WATCH: Mark Levin says Trump is a ‘unique and peculiar victim’ of the media

CBN News interviewed The Great One on his new book on Friday and I have to say they did a really good job explaining what the book is about:



Levin points out in his book “Unfreedom of the Press” that far back as the 1800s the media began aligning with political parties. Back then they were at least honest about it, but then came the 1900s and all of that changed. Levin sites example after example showing how the media protected Democratic presidents and went after Republicans.

Fast forward to now and its pretty obvious to anyone who pays attention. All you have to do is look at the last presidency versus the current presidency and you’ll see a media that pretty much slept through Obama era but has waged a ‘holy war’ against Trump.

Levin is exactly right to call Trump a victim of the media and says a president has never been more persecuted than Trump. He does note that the media went after Nixon pretty hard too, but the flip side is that Trump did nothing wrong.

Watch the video for more. You will enjoy it…

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

To our ad-free users: I apologize for the ad below but unfortunately DISQUS requires this ad in order to use their commenting system and I cannot make it go away.

152 thoughts on “WATCH: Mark Levin says Trump is a ‘unique and peculiar victim’ of the media

  1. I am currently reading ‘Unfreedom of the Press’ and recommend it. Mark Levin does a deep dive into the subject. I learned quite a bit about the Wilson and FDR control of print and radio. Very enlightening.

  2. Re the NT debate…

    Yes, NT is over. As I stated many times, it ended exactly when the last polls closed on Nov. 8, 2016.

    But of course, a new version of NT was born at the exact, same moment. They still used the NT moniker for a long time. But about halfway through 2018, they stopped using the NeverTrump label as it became obvious they were pariahs on the right, and the NT concept had fast become anachronism.

    But it’s still a useful label. Because these ridiculous people are still obsessed with tearing down Trump each and every day, while simultaneously claiming the heart of conservatism, just as many colonial Tories claimed to be the true patriots.

    Such obsession is idolatry. It’s manifestly impossible to be both an idolater and a conservative.

  3. The idea that President Trump is somehow a “unique and peculiar victim” of unfavorable media coverage is absurd. It’s also historically inaccurate. Such wild exaggeration serves no useful purpose.

    Negative coverage has accompanied many Presidents, including some historically great or near-great Presidents. Presidents Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, Harry Truman, among others had received extraordinarily harsh and persistent negative coverage. That Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of the Declaration of Independence did not spare him. Indeed, the coverage directed toward Donald Trump is mild compared to some of that to which Jefferson was subjected.

    1. There is a difference between today’s media and the past.
      1) It’s monolithic in its negative coverage. Numbers matter. You get 12 people saying you’re guilty and guess what!? YOU’RE GUILTY! At least in the minds of many misinformed people!
      2) Today’s media perpetrates to be “OBJECTIVE” when it’s actually biased. It’s like a used car salesman making himself to be a tech from Consumer Reports helping you to buy a car! They are COMPLETELY DISHONEST!

    2. Negative coverage has accompanied many Presidents

      Don, your framing in itself is a strawman. This isn’t cherry-picked or even predominately negative coverage we’re talking about. This is over the top, leftists screaming at the sky wall-to-wall negative coverage. This is hostile and deceptive vitriol coming from the main news media sources in the USA as well as from Hollywood and the new media giants on the Internet.

      If you want to argue that Trump deserves the negative coverage… sure, have at it. That’s more subjective and I could see some arguments that way. But to pretend that this is a “wild exaggeration” is itself a wild exaggeration.

      1. Much, but not all, of the negative coverage is self-inflicted. When a President makes 10,800 misleading statements in just 2.5 years in office, allows for little transparency when it comes to potential conflicts of interest (e.g., his refusal to release his tax returns, something that could readily clear up concerns), and attacks the news media/news organizations/journalists, he creates an environment conducive to exceptional scrutiny (some of which results in inaccurate stories due to limited information that is available to the press) and unfavorable coverage. When that President accomplishes little, has near misses with crises due to impulsive decision making, and governs in a divisive fashion, he creates few opportunities to change the narrative.

