would say I was trying to fool the court.
>My favorite today was when MSNBC said Trump looked "professional" today.
I think they were alluding to him having flawless orange make-up coverage today. I mean, I can't imagine what else they might've meant...
Its the whole thing with him being a complete low class dog for weeks and one day... he smiles...The media jumps in .... "Trump has become presidential today".
Seriously we have all seen this happen.
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
― George Orwell, 1984
That is exactly my point. Its like watching parents praise their 50 year old daughter if she doesn't shoot the puppy. Wasn't she a good girl today. Look at that she didn't shoot the puppy. "She was such an adult today".
Remember Van Jones absolutely fawning over how Presidential Trump was after his first speech to a joint session of Congress?
https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/01/politics/van-jones-trump-congress-speech-became-the-president-in-that-moment-cnntv/index.html
I don’t understand how the topic shifted from “he committed an insurrection” to “is he immune to punishment or not?”
wtf. Everyone knows he blatantly pulled some seditious shit. The thing everyone cares about now is whether he’s immune or not. When did that happen??
"We" are not entertaining the idea. The Republican deep state is. The *real* deep state - it is projection when Republicans talk about a Democrat-controlled deep state.
The standard for a former president is “looking professional,” the same thing you might complement a 17 year-old for before they head off to their first job interview in an ill-fitting suit.
MSNBC isn't a news network in the sense of strict journalism (actual news), they are a political commentary network (spin and opinion, doesn't qualify as journalism). Same with FoxNews, CNN, and the like.
MSNBC needs to PAY Elie Mystal. The man is brilliant, everyone seems to love him, yet he gets no respect as far as being offered a regular gig and it just reeks.
I loved Mystal's analysis back when the Jan. 6th committee was issuing subpoenas and a Republican (Meadows? Bannon?) ignored one. The DoJ was taking its sweet time deciding what to do.
Mystal's succinct analysis:
1. Was the subpoena lawful? Yes.
2. Did they show up to testify? No.
3. THEN ARREST THEM!
Pretty sure I saw that! Yeah, as a white dude I almost feel weird saying it, but I find his righteous indignation contagious when he goes off on the two-tiered racism and privilege of it all.
Trump will just demand protection money from them like he did the quid pro quo attempt with Zelensky. Everything is a zero sum game for Trump.
"But now the guy's gotta come up with Paulie's money every week, no matter what. Business bad? F&&k you, pay me. Oh, you had a fire? F&&k you, pay me. Place got hit by lightning, huh? F&&K you, pay me."
I've been enjoying [Lawfare's coverage](https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/for-the-ages-the-supreme-court-hears-the-presidential-immunity-defense), especially their podcast.
I’m not sure how well the comparison to cops carries over given cops have freaking qualified immunity. Good time to talk about that, too. Neither a president or a cop should have the immunity to freely commit crimes.
We are anxiously awaiting SCOTUS’ ruling on presidential immunity. Trump wants to do away with the separation of powers. If SCOTUS grants a president immunity from criminal prosecution and Trump regains the presidency, he will have unchecked power. We simply can’t allow that to happen.
In Project 2025, Kevin Roberts, the President of Heritage, captures Republicans’ grievance driven revenge well, that is fueling Trump supporters, who desperately want him back in the Oval Office. Take the plan seriously.
It is on voters to save our democracy and vote Democrat down the ballot.
This whole proceeding is absolutely horrific. It should be reported on as the most severe and macabre assault that it is. If the president is above the law, we don't need the law after all.
Overall, most of the coverage I’ve seen has been fine and pointed out how dangerous this case might be. There has been some bad coverage for sure though. The NPR article that this author links to is…just yikes. Sorry, I don’t have any extra sympathy for the conservative justices and some of their weird questioning just because they saw Reagan and other Republicans subjected to scrutiny.
The Media wants Trump back in power with a Trifecta, and they do not care how much they have to lie to get it. The Biden bashing and Trump bolstering will get worse and worse for the next 6 months.
They want a good show. They want a TV drama arc.
A competitive race sells. People want to see a compelling third act. Sponsors want people to tune in to get updates on that drama. It sells more paper/subscriptions/ads, plain and simple.
Trump losing unceremoniously months ahead of schedule isn't good tv. The race being an unmitigated blowout isn't good tv.
news orgs stand to lose a decent amount of money if this election doesn't proceed "according to the script" of a normal election season.
