this administration's growing obsession with national security is really starting to worry me. not only is this a tenet of fascism, but their recent reasoning has become increasingly delusional, almost to the point where i'm genuinely concerned that any terror-related reason might be used to threaten the courts and the rule of law.

I think Trump has much more to lose. CNN still has a very large audience which is very evenly distributed in terms of age groups and gender, while the average education and income levels are also low. That equates to lot of low-hanging moderate fruit they need to influence.

CNN will get a few bruises along the way but I think they've already eroded Trump & Co's credibility more than the other way around. Most people seem to get that there's a lefty-bias with CNN and it's not perfect, but still see value in it, and just aren't going to bail on it just because Trump says mean things and calls them fake news. They're going to just keep on stinging him. And they're certainly not going to migrate en masse to fringe websites even if CNN took a major hit.

The Speaker of the House of Politics 7.0a admiring the Speaker of the House of Commons for advocating the no-platforming of Donald Trump is quite rich.

Maybe 7.0a as it stands is the best of a bunch of bad options though? /derail

Dvaut,

Agreed, and I don't plan to stop, rather I was just venting at how it's a slow train.


p.s. And I still find it alarming how much traction an ill-defined and nebulous notion like a 'war' on 'terror' can still get.

Bercow is pretty awesome. You can lose a good half hour looking for his best bits on youtube.

I respect him taking a stand.

Trump would be very welcome to post in Politics v 7.0

He is stunningly unwelcome to have the honour and acknowledgement that comes with speaking in Westminster Hall.

If that seems even slightly rich to you then I think you have got very confused.

45 going hard in the paint on his Russia lies again.

Man it's painful reading some of the alt-right media right now. Basically saying USA gearing up for war vs Iran and the other 6. I can't imagine how or why you'd actually do that. But worse still I can't imagine why you'd do it by first pissing off Jews/Israel as much as you did. If your really want to get serious about Iran, Israel should be your best friend. Not the other way around.

One writer said CNN and Conway needed to both grow up and not having her on their channel is a mistake. I find that to be complete pathetic bull**** and I'm sure that writer is a cuck.

In terms of journalism, the rationale for talking to people like Conway is growing increasingly thin since the information they give is either wrong, misleading, or incomplete. I suppose there's some value in having the administration on record saying stuff, but when Spicer says "It's not a ban" and Trump says "It is a ban," you aren't really informing your readers by engaging with these people.

Republicans in Congress are tap-dancing their asses off when confronted with Trump's absurd statements. That's probably better TV than KellyAnne.

A common question is what do people hope to gain by protesting and it's hard to answer because we have to play a join the dots guessing game. However, it's quite possible that without a) the very well supported petition against trump's visit b) the protests we have already had and c) the certainty of a massive protest if the visit goes ahead, that Bercow wouldn't have been confident enough to make this stand.

It's a fair point, but I guess it's only really symbolic.

There's a good chance that it is damaging to any attempt by the UK government to cosy up to trump. May has already been forced to take a slightly tougher stand against the Muslim ban than she wanted to. It all accumulates and I'm not sure it takes that much with trump.

On one hand Democrats kind of said the same thing during the Tea Party. I think I might have said something similar. That they weren't "spontaneous", that they were "astroturfed", that they were funded by the Koch Brothers. All of which were true, but having a older head on my shoulders realized that that's how protests work. No one just comes together on their own. You have organizations get the word out and how many people actually how up is what counts. So it's just Republicans dismissing the intentions of Democrats just like Democrats did of Republicans during Barack.

On the other hand, it's way more unbelievable that millions of people are getting paid to protest every day. Even at a dollar a day, someone would be burning through millions already.

According to this Bannon profile he considers a major world war necessary and desirable.

It'll be curious to see how far this gets in the legislative process. I guess we'll see if Trump really meant keeping legal immigration open while cutting back illegal immigration. My bets are on restricting legal immigration as well, but we'll see.

Also Cotton is thirsty for the Presidency so if he runs, expect him to be a more disciplined more hard line Trump.

https://www.axios.com/trump-and-tom-...244795741.html

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...raham-in-2016/

I like to think that Soros shipped some pocket change to Paul Ryan in anticipation of exactly this moment.

Trump winning friends and influencing people:
Trump 'shows true face of US,' says Iran's Supreme Leader

It is actually interesting to see that Bannon is still pushing anti-Paul Ryan stuff in his B****bart magazine. I think it might give away a bit of their strategy.

One of his all-time greatest hits:
He’s With Her: Inside Paul Ryan’s Months-Long Campaign to Elect Hillary Clinton President

I won't even quote or link the article because it's insidious propaganda with lies on almost every line. But if you search B****bart for Paul Ryan you will see a slew of anti-Paul Ryan articles, it's not just an accident, Bannon has been going after this guy hard for a long time. And now he's continuing to do so from inside the White House. I just found that part interesting.

There were 5 incidents from Australia on Trump's list of things the Bad Dishonest Media Underreported. Bad!

One of them was specifically found to not be terrorism-related. It was just a murder by someone who suffered from mental illness and was psychotic. Two of the others were non-fatal stabbings. I have no idea why CNN didn't lead their bulletins with "non fatal stabbing occurs in rural Australia, cows only witnesses" but I assume it's because they hate America.

It's beyond obvious that neither Trump nor anyone associated with him could possibly have heard of any of these incidents before, so clearly some intern was tasked with Googling "muslim attaker, bad!" and transcribing whatever nonsense that turned up. This is the level of incompetency and disingenuousness* we're dealing with.

* Chrome claims this is not a word, but I just looked it up and it is. FAKE NEWS!

Whoever figures out which fever swamp website they pulled that list off of should get a Pulitzer honorary mention.

I'm definitely on the side of the press banning Conway, Spicer, and any other obvious lairs. If not, they should tape the interviews with. Be obstinate in confronting them on obvious lies and deception during the interview (this alone might cause them to stop doing interviews). Then fact check afterwards and if any lying was missed, cut it.

I guess the Administration's CNN boycott is over.