        1. One point at a time. So you’d agree that Trump has received a huge amount of negative media? I’d argue that even Nixon didn’t receive this amount of negative media attention. His negative media attention was focused mostly on Watergate. During the rest of his presidency the media coverage may not have been great, but it wasn’t the histrionic coverage we see of Trump today regarding almost every aspect of his presidency. We can get into whether or not Trump’s coverage is self-inflicted and maybe even deserved (two different things) – but it’s the volume and the vitriolic nature of it that we should be able to somewhat agree upon.

      2. Right, they’ve accused him of treason on multiple occasions live on air. As bad as it was before with Bush, Romney and others it was never to this level.

    3. Dude wrote a book, much of which concerned the history of the press. Did tons of easily corroborated research.

      You fat-fingered a comment into a comment section, dismissing his statement as “historically inaccurate.”

      Who to believe…
      Who to believe…

      1. Levin’s is far from the only book on the topic. His account is not the only one that concerns historical narrative. More detailed and substantive works on the history of the press and journalism in the United States have been written. Levin offers one opinion out of many.

        Now, a quick look back at history. Here’s what the December 23, 1796 edition of the Philadelphia Aurora wrote about President Washington’s legacy:

        If ever a nation was debauched by a man, the American nation has been debauched by Washington. If ever a nation was deceived by a man, the American nation has been deceived by Washington. Let his conduct, then, be an example to future ages; let it serve to be a warning that no man may be an idol; let the history of the Federal Government instruct mankind that the mask of patriotism may be worn to conceal the foulest designs against the liberties of the people.

        Nothing that has been directed toward President Trump even begins to compare. Further, one can look at the rhetoric targeting Adams, Jefferson Roosevelt, among others in the press.

        Levin overlooked some truly sordid commentary to hastily conclude that Donald Trump is a “unique and peculiar victim” of the news media. Others have faced much worse.

    4. Yes, Don. I remember the press claiming Thomas Jefferson was a spy for the English crown… without evidence. smh

  4. I don’t think I can take any further use of “Donald Trump” and “victim” in the same sentence.

    He’s the friggin’ POTUS. The media can “persecute” him all they want, it doesn’t change that fact. AND Donald has a very unique opportunity to shut them down hard. But he DOESN’T. Instead, he continues to play this stupid little cat and mouse game with them (AND the Democrats), instead of just shutting TFU and doing his job. He’s so obsessed with being liked and praised, that this is what he spends his days doing. I ask AGAIN: what the HELL where people thinking when they voted for this yahoo.

    “Donald’s a victim of the media”. FFS. Are you kidding me? [Insert a dozen expletives and blasphemes.]

    1. AT, I know you prefer spineless RINO Republicans who promise, but don’t deliver and are easily swayed one way or another depending on leftist media narrative. Trump just had an unethical and unfounded multimillion dollar campaign leveled at him using the funds of the federal government–DOJ because of a complicit and enciting media. HECK YA, HE’S A VICTIM! Sorry if the facts are hurting your feelings, but these are the facts whether you choose to accept them or not!

      1. I know you prefer spineless RINO Republicans who promise, but don’t deliver and are easily swayed one way or another depending on leftist media narrative.

        False.

        Trump just had an unethical and unfounded multimillion dollar campaign leveled at him using the funds of the federal government

        Wah.

        HECK YA, HE’S A VICTIM!

        Safe space.

        1. @atomicsentinel I’m surprised any President would continue with his job after this kind of treatment, so he’s obviously passing up your “safe space” offer, but a little credit for what he had to put up with would be appreciated!

          Evidently, I completely misread you as I thought you to be “libertarian” in which case, your freak-out would be over the government using its power to spy on American citizens–let alone an opponent’s party campaign with incitement from the propagandist media!

      1. That’s not the point.

        The point is that they are factually wrong. Donald is not a victim. Stop pretending like he is. This is f*cking snowflake logic. Snowflake logic from a progressive president who clearly needs a damned safe space. What in all the hells is happening here.

        1. You are using the word victim as if it means someone who is helplessly preyed upon rather than the literal definition which is someone who is the target of dishonest or criminal action. The pop culture definition you are using does not apply, but the actual definition does.