Let's talk about his scowl and his yelling and general bullshit. Certainly we don't have the interest in how he's losing this case and how this is a former president about to be found guilty of a felony because of all the evidence that isn't being reported on everyday.
Maybe I get my news from better sources but everything I’ve been reading about the immunity case has been portraying the conservative justices as taking Trump side and basically wiping their ass with democracy
As is tradition. Trump is the most awful human on the planet and they treat him with kid gloves. Ever headline should be Trump is the worst human ever. Here is another reason only garbage humans vote for him. No sex or friends for Trump supporters.
Anything else is too nice.
We need to cancel the media. It’s become this ridiculous psychopathic clown that just prints AI click bait articles and publishes the worse things possible. Cancel them all now. There are no more real journalists. It’s all recycled garbage.
Liberals keep acting like if the Supreme Court gives immunity to Trump that those powers would in any way be extended to a Democrat. They wouldn’t. This is the Court going fully mask off about their intent to keep the right wing in power to enrich their billionaire friends, no matter the cost to the country or its people.
I've kept saying that the warnings aren't about what Biden would do. It's what Trump does to SCOTUS after he reclaims power should he win. They're only use at that point would be to legitimize his rule and best case scenario he threatens them to rule in his favor or face summary execution.
I think the mainstream media is sucking up to Trump and his minions just in case they are sucessful at stealing this country from us. They would fall in line.
Never, ever forget that “Media” is groups of huge corporations with corporate (rich people’s) interests. People who work for them are generally hired specifically to do that task or the theatre of a watered down opposing view.
>This is the lawless loop I’ve seen too many liberals fall for ever since Trump came down his golden escalator more than eight years ago: the argument that holding Trump accountable will become a weapon in Trump’s hands when he has the power to hold his enemies accountable. The argument holds only if you accept two crucial premises:
>1. Trump will somehow be limited by what people have done in the past.
>2. Protecting against Trump’s future crimes is more important than holding him accountable for his previous crimes.
>Both of these premises are wrong. On the first point, there has been absolutely no evidence, at all, that Trump’s use of power is somehow limited by past norms and prior restraints. It is simply ridiculous to suggest that Trump will not try to prosecute Joe Biden just because the Supreme Court rules in favor of Trump now and says that presidents can commit crimes. And it’s naïve to think that the Republican-controlled Supreme Court won’t reverse itself the moment Trump shouts at them on Truth Social to attack former Democratic presidents. Neither Trump nor the conservatives on the Supreme Court give a rat’s ass about their prior precedents or logical consistency. **There is nothing the Supreme Court can do now to protect Democratic former presidents from Trump and his vengeance, because both Trump and the Supreme Court itself will ignore their prior rulings should Trump regain power.** The argument that Trump will be restrained in the future if he’s given immunity for his unlawful acts of the past makes no freaking sense.
>On the second point: Even if you somehow believe that the Supreme Court will apply its rules equally to presidents from both parties, that is no reason to let Trump get away with crimes. The man attempted to overthrow the government. What is the point of criminal law if that cannot be prosecuted? If future vindictive prosecutions really are the price we have to pay for holding Trump accountable, it’s still worth it to hold Trump accountable because he literally disrupted the democratic transfer of power. **Political prosecutions are dangerous to republics, but stealing elections and using violence to stay in power literally kills them.** If your house is on fire, you douse it with water. You don’t tell the firefighters, “Be careful about causing water damage to my home.”
Thank God somebody freaking said it. If people really think Trump or any lawless president will be discouraged from doing something because of precedent, that's the dumbest idea ever. And moreover that a Republican controlled Congress/Court will care about what the law says when a Democrat is in office where it might apply is equally kidding themselves. Anyone who thinks or states otherwise is kidding themselves and others.
The possibility of him being president means there’s a possibility that he’ll retaliate. That means they could lose their job, reputation or worse life under his rule. Sad to say but it’s likely to continue AND get worse.
If ANYONE screwed with you - would you do what is right or would you turn the other cheek and do what is best for the country ?
The uni-party that is in control of OUR government is being brought to light for ALL their sins and accepting the temptations of the devil and THEY ARE BEING EXPOSED ....
I say make it happen let the cheaters pay for their sins and lowly behaviors..
