it’s obvious to a neutral observer that his arm is in the outstretched position, pointing at Trump, before the intern’s arm entered his space. she put her arm into his space. any contact was incidental and the WH is making fake news out of the non-incident.
One of the absolute worst things about Trump (and there are many) is his relentless attack on the press. He may not know the implications of the phrase “enemy of the people,” but the rest of us do. As do the advisers who wrote the phrase for him and encourage him to continue saying it.
Attacking a reporter for asking entirely legitimate questions, insulting him personally, and then revoking his press credentials are not acts that should be acceptable in the US. Of course, the tactic of attacking the press in general, as well as targeting specific reporters, suits Trump for a variety of reasons: it distracts people from the fact that he won’t answer reasonable questions, it has a chilling effect on other journalists, it gives his followers a convenient scapegoat and discourages them from seeing the role of the media as a positive one, etc.
I spend a lot of time in Russia. We expect such behavior from Putin. We shouldn’t expect it from a US president.
The White House is lying, and they know everyone knows that they’re lying – no one really thinks that Acosta assaulted or mishandled the woman he brushed against while she was trying to pull his mic away. But it doesn’t matter – it’s an exercise in domination and humiliation. That so many conservatives are going along with these obvious lies just shows how thoroughly so many of them have accepted Trump’s domination.
Trump should learn that although he is the most important person in the room, the press has both a right and a duty to ask him questions and he is there to answer them, not to rant about “fake” (i.e. accurate) news reporting, lob infantile insults and dissemble with rambling gibberish about how great he is. He won’t, but he should.
Actually from what little I’ve seen of Putin (the Q&A after the last summit, and a lengthy interview with him) he’s far less abrasive than Trump and comes across as more rational, and certainly immeasurably more intelligent. Granted that they’re both about equally ruthless, and Trump is being held in check only by existing American institutions and institutionalized freedoms, all of which he’s systematically trying to dismantle so that he can emulate the heroes he so openly admires, Putin and Kim Jong Un.
Agreed except for the part about “they know everyone knows that they’re lying”. Trump’s base doesn’t know anything unless Fox News or breitbart.com tells them, and I doubt that either of those are telling them that the WH video was tampered.
Just to add to the fiasco, another CNN reporter asked Trump (yesterday, I think) whether the appointment of Whitaker as acting AG would have the effect of reining in the Mueller investigation – a rather central question in this whole sordid affair. His reply was to insult the reporter: “What an incredibly stupid question”. Then he repeated the insult, and stormed off. The alt-right just loves this sort of thing. Decent Americans and the rest of the world can only watch in stunned bewilderment.
I’m so incensed by the whole situation that I didn’t even address the issue of the White House lying about Acosta’s actions and making use of a doctored video. The members of this administration and its spokespeople lie reflexively, shamelessly, constantly. I would have thought that even they wouldn’t stoop so low as to accuse a reporter of something he didn’t do, using manufactured evidence to “support” the accusation. But I guess they don’t even have the shred of decency required to reject such tactics.
How do you feel about the White House Press Secretary spreading a doctored video to defame him?
No big deal?
“put his hands on her” is not credible, at any speed of that video.
Indeed. The doctoring was not only immediately spotted, it was also pointless. I can barely tell the difference between the two clips, even side by side, and they both show the intern as being the one to (tentatively and reluctantly) get in his face.
I suppose the difference was supposed to be ‘subliminal’. That would be another word for ‘unnoticeable’. InfoWars might as well have just put up the right clip, they could have generated just as much outrage among people primed to be outraged.
Both sides do it, yada yada yada…
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Would “White House Shares Bullshit Video In Attempt To Smear Reputation Of Scary Reporter” ease your discomfort with the OP’s terrible accusation?
Sarah Sanders tweeted this:
“We stand by our decision to revoke this individual’s hard pass. We will not tolerate the inappropriate behavior clearly documented in this video.”
Along with the doctored video. So, the press pass was revoked based on the falsified video according to the people who revoked it. I suggest you should believe them.
Shodan, the White House and the Press Secretary has an obligation to make an honest effort to fact check (especially such easily verified BS) before speaking on behalf of the POTUS and the US of A. Retweeting Infowars doctored propaganda fails this bar.
Reminds me of when Trump retweets of UK far-right leader’s anti-Muslim videos that was roundly and rightfully criticized by Teresa May.
Do you agree that title of the thread and the claim of the OP are incorrect?
If so, what is the point of your post? Did I say that what Sanders re-tweeted was a good thing? Did I in ANY way defend the White House in my post? Did I in ANY way imply that I thought what the White House did was good, or proper?
If you are going to call out someone for a bad thing they have done, it behooves you not to do a bad thing yourself (making a false accusation is a bad thing, is it not?) in the process. All that does is allow the opposition to make the focus of the discussion be the bad thing YOU did, and not the bad thing you say THEY did. As someone who sits in the middle of much of the political debate in this country (and on this MB), I see way too much of this happening. I don’t think it is a bad idea to call out someone who is committing that error.
Just wanted to point out Sanders didn’t retweet the video, which would be linking a video from someone else’s twitter account. She uploaded the video to her account. It could have come from info-wars, it could have come from the white supremacist, Paul Joseph Watson, who first posted it, or the white house could have been the ones to originally create it for all we know.
I’d assume she downloaded it from a site like infowars, then uploaded it herself to avoid showing her source, or it could have simply been a matter of her failing to manage her twitter account and accidentally downloading instead of sharing.
OP here. Yes, the title is incorrect. “White House uses likely doctored video of Jim Acosta” is better. This is my fault and not Ars Technica’s
Brian
(could have sworn I posted this earlier)
You implied defamation of character occurred in the OP, which is utter bullshit.
Hey, for what it’s worth I thought this was in The Pit and it’s too late to edit the above.
Interesting.
It is the kind of discourse about the reporting that I read mostly chez the commentary in the authoritarian countries where adherence to the Leader overrides the values of the adherence to the challenging by a free press.
I found by chance from the linking this article, which seems to indicate that your laws do not allow for this kind of censorship via the intimidation.
He is more competent than Trump. More disciplined. More organized.
But it is a good demarche for the propaganda.
It is very fascinating to see how easy it is for a country to be dragged in its norms, and to see how the partisan tribal response allows that, for the behaviors we have normally only seen among the third world authoritarian countries become defended and normalized.
The US is not as special in its democracy and democratic culture as certain of its commentators over the time has shouted out to the world it thinks it is.
it seems normalized now, the official repetition of the propaganda with the thin deniability it is not their direct product.
It is again something I see here in my arabe world, the new sources that are not official but close to the government (by the association of the owners) that structure the propaganda with the small deniability
First, it was based on the video, at least according to Sarah Sanders.
Second, are you ready to defend your statement that he put his hands on the intern? That seems to be a minority opinion here, to say the least. I don’t see it – I see his arm coming down as he’s making a point and trying to hang onto the mike.
Third, are you white-knighting the other reporters in the room? Because I’ve seen nothing but defenders of Acosta from other reputable news organizations. No one was complaining that he wasn’t taking turns, just that he had his credentials revoked.
I know you’re not a Trump supporter, so I don’t know why you’re apparently swallowing their lies about who put hands on who(m).