  5. I am currently reading ‘Unfreedom of the Press’ and recommend it. Mark Levin does a deep dive into the subject. I learned quite a bit about the Wilson and FDR control of print and radio. Very enlightening.

  6. “…a media that pretty much slept through (the) Obama era but has waged a ‘holy war’ against Trump. Levin is exactly right to call Trump a victim of the media and says a president has never been more persecuted than Trump.”

    That’s just the best possible way to put it. It brilliantly and succinctly sums up reality! :thumbsup:

  7. Re the NT debate…

    Yes, NT is over. As I stated many times, it ended exactly when the last polls closed on Nov. 8, 2016.

    But of course, a new version of NT was born at the exact, same moment. They still used the NT moniker for a long time. But about halfway through 2018, they stopped using the NeverTrump label as it became obvious they were pariahs on the right, and the NT concept had fast become anachronism.

    But it’s still a useful label. Because these ridiculous people are still obsessed with tearing down Trump each and every day, while simultaneously claiming the heart of conservatism, just as many colonial Tories claimed to be the true patriots.

    Such obsession is idolatry. It’s manifestly impossible to be both an idolater and a conservative.

          1. You were already complaining about David French being included with “them.” You know, the “they” who were listed earlier. Real people, in other words. Your denial is pathetic and futile.

            1. “They” were not NT. They were people so off-the-rails anti-Trump that they’ve turned their backs on Conservatism.

              French has in no way done that.

              1. Since he’s not much of a conservative, you might be right. Hard to walk away from a position never held.

  8. “…a media that pretty much slept through (the) Obama era but has waged a ‘holy war’ against Trump. Levin is exactly right to call Trump a victim of the media and says a president has never been more persecuted than Trump.”

    That’s just the best possible way to put it. It brilliantly and succinctly sums up reality! :thumbsup:

  9. At least it’s not like Adams/Jefferson where they started throwing out the term “hermaphroditical character.”

    1. That was a presidential campaign… not the MSM calling politicians hermaphrodites. In Trump’s case, the MSM claims he is a Russian spy, a criminal, a mental patient, etc.

      1. I know it was them doing it to each other. I’m just grateful no one’s gone that far anymore in the name calling. Imagine the fallout from multiple sides of
        Side 1 : He called who a hermaphrodite!
        Side 2: Who uses that kind of old school language? Hermaphroditical character? Where’s the thous and thys?
        Side 3: Dude, what’s a hermadite?

  10. The idea that President Trump is somehow a “unique and peculiar victim” of unfavorable media coverage is absurd. It’s also historically inaccurate. Such wild exaggeration serves no useful purpose.

    Negative coverage has accompanied many Presidents, including some historically great or near-great Presidents. Presidents Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, Harry Truman, among others had received extraordinarily harsh and persistent negative coverage. That Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of the Declaration of Independence did not spare him. Indeed, the coverage directed toward Donald Trump is mild compared to some of that to which Jefferson was subjected.

    1. Yes, Don. I remember the press claiming Thomas Jefferson was a spy for the English crown… without evidence. smh

    2. There is a difference between today’s media and the past.
      1) It’s monolithic in its negative coverage. Numbers matter. You get 12 people saying you’re guilty and guess what!? YOU’RE GUILTY! At least in the minds of many misinformed people!
      2) Today’s media perpetrates to be “OBJECTIVE” when it’s actually biased. It’s like a used car salesman making himself to be a tech from Consumer Reports helping you to buy a car! They are COMPLETELY DISHONEST!

    3. Negative coverage has accompanied many Presidents

      Don, your framing in itself is a strawman. This isn’t cherry-picked or even predominately negative coverage we’re talking about. This is over the top, leftists screaming at the sky wall-to-wall negative coverage. This is hostile and deceptive vitriol coming from the main news media sources in the USA as well as from Hollywood and the new media giants on the Internet.

      If you want to argue that Trump deserves the negative coverage… sure, have at it. That’s more subjective and I could see some arguments that way. But to pretend that this is a “wild exaggeration” is itself a wild exaggeration.

      1. Right, they’ve accused him of treason on multiple occasions live on air. As bad as it was before with Bush, Romney and others it was never to this level.