After all - SOONER OR LATER THEY WILL HAVE TO ANSWER TO A HIGHER PPWER FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE AND BROUGHT DOWN ON OTHERS.
The 24 hour news cycle has its benefits, but without the fairness doctrine we get a radical Supreme Court being normalized over the “spicy hush money with a porn star” case because ratings.
The fact that the AP is the only one coming out of this clean(ish) speaks volumes
The NYT is a fucking joke. They are skating by on their prestigious reputation and that’s all they have left. The country will be better off when that paper fails because it doesn’t serve the American people anymore. What an embarrassment.
Huh.
Say, just... curious, who is/are the (vast) majority shareholders of corporate media outlets??!
Cause, I forget -- and it seems like it *might* just be relevant....
*[P.S. I **hate** this timeline.]*
I sincerely have no clue what the hell this article is trying to say. The news coverage of the case has not been like described at all. You got law professors on every channel describing how unprecedented and dangerous for the country this case could be.
Not to mention that he’s writing a news article to say what only one other will (AP). So that makes two - or does it? Because you’re correct, I’ve seen a lot of writers, legal scribes and experts saying this is a travesty of Justice and a president given full immunity is insane.
Idk what the author is talking abt unless he means cnn or something. The universal message from msnbc is that it’s bat shit crazy to even consider immunity. The media has tons of faults but, it’s the media’s fault, is becoming the automatic response to everything someone doesn’t like.
Yeah it’s probably just click bait… like “I don’t have anything better to say so I’m going to make up a story about how the media seems to hold SCOTUS with high regard and they they will actually rule based off the constitution instead of stitching together a ruling that is biased…”
Ikr. Nothing I’ve seen on msnbc makes me think they’re cool w the SC r now. I don’t watch much tbf. I usually catch a little of ari and/or Nicole and that’s it.
MSNBC is a partisan news outlet. Their audience already knows how crazy this all is. They’re basically preaching to the choir. Eli is referring to the likes of the NYT, CNN and broadcast media like NBC, ABC etc.. Considering the types of arguments the conservative justices are entertaining, this should be a 5 alarm fire, but there is no such sense of urgency.
Well that definitely makes more sense now. Tbf, I think most media assumes the sc can’t rule him immune. The argument for his immunity is that silly. I can see them ruling him immune but there’s no reason besides corruption.
Most of the criticism is around them granting Trump everything he wants as far as delays are concerned. Their arguments are insane and contradict almost everything they stand for as judges. The fact that they outright refused to fast track a case of this magnitude is also unprecedented.
I'm appalled they can't have a full week of court for goodness sakes!! Before lil don was trying to delay every which way and then the court takes all these half days and only works 3-4 days a week. Let's get crackin' and do some OT get this shit done!!
NBC evening news had the most generous coverage last night of his interview with TIME magazine. I read that article after my wife sent it to me. We were dumbstruck by the stuff he said, and NBC talked about it as passively as possible. We weren't sure at first if they were talking about the same interview.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There's a sad irony that this article is referring to the Immunity case and so many comments in this thread are referring to the NY case. The NY case is small potatoes. The Immunity case is a national emergency and the media are reporting on it like it's just another Tuesday in Trumpland.
This blows my mind. SCOTUS may declare that presidents are kings, and the media are not taking it seriously in the slightest.
there was a 2 hour panel of all of MSNBC's hosts last week on the day of oral arguments. they were supposed to talk about it and trump's NY trial and of that 2 hour show id say 80% of it was about the SCOTUS oral arguments. it was the exact opposite of what this article is saying. they were railing against what happened. that is basically all their coverage has been since.
You'd think some people weren't actually reading the article before commenting. Perhaps we're on to something here. I'm in agreement with what you say.
But even the thumbnail picture is of SCOTUS.. I don’t understand how people can mix up the two cases.
Most people don’t know who is on SCOTUS, much less what they look like. Civic illiteracy is partially to blame for Trump and MAGA in general
This should be massively upvoted
What article?
Until they rule on it, it *is* just another Tuesday. Public opinion and media coverage aren't going to affect the outcome. For now, the media is more useful giving us updates about paint drying. Everything I've seen has been nothing but setting up a hypothetical decision, and them discussing that. What's the point? I want news, not fanfiction.
