Muhammad Ali, Jr. detained by customs demanding to know if he is a Muslim.
At the CPAC meeting, Trump referred to CNN as the “Clinton News Network.”
HA-ha! 
Or the short version: “Trumpy did stupid things!”
Shortest version: Trumpy Sad!
My favourite detail from the article (bolding mine):
How do you know that?
This made me laugh out loud.
I read the headline and wondered if they called him “honky” while they detained him. Really, Trump and his cartoonist circus are at–or likely below–that level of stupid.
These people were the stunters.
serious question - WERE THEY EVER DENIED ACCESS?
Cite, please.
This made me go … um wut? Since all of his (Ali’s wives) were “black” and he did convert to Islam ( which I have no problem with at all… no more than someone converting to Judaism or Christianity) but why? Why would you ask about “Honky”?
Honky from the 70s was reserved for “white” people vs any color from cafe au lait to dark chocolate let alone any other color minus “flesh colored”.
A realistic scenario would be “Do you know who Allah is?” and if you could say more than “The god of Islam” (little"g" being really important) you will be detained.
I dunno what will happen if a Native American ever goes abroad during these Mad or Cracked Times.
You quoted what I wrote but you didn’t read it, apparently. Why would they ask that? Answer: because they are stupid. It’s a bit like the bigot in Porky’s trying to insult another student, but constantly using the wrong word (kite).
Bookmark this for the next time some whiny Trump apologist tells us the EO was not a Muslim ban.
ALL of the Trump supporters I know are in favor of that EO because they believe it’s a Muslim ban. And why do they believe that? Because Trump told them it is!
ETA: What’s the deal on the government interrogating the man about his religious affiliation?
It raises his status from “suspected” to “self-confessed” Muslim. They don’t use “card-carrying” anymore.
Oh, so you are saying it would have been hunky dory if the Obama White House had kept Fox News from press briefings? Do you think we should have a Government run news service and shut down outlets that are critical of the government? If you feel that it is OK to do this now, how long do you think you will feel this way? About 44 months? Maybe 92 months?
It seems that there was, at least, some sort of effort to keep them out of one interview in 2009, with Treasury’s ‘Executive Pay Czar’ Kenneth Feinberg.
There was to be a sort of pool arrangement for the interview, with one camera and a bunch of reporters, and it seems that FOX News was left off the list. Now, FOX News was never actually left out of the interview because, as this NPR story notes:
It is worth noting that, according to TalkingPointMemo, the whole thing went down a little differently:
As you can see, the wording and sequence of events here suggest that FOX was not deliberately excluded, but were simply not on the list of organizations that has actively asked for an interview. Both the NPR and TPM stories agree that, in the end, FOX was not actually excluded.
More broadly, there was quite a lot of low-level conflict between the White House and FOX during the Obama administration, and in some cases the White House attitude to FOX seems to resemble, although in a slightly less belligerent manner, the position that Trump’s White House has taken towards some media outlets. This New York Times story gives some of the flavor of the mood. They mention the Feinberg incident that i’ve already discussed:
Then, the article moves beyond this to talk about the overall attitude of White House people towards FOX:
And this CNN interview has a comment from Anita Dunn, White House communications director, in 2009:
As a general observation, i would note that the Obama White House was constantly making efforts to limit and control the information it gave out. They were experts at keeping secrets when they wanted to, and releasing information when they felt it served their interests. They took considerable pains to hide information, and at times fought hard against FOIA requests for information that might have portrayed the administration in a negative light. As a lefty and as an Obama supporter, i often became annoyed and frustrated at their obfuscation and their lack of transparency on some issues. But this has been true of Presidential Administrations for longer than just last eight years.
The real difference, right now, if that yesterday’s incident with the media was part of a clear and concerted campaign not simply to control information, but to undermine the whole notion of a critical and independent media as an integral part of democracy. If the Obama administration overstepped the mark early in its terms with its treatment of FOX News—and i think you could make the argument that it did—it paled in comparison to the outright attack that is going on now, and that is very dangerous for public discourse and democratic ideals. And, in terms of validity and credibility, we also have to remember that the current attack on the media for its alleged dishonesty and unfairness, is coming from an administration that seems to have no trouble declaring, with a completely straight face, that black is white, up is down, and left is right.
Freaking excellent post, mhendo! Thank you!
Indeed. Very informative.
I rise to quibble. A minor point, perhaps, but that’s the trouble with quibbles.
This:
Dunno. Maybe, I guess, but really? Not a big hairy, but I don’t personally recall them being any better or any worse than anybody else.
ETA: Golf claps, in case its not obvious.
Sorry if it’s been mentioned and I missed it, but I noticed in the news that China has granted Trump the trademark for his name brand that he’d been trying fruitlessly to get. Hmm, I wonder if this could have anything to do with backing away from the Taiwan issue. Both happened shortly after the latest phone call a couple of weeks ago.