      2. Much, but not all, of the negative coverage is self-inflicted. When a President makes 10,800 misleading statements in just 2.5 years in office, allows for little transparency when it comes to potential conflicts of interest (e.g., his refusal to release his tax returns, something that could readily clear up concerns), and attacks the news media/news organizations/journalists, he creates an environment conducive to exceptional scrutiny (some of which results in inaccurate stories due to limited information that is available to the press) and unfavorable coverage. When that President accomplishes little, has near misses with crises due to impulsive decision making, and governs in a divisive fashion, he creates few opportunities to change the narrative.

        1. One point at a time. So you’d agree that Trump has received a huge amount of negative media? I’d argue that even Nixon didn’t receive this amount of negative media attention. His negative media attention was focused mostly on Watergate. During the rest of his presidency the media coverage may not have been great, but it wasn’t the histrionic coverage we see of Trump today regarding almost every aspect of his presidency. We can get into whether or not Trump’s coverage is self-inflicted and maybe even deserved (two different things) – but it’s the volume and the vitriolic nature of it that we should be able to somewhat agree upon.

    4. Dude wrote a book, much of which concerned the history of the press. Did tons of easily corroborated research.

      You fat-fingered a comment into a comment section, dismissing his statement as “historically inaccurate.”

      Who to believe…
      Who to believe…

      1. Levin’s is far from the only book on the topic. His account is not the only one that concerns historical narrative. More detailed and substantive works on the history of the press and journalism in the United States have been written. Levin offers one opinion out of many.

        Now, a quick look back at history. Here’s what the December 23, 1796 edition of the Philadelphia Aurora wrote about President Washington’s legacy:

        If ever a nation was debauched by a man, the American nation has been debauched by Washington. If ever a nation was deceived by a man, the American nation has been deceived by Washington. Let his conduct, then, be an example to future ages; let it serve to be a warning that no man may be an idol; let the history of the Federal Government instruct mankind that the mask of patriotism may be worn to conceal the foulest designs against the liberties of the people.

        Nothing that has been directed toward President Trump even begins to compare. Further, one can look at the rhetoric targeting Adams, Jefferson Roosevelt, among others in the press.

        Levin overlooked some truly sordid commentary to hastily conclude that Donald Trump is a “unique and peculiar victim” of the news media. Others have faced much worse.

        1. Others have faced much worse.

          Not even close. None have faced worse. It take hard cherry-picking, a complete inability to gauge scale, and a marked determination to ignore evidence to buy that claim.

          Sure, some nasty accusations happened in history. But those were dribbled out in small bits by a tiny number of media participants. The whole of presidential critique, from Washington thru Obama is about equal to any given day during Trump’s administration.

          1. That’s your opinion. In time, we’ll see what the research shows. I suspect it will reveal other Presidents have been treated more harshly than Trump.

            1. On just the one claim; that he’s mentally ill, he’s had more media hacks promote it than all of the mean or disgusting claims against all prior presidents. And there are a long list of other such anti-Trump calumnies that are brought forth daily by most major network news operations.

              So there’s just no possible way any president was treated worse by the press.

            1. Trotting that out without a serious case defending its use shows you don’t know what it means.

              Informal fallacies, especially ones pertaining to relevance, authorities, or validation require a case be made.

              1. “Mark says A.”
                “Don says B.”
                “Mark is an authority.”
                “Therefore A is true and B is false.”

                That’s your post in a nutshell buddy.

                1. @atomicsentinel You missed the most important feature of the ad verecundiam fallacy:

                  In order for an argument to qualify as ad verecundiam, the topic has to be in regard to subject matter *other* than one in which one’s referred-to authority is expert.

  11. The reason why the media is more vicious with Trump is because they did not create him. The “connection” Obama et al. have with the people is media-hyped; non-existent. As opposed to Trump, he really connects with the average American and that is what infuriates the Left and anti-Trumpists on the right.

    1. You got it.

      He connects with the common man – populists are dangerous to the corporate status quo.