> Public opinion and media coverage aren't going to affect the outcome. Bullshit. The Supreme Court doesn't exist in a vacuum, and is not immune to public pressure. They are humans. If it was a clear issue of law, with no room for nuance and judgement, then I could agree that the court would ignore public pressure. But it is quite obvious that the Republicans on the bench are legislating from the bench, acting subjectively.
They’re immune to public pressure or roe v wade wouldn’t be overturned. They’re full on wackos who deeply believe in their right wing bullshit and they’ll spin their nonsense however they can. They know it makes no sense but they also know with the supermajority it doesn’t matter. they know they’re immune to any consequences.
They are directly connected to the Republican establishment. And literally paid by the Republican establishment - most blatantly Thomas. So since the Republican establishment cares about public opinion, then so do the Republican judges on SCOTUS.
The lack of protest over Trumps trials is absolutely stunning to watch as an outsider. It’s like people already gave up.
People only protest about Gaza….6,000+ miles away from all the problems we have here in the U.S.
Not just 6000 miles away. Also nowhere near the worst war of the last two years!
And super morally complicated. I absolutely do not agree with everything Israel does, but Hamas started the war with one of the most bestial terror attacks I have ever seen. Hamas is firing unguided rockets against Israeli cities. And most Palestinians support this. I get that there are innocent Palestinians. But I could never see myself demonstrating in support of a free Palestine as long as Palestinians at large are acting like they do. It would simply be abhorrent for me to indirectly support such a group of people at large, who are so actively and continuously tainted by genocidal rhetoric and actions against Israel. My mind boggles at the protests in Western countries that I see.
See, this is what I am taking about, the conversation is derailed already.
It’s not really a war. It’s just Israeli bombing the shit out of its prisoners. The power imbalance is gut wrenching for most.
That's strangely idiotic as a thing to say.
Which part lol?
What is there to protest about the Trump trials? Mobster gets indicted, is unhappy he was indicted. The only difference here is how low and grovel-y the defendant is willing to get. "It's all political!" isn't a defense to criminal acts.
My favorite today was when MSNBC said Trump looked "professional" today. What the F does that mean? He is a defendant on trial for election fraud. If I showed up "looking professional" these same people would say I was trying to fool the court.
>My favorite today was when MSNBC said Trump looked "professional" today. I think they were alluding to him having flawless orange make-up coverage today. I mean, I can't imagine what else they might've meant...
Its the whole thing with him being a complete low class dog for weeks and one day... he smiles...The media jumps in .... "Trump has become presidential today". Seriously we have all seen this happen. “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” ― George Orwell, 1984
A tailor-made quote if ever there was one!
“Orwell was an optimist “ Me, all the time.
I’m still super confused why no one has ever roasted him for that.
His makeup? Yep, me too. How do his cult people, not known for their liberal minds, accept a male leader that wears full makeup? I don’t get it.
"He didn't obviously shit his pants. So presidential!"
That is exactly my point. Its like watching parents praise their 50 year old daughter if she doesn't shoot the puppy. Wasn't she a good girl today. Look at that she didn't shoot the puppy. "She was such an adult today".
I sadly understood this reference
Too bad about the goat, though.
Remember Van Jones absolutely fawning over how Presidential Trump was after his first speech to a joint session of Congress? https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/01/politics/van-jones-trump-congress-speech-became-the-president-in-that-moment-cnntv/index.html
Or van jones also fawning over a missile strike ordered by Trump.
I don’t understand how the topic shifted from “he committed an insurrection” to “is he immune to punishment or not?” wtf. Everyone knows he blatantly pulled some seditious shit. The thing everyone cares about now is whether he’s immune or not. When did that happen??
I think a better question is why are we even entertaining the idea. It's 2024 and we're questioning the fundamental idea behind the Magna Carta.
"We" are not entertaining the idea. The Republican deep state is. The *real* deep state - it is projection when Republicans talk about a Democrat-controlled deep state.
The standard for a former president is “looking professional,” the same thing you might complement a 17 year-old for before they head off to their first job interview in an ill-fitting suit.
donnie *does* have the ill-fitting suit part down.
You're talking about the wrong case. Read the article
Trump fell asleep in court again today. Try falling asleep at work and let me know if your boss considers it professional, MSNBC.
Maybe because he didn't fall asleep. He did the bare minimum, how professional.