      1. Yes! They don’t follow the political playbook… Trump crushed identity politics and has put corporate cronyism on alert with tariffs. Who knew the so-called Libertarian, Quisling Amash was such a swamp creature? Trump helped expose Amash’s Chinese business deals…

        1. I doubt AOC, Bill Kristol, David French, and Justin Amash connect with Trump, AT.

            1. Weird? The man is your so-called Conservative Never Trumper… I could not have said it better… “David French is the poster-scold for the Surrender Caucus, a fussy man who is always at the ready with some hitherto unknown conservative norm, rule or principle that boils down to you not being allowed to effectively resist the massive attack on your liberty and prosperity by our garbage elite. These conservative norms, rules and principles are pretty remarkable in that they only apply to limit our options and actions – they never apply to protect us from our enemies.”

              https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2019/06/10/ignore-the-never-trump-losers-who-are-ok-with-liberals-winning-n2547810

              1. #NT isn’t a thing. Been over two years bro. Let it go.

                And Kurt is a babbling moron trying way too hard to be clever and witty. He’s neither. A straight up cultist.

                Conservatives worth the name should recognize that French has been fighting for conservative principles for decades, as president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, as a lawyer with the American Center for Law and Justice and Alliance Defending Freedom, and even by joining the military and fighting in Iraq. French is not a traitor to conservatism, he’s a bona fide hero for the cause.

                Instead, many people have ganged up against David French, falsely calling him a squish or a fake conservative. This is nonsense, and my fellow Trump supporters should know better.

                https://pjmedia.com/trending/the-bizarre-conservative-twitter-mob-gunning-for-david-french/

                1. Been over since election day, 2016.

                  It’s a factual impossibility now. Anybody still bearing the moniker or applying it to others is either very silly or very stupid.

                2. Maybe it’s migrated to NMT? No More Trump? No More Trumpers sounds like a campaign against brass instruments. High school marching bands will cower at the name.

                3. I think there’s three general camps.

                  There’s the pro-Trump. You know, the hooting baboons that are fundamentally indistinguishable from First Black’s cult, who rationalize everything and insist the man can do no wrong.

                  There’s the anti-Trump. The Kristolites and so forth, and most of the left-wing, who are so far up their own ass that they’re willing to support Democrats even though that’s patently insane.

                  There’s the WTF-Trump. The folks who will give credit where it’s due, but generally find they have to spend their time scratching their head at what this orange moron says and does.

                4. I wasn’t a fan during the election. I kept thinking of how he was a recent democrat, his entire family is democrats, his actions on his show Celebrity Apprentice, and even after all that, I don’t really like politicians and he became one. I’m more of a meh Trumper. He’s a small part of history (good or bad.) My undying loyalty resides in no human.

                5. @ciceroni-excogitatoris It’s strange to see so much NT propaganda–disgised as non-NT propaganda–being pushed lately. But that’s because the NT faction is left solely with absurd propaganda as its one, last chance to try and regain credibility. They’re the tru cons, you know. /s

                  It’s working about as well as you’d expect: ie, not at all.

                6. Laugh as you may, but we’re not the ones continually obsessing over a failed movement that ended years ago.

                7. we’re not the ones continually obsessing over a failed movement that ended years ago.”

                  No one is obsessed with NT. It comes up once in a while, just like most issues do. So congratulations. Please clap.

                8. The hell they’re not. The Cult of Orange blames all its woes on a tiny conservative minority that couldn’t budge the election. “The NT-crowd” is their boogeyman they invoke to shut down criticism of King Tinyhands.

                9. The NT folks would naturally feel self-important like that. They are barely barnacles on the hull, but they pretend they are the icebergs lying in wait. It was cute, for about 30 seconds. Now it’s boringly predictable.

                10. The new ones, born in 2016 close to and after the election are alive and breathing. Just go read your favorites at TheBulwark.

                11. I don’t know what that is.

                  And there are no new ones, because it’s a factual impossibility.

                12. You’re complaining about a label. Perhaps you’d prefer the term used by the so-called alt-right?

                  Fact: Trump-obsessed critics who claim to be conservative are not different in any material way** from a significant group of pre-election-night NeverTrump. And in further fact, are likely all former members of that group, who refused to drop the NT label until they became embarrassed by it over a year later.