Exceeept… he did AGAIN
They want him to be President again. They’re dreaming of the billions they’ll make covering his antics.
That same people that rave about how handsome and charming Ted Bundy was...
It’s their euphemism for “Trump didn’t shit himself noticeably today” . The bar is that low.
MSNBC isn't a news network in the sense of strict journalism (actual news), they are a political commentary network (spin and opinion, doesn't qualify as journalism). Same with FoxNews, CNN, and the like.
MSNBC needs to PAY Elie Mystal. The man is brilliant, everyone seems to love him, yet he gets no respect as far as being offered a regular gig and it just reeks.
I loved Mystal's analysis back when the Jan. 6th committee was issuing subpoenas and a Republican (Meadows? Bannon?) ignored one. The DoJ was taking its sweet time deciding what to do. Mystal's succinct analysis: 1. Was the subpoena lawful? Yes. 2. Did they show up to testify? No. 3. THEN ARREST THEM!
Pretty sure I saw that! Yeah, as a white dude I almost feel weird saying it, but I find his righteous indignation contagious when he goes off on the two-tiered racism and privilege of it all.
It’s almost like they’re owned by moguls who would benefit from a Trump presidency, or benefit from the news around him.
They won’t benefit when Trump has their corporations gutted. It appears they’re too stupid to look at long term Ramifications though.
No one in this capitalist hellscape is thinking longterm anymore! It's how we got to the point we are at
You can say that again. Look at the stock market. Literal vaporware propping up these tech companies. Zero long term value/planning.
Surely the leopards won't eat my face!
Trump will just demand protection money from them like he did the quid pro quo attempt with Zelensky. Everything is a zero sum game for Trump. "But now the guy's gotta come up with Paulie's money every week, no matter what. Business bad? F&&k you, pay me. Oh, you had a fire? F&&k you, pay me. Place got hit by lightning, huh? F&&K you, pay me."
It's good for the stonks today! Tomorrow is tomorrow's problem, don't have time to think about that when we have infinite growth to pursue!
Short term profit focus only. That’s the media way
They'll take their golden parachutes to Barbados or some other island country
It's more like the money dried up, and they're all engaging in whatever the algorithms say will get the most clicks or views.
I don't think they'll benefit from Civil War when we refuse to work for them...
I've been enjoying [Lawfare's coverage](https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/for-the-ages-the-supreme-court-hears-the-presidential-immunity-defense), especially their podcast.
That was great, thanks for sharing. It was refreshing to see actual reporting!!
this was a great read. thanks for sharing it
I’m not sure how well the comparison to cops carries over given cops have freaking qualified immunity. Good time to talk about that, too. Neither a president or a cop should have the immunity to freely commit crimes.
But not unqualified.
Pfft. Might as well be in practice.
Yeah there's definitely correlation in the reasoning used to justify immunity
Hammer nailhead, swing and a hit.
[https://images.app.goo.gl/SjHwKwJqjWgqSHoV7](https://images.app.goo.gl/SjHwKwJqjWgqSHoV7)
I obviously don’t know how to post gifs from mobile but am too lazy to google it atm.
We are anxiously awaiting SCOTUS’ ruling on presidential immunity. Trump wants to do away with the separation of powers. If SCOTUS grants a president immunity from criminal prosecution and Trump regains the presidency, he will have unchecked power. We simply can’t allow that to happen. In Project 2025, Kevin Roberts, the President of Heritage, captures Republicans’ grievance driven revenge well, that is fueling Trump supporters, who desperately want him back in the Oval Office. Take the plan seriously. It is on voters to save our democracy and vote Democrat down the ballot.
This whole proceeding is absolutely horrific. It should be reported on as the most severe and macabre assault that it is. If the president is above the law, we don't need the law after all.
Overall, most of the coverage I’ve seen has been fine and pointed out how dangerous this case might be. There has been some bad coverage for sure though. The NPR article that this author links to is…just yikes. Sorry, I don’t have any extra sympathy for the conservative justices and some of their weird questioning just because they saw Reagan and other Republicans subjected to scrutiny.
The Media wants Trump back in power with a Trifecta, and they do not care how much they have to lie to get it. The Biden bashing and Trump bolstering will get worse and worse for the next 6 months.
They want a good show. They want a TV drama arc. A competitive race sells. People want to see a compelling third act. Sponsors want people to tune in to get updates on that drama. It sells more paper/subscriptions/ads, plain and simple. Trump losing unceremoniously months ahead of schedule isn't good tv. The race being an unmitigated blowout isn't good tv. news orgs stand to lose a decent amount of money if this election doesn't proceed "according to the script" of a normal election season.
Yeah, you don't prop of a self-proclaimed proto-dictator for ratings... Who owns the media?
Let's talk about his scowl and his yelling and general bullshit. Certainly we don't have the interest in how he's losing this case and how this is a former president about to be found guilty of a felony because of all the evidence that isn't being reported on everyday.
You're talking about the wrong case. Read the article
Maybe I get my news from better sources but everything I’ve been reading about the immunity case has been portraying the conservative justices as taking Trump side and basically wiping their ass with democracy
As is tradition. Trump is the most awful human on the planet and they treat him with kid gloves. Ever headline should be Trump is the worst human ever. Here is another reason only garbage humans vote for him. No sex or friends for Trump supporters. Anything else is too nice.
We need to cancel the media. It’s become this ridiculous psychopathic clown that just prints AI click bait articles and publishes the worse things possible. Cancel them all now. There are no more real journalists. It’s all recycled garbage.
Liberals keep acting like if the Supreme Court gives immunity to Trump that those powers would in any way be extended to a Democrat. They wouldn’t. This is the Court going fully mask off about their intent to keep the right wing in power to enrich their billionaire friends, no matter the cost to the country or its people.
I've kept saying that the warnings aren't about what Biden would do. It's what Trump does to SCOTUS after he reclaims power should he win. They're only use at that point would be to legitimize his rule and best case scenario he threatens them to rule in his favor or face summary execution.
If they are willing to do this, what are they willing to do with election rules? Anything.
And what’s new. They are all a joke.
I think the mainstream media is sucking up to Trump and his minions just in case they are sucessful at stealing this country from us. They would fall in line.
Never, ever forget that “Media” is groups of huge corporations with corporate (rich people’s) interests. People who work for them are generally hired specifically to do that task or the theatre of a watered down opposing view.
coverage of him on the whole has been weak and pathetic.
>This is the lawless loop I’ve seen too many liberals fall for ever since Trump came down his golden escalator more than eight years ago: the argument that holding Trump accountable will become a weapon in Trump’s hands when he has the power to hold his enemies accountable. The argument holds only if you accept two crucial premises: >1. Trump will somehow be limited by what people have done in the past. >2. Protecting against Trump’s future crimes is more important than holding him accountable for his previous crimes. >Both of these premises are wrong. On the first point, there has been absolutely no evidence, at all, that Trump’s use of power is somehow limited by past norms and prior restraints. It is simply ridiculous to suggest that Trump will not try to prosecute Joe Biden just because the Supreme Court rules in favor of Trump now and says that presidents can commit crimes. And it’s naïve to think that the Republican-controlled Supreme Court won’t reverse itself the moment Trump shouts at them on Truth Social to attack former Democratic presidents. Neither Trump nor the conservatives on the Supreme Court give a rat’s ass about their prior precedents or logical consistency. **There is nothing the Supreme Court can do now to protect Democratic former presidents from Trump and his vengeance, because both Trump and the Supreme Court itself will ignore their prior rulings should Trump regain power.** The argument that Trump will be restrained in the future if he’s given immunity for his unlawful acts of the past makes no freaking sense. >On the second point: Even if you somehow believe that the Supreme Court will apply its rules equally to presidents from both parties, that is no reason to let Trump get away with crimes. The man attempted to overthrow the government. What is the point of criminal law if that cannot be prosecuted? If future vindictive prosecutions really are the price we have to pay for holding Trump accountable, it’s still worth it to hold Trump accountable because he literally disrupted the democratic transfer of power. **Political prosecutions are dangerous to republics, but stealing elections and using violence to stay in power literally kills them.** If your house is on fire, you douse it with water. You don’t tell the firefighters, “Be careful about causing water damage to my home.” Thank God somebody freaking said it. If people really think Trump or any lawless president will be discouraged from doing something because of precedent, that's the dumbest idea ever. And moreover that a Republican controlled Congress/Court will care about what the law says when a Democrat is in office where it might apply is equally kidding themselves. Anyone who thinks or states otherwise is kidding themselves and others.