                  So you can object to the label, but it won’t change the specifics. That group exists.

                  Anyone who claims to be conservative and spends enough time to post criticisms of Trump every single day, with few commendations, ever, is logically equivalent to members of that group.

                  The label stays as long as they do.

                  ———–

                  **as far as political philosophy is concerned.

          1. Because he’s better and smarter than everyone. Are you just now realizing this?

  12. I don’t think I can take any further use of “Donald Trump” and “victim” in the same sentence.

    He’s the friggin’ POTUS. The media can “persecute” him all they want, it doesn’t change that fact. AND Donald has a very unique opportunity to shut them down hard. But he DOESN’T. Instead, he continues to play this stupid little cat and mouse game with them (AND the Democrats), instead of just shutting TFU and doing his job. He’s so obsessed with being liked and praised, that this is what he spends his days doing. I ask AGAIN: what the HELL where people thinking when they voted for this yahoo.

    “Donald’s a victim of the media”. FFS. Are you kidding me? [Insert a dozen expletives and blasphemes.]

      1. That’s not the point.

        The point is that they are factually wrong. Donald is not a victim. Stop pretending like he is. This is f*cking snowflake logic. Snowflake logic from a progressive president who clearly needs a damned safe space. What in all the hells is happening here.

        1. @atomicsentinel you sound pretty unhinged here. Do you need some time out or safe space to cool down a bit?

            1. @atomicsentinel Well, look at it this way, at least you don’t have the full power of DOJ, Congress, leftist media and Hollywood coming after you!

              1. Wah.

                The guy won. He’s the president. If he spent half as much time working as he does whining, he might to do something about those shitty poll numbers of his.

                1. AT, does it EVER occur to you that maybe–just maybe–the “shitty poll numbers” could be as a result of the monolithic persistent attacks against him from the leftist media? You ever see the montage of the leftist media comparing him with Pelosi? It’s like they’re all using the same damn script!

                2. could be as a result of the monolithic persistent attacks against him from the leftist media

                  lol, actions speak louder than words, Abe.

                3. Did you see that survey that found that most people get their news from late night talk shows and it just so happens that 99% of late-night talk shows are left leaning? People haven’t a clue who the VP is let alone what the President’s actions are!

                4. @atomicsentinel How exactly is he to “inform the people” if most people get their news from late night talk shows? You want him to send them a text message or cut into the late-night program to give a message?

                5. Why not? We’re all glued to our smartphones, and we’re a headline-only society. Take advantage of that.

                6. I agree, but then again, that surprises me coming from you if you claim to be libertarian.

                7. I agree.

                  Reagan faced heavy criticism (including columns that he posed the biggest risk of starting World War III). He did not whine. Instead, he accomplished big things. His ratings rose and remain high even today. In sum, when a leader accomplishes things, the ratings take care of themselves.

        2. The MSM is “factually wrong?” What!? They are purposefully misleading and making stuff up. There’s a difference, you know?

        3. You are using the word victim as if it means someone who is helplessly preyed upon rather than the literal definition which is someone who is the target of dishonest or criminal action. The pop culture definition you are using does not apply, but the actual definition does.

            1. Can a president be the victim of a crime or conspiracy or does becoming president somehow create a magic shield of invulnerability? The fact that he’s facing these people EXPOSES the swamp that people like you have talked about for decades, yet when push comes to shove you suddenly want to act like it doesn’t exist and that anyone they attack is just a whiner for responding.

              Your “shut up and take it” mentality is what has empowered these people.

              1. He doesn’t expose jack shit, Col. That’s the biggest lie in this administration. The people he’s “exposing” things to fall into one of two categories: People who knew it to begin with; and People who choose to believe otherwise. That accomplishes absolutely nothing.

                You’re a choir that likes being preached to, which is why you regard it as some kind of accomplishment. But it’s not accomplishing anything.

                You want to talk about swamp-draining, Col? Has it actually happened in any way shape or form? No. Because Donald lives in it. He always has. The other great lie of this administration was that he was an “outsider candidate.” Total. Nonsense. Donald’s been playing the political graft game since he was eating his pizza backwards.