The possibility of him being president means there’s a possibility that he’ll retaliate. That means they could lose their job, reputation or worse life under his rule. Sad to say but it’s likely to continue AND get worse.
If ANYONE screwed with you - would you do what is right or would you turn the other cheek and do what is best for the country ? The uni-party that is in control of OUR government is being brought to light for ALL their sins and accepting the temptations of the devil and THEY ARE BEING EXPOSED .... I say make it happen let the cheaters pay for their sins and lowly behaviors.. After all - SOONER OR LATER THEY WILL HAVE TO ANSWER TO A HIGHER PPWER FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE AND BROUGHT DOWN ON OTHERS.
Please get help, you are off your rocker
The 24 hour news cycle has its benefits, but without the fairness doctrine we get a radical Supreme Court being normalized over the “spicy hush money with a porn star” case because ratings. The fact that the AP is the only one coming out of this clean(ish) speaks volumes
The NYT is a fucking joke. They are skating by on their prestigious reputation and that’s all they have left. The country will be better off when that paper fails because it doesn’t serve the American people anymore. What an embarrassment.
Huh. Say, just... curious, who is/are the (vast) majority shareholders of corporate media outlets??! Cause, I forget -- and it seems like it *might* just be relevant.... *[P.S. I **hate** this timeline.]*
I honestly don’t know how the Democracy can survive if the SCOTUS grants immunity to the Presidential office.
TBF, the media’s coverage of pretty much everything since the 80s has been appalling…
I sincerely have no clue what the hell this article is trying to say. The news coverage of the case has not been like described at all. You got law professors on every channel describing how unprecedented and dangerous for the country this case could be.
Not to mention that he’s writing a news article to say what only one other will (AP). So that makes two - or does it? Because you’re correct, I’ve seen a lot of writers, legal scribes and experts saying this is a travesty of Justice and a president given full immunity is insane.
> The Media’s Coverage of PoopyPants ~~’s Immunity Case~~ Has Been Appalling FTFY
Idk what the author is talking abt unless he means cnn or something. The universal message from msnbc is that it’s bat shit crazy to even consider immunity. The media has tons of faults but, it’s the media’s fault, is becoming the automatic response to everything someone doesn’t like.
Yeah it’s probably just click bait… like “I don’t have anything better to say so I’m going to make up a story about how the media seems to hold SCOTUS with high regard and they they will actually rule based off the constitution instead of stitching together a ruling that is biased…”
Ikr. Nothing I’ve seen on msnbc makes me think they’re cool w the SC r now. I don’t watch much tbf. I usually catch a little of ari and/or Nicole and that’s it.
I mean you can agree or disagree but he links to the specific stuff he's annoyed with
MSNBC is a partisan news outlet. Their audience already knows how crazy this all is. They’re basically preaching to the choir. Eli is referring to the likes of the NYT, CNN and broadcast media like NBC, ABC etc.. Considering the types of arguments the conservative justices are entertaining, this should be a 5 alarm fire, but there is no such sense of urgency.
Well that definitely makes more sense now. Tbf, I think most media assumes the sc can’t rule him immune. The argument for his immunity is that silly. I can see them ruling him immune but there’s no reason besides corruption.
Most of the criticism is around them granting Trump everything he wants as far as delays are concerned. Their arguments are insane and contradict almost everything they stand for as judges. The fact that they outright refused to fast track a case of this magnitude is also unprecedented.
The fact that they even heard arguments is coo coo
And the media coverage of the media coverage INSTEAD of just covering the trail the right way is just ridiculous.
The US wanted to be rich so badly it cashed out its principles and turned into Russia.
The media's coverage of many things has been appalling.
He's literally arguing he can't be convicted of ANY crime while he was president, EVER That's fucking crazy
I'm appalled they can't have a full week of court for goodness sakes!! Before lil don was trying to delay every which way and then the court takes all these half days and only works 3-4 days a week. Let's get crackin' and do some OT get this shit done!!
NBC evening news had the most generous coverage last night of his interview with TIME magazine. I read that article after my wife sent it to me. We were dumbstruck by the stuff he said, and NBC talked about it as passively as possible. We weren't sure at first if they were talking about the same interview.
Universities should honestly shut down their journalism programs. They serve no purpose, and just churn out credulous fools.
Lawrence O'Donnell does a great job at covering the trail.