                1. Okay, so saying that a particular news item is “fake news” or wrong when speaking in an interview or at a rally or tweeting doesn’t count then. You want him to sit down and have a serious address to the nation with his cabinet members and advisers coming forth with evidence to back up the accusations of fake news? That’s what I’d like to see, but what are you suggesting?

                2. Okay, so saying that a particular news item is “fake news” or wrong when speaking in an interview or at a rally or tweeting doesn’t count then.

                  If it’s unfriendly to Donald, did his cult believe it in the first place? And was the other cult all too happy to believe it without question?

                  You want him to sit down and have a serious address to the nation with his cabinet members and advisers coming forth with evidence to back up the accusations of fake news?

                  I want him to stop whining. I want him to get creative about how he can get unvarnished messages to the people. We live in the digital age for pete’s sake – but he’s still insistent on sending his messages through CNN and NYT, and then whining when they misrepresent it.

                  He’s got options. He’s just too dumb to use them.

                  Or, he’s in on it with CNN.

                3. Well if you look at his digital marketing team they’re pretty amazing. Read into what they did in the 2016 campaign and it is very eyeopening. He also uses Twitter, but I guess that doesn’t count. I don’t like it when he fixates on BS like crowd sizes or whatever, but that’s the crap his audience eats up. He covers other stuff as well. In reality we just need an alternative voice to media dishonesty that goes beyond just himself, Fox News and Breitbart. The whole industry needs to be reshaped.

    1. Trump is not your typical spineless Republican, AT.
      Maybe you would like President Trump to bend over and hide under his desk; as the MSM defines his presidency… just ask Bush 43.

      1. How about he just ignore it? Huh? He could shut this down at any time, and he doesn’t. Instead, he just encourages them and encourages them. He must LOVE the free publicity.

        He’s the walking talking example of “A child would rather have good attention than bad attention, but bad attention rather than no attention.”

        How about he wave them off flippantly and then go be president for awhile, huh? That too much to ask from this dickless thin-skinned orange whiny jackass and his cult of morons?

        1. It’s not too early to have a drink, AT. Check your blood pressure… Trump pointing out the deceptive MSM is refreshing because there needed to be someone to fight back against it.

          Remember the Obama-Romney debate in 2012 when CNN’s Monica Crowley helped Obama by LYING about a certain stat and then she was caught laughing afterwards in an interview? Romney, the quisling, didn’t say a word. He just smiled like a schmuck… had it been Trump, he would have shut her down at the moment, exposing her bias.

          1. Trump pointing out the deceptive MSM is refreshing because there needed to be someone to fight back against it.

            Pointing them out is not fighting back. It’s just whining. Like a bitch.

            Trump is a gutless punk who COULD fight back against the media – hard – but just doesn’t. It’s because they feed off each other, Cic. They’re both loving this.

            1. Fight back, “hard?” What!? How, AT? Please enlighten us… I’m waiting.

              1. Well, for one, he could deny press responses/interviews to clearly biased sources. He could also use his influence to shift people to new media, instead of relying on the MSM and popular social media to do his messaging. He could make weekly, if not daily, addresses straight from the OO to the American people. There’s all kinds of things he could do to take the wind out of their sails. Especially in the digital age.

                Instead, he does the exact opposite.

        2. We don’t want him to ignore it. The media’s dishonesty MUST be confronted head on. In fact most of us DEMAND that this happen, while fools want to act like turning the other cheek will fix it. How well did that work out for Bush, Romney, McCain and other milquetoast Republicans?

          1. The media’s dishonesty MUST be confronted head on.

            Then he should DO that. Instead, he just whines. And when he doesn’t, his bloc whines for him. It’s pathetic.

            1. You seem to be confusing confrontation with whining. Granted, in politics repetitive short messages like “fake news” are part of how you effectively communicate with a large audience.

              1. He’s not pushing back. He’s not doing anything he could be to take away their power. Instead, he feeds it.

                1. I think we’ll have a better assessment on the accuracy of that statement after these counter-investigations wrap up and the results get announced. But what else could he do? Even with merely voicing his opposition they label him as obstructing justice and whatever other nonsense. So what do you suggest?

                2. Ignore them.

                  “I won’t be dignifying that with a response, if you have a question about Education or Immigration or International Policy, I’m right here.”

                  Let them dig their own hole. Don’t hand them a shovel.

                3. I just think you’re nitpicking. Trump is what we’ve got whether we like it or not and that’s his style. It’s what he knows. If someone put out a lie he’s going to point at them and call them fake news and then on top of that he’s going to generically call them fake news at his rallies because he gets cheers from it. If Marxists are the only ones who can use a crowd then we lose by default. If Trump can be our crowd-wrangler then I’m fine with it, but we’ve had that conversation before.

        3. Maybe he’s doing this is as prep work for a book deal and speaking tour after he’s out?

    2. AT, I know you prefer spineless RINO Republicans who promise, but don’t deliver and are easily swayed one way or another depending on leftist media narrative. Trump just had an unethical and unfounded multimillion dollar campaign leveled at him using the funds of the federal government–DOJ because of a complicit and enciting media. HECK YA, HE’S A VICTIM! Sorry if the facts are hurting your feelings, but these are the facts whether you choose to accept them or not!

      1. I know you prefer spineless RINO Republicans who promise, but don’t deliver and are easily swayed one way or another depending on leftist media narrative.

        False.

        Trump just had an unethical and unfounded multimillion dollar campaign leveled at him using the funds of the federal government

        Wah.

        HECK YA, HE’S A VICTIM!

        Safe space.

        1. @atomicsentinel I’m surprised any President would continue with his job after this kind of treatment, so he’s obviously passing up your “safe space” offer, but a little credit for what he had to put up with would be appreciated!

          Evidently, I completely misread you as I thought you to be “libertarian” in which case, your freak-out would be over the government using its power to spy on American citizens–let alone an opponent’s party campaign with incitement from the propagandist media!

          1. I’m surprised any President would continue with his job after this kind of treatment, so he’s obviously passing up your “safe space” offer, but a little credit for what he had to put up with would be appreciated!

            No.

            Evidently, I completely misread you as I thought you to be “libertarian” in which case, your freak-out would be over the government using its power to spy on American citizens–let alone an opponent’s party campaign with incitement from the propagandist media!

            Yea, that’s a problem.

            But we’re not talking about that. We’re talking about President Victimey Victim von Whiner Victim.

  13. The media is melting down as we speak. ThinkProgress is hemorrhaging money and staff. Cue the tiny violins as I look forward to seeing another TDS Company bite the dust.

  14. The media really has become the enemy of the people. No two ways about it.

    BTW, Mark had a really great show last night. His guest was Mark Penn, the Democrat pollster and they talked about the media.

    1. Mark Penn and Pat Caddell (RIP) = honest Democrats. Pat Caddell predicted Trump would win.

  15. At least it’s not like Adams/Jefferson where they started throwing out the term “hermaphroditical character.”

    1. That was a presidential campaign… not the MSM calling politicians hermaphrodites. In Trump’s case, the MSM claims he is a Russian spy, a criminal, a mental patient, etc.

      1. I know it was them doing it to each other. I’m just grateful no one’s gone that far anymore in the name calling. Imagine the fallout from multiple sides of
        Side 1 : He called who a hermaphrodite!
        Side 2: Who uses that kind of old school language? Hermaphroditical character? Where’s the thous and thys?
        Side 3: Dude, what’s a hermadite?

  16. The reason why the media is more vicious with Trump is because they did not create him. The “connection” Obama et al. have with the people is media-hyped; non-existent. As opposed to Trump, he really connects with the average American and that is what infuriates the Left and anti-Trumpists on the right.

  17. The media is melting down as we speak. ThinkProgress is hemorrhaging money and staff. Cue the tiny violins as I look forward to seeing another TDS Company bite the dust.

  18. The media really has become the enemy of the people. No two ways about it.

    BTW, Mark had a really great show last night. His guest was Mark Penn, the Democrat pollster and they talked about the media.

    1. Mark Penn and Pat Caddell (RIP) = honest Democrats. Pat Caddell predicted Trump would win.

Comments are closed.