Fizzling ‘fake news’ excuse from Sideshow Don

Politicians have tried to discredit media when they report unfavourable news for a long time. All Donald Trump has done is raise it to new heights of ridiculousness – something that has worked in his favour to an extent, but is likely to turn against him over time. Especially when claims of ‘fake news’ are prove him to be the one trying to fake it.

CNN:  Sorry, Mr. President, the ‘fake news’ excuse isn’t good enough anymore

In Davos, Switzerland, on Friday, President Donald Trump was asked about reporting by a slew of media organizations — including CNN — that he had ordered White House counsel Don McGahn to fire special counsel Bob Mueller.

“Fake news,” Trump replied. “Fake news. Typical New York Times fake stories.”

And that was it. Which is not good enough. Not even close to good enough.

The reporting that Trump had ordered Mueller’s firing is a) deeply sourced b) confirmed — after being first broken by The New York Times — by a number of serious and credible media outlets and c) very detailed as to how and why Trump moved to fire Mueller.

Given both the seriousness of those charges and the depth of the reporting, it is a massive — and, likely, purposeful — cop-out by Trump to simply reply with his standard issue “fake news.”

What about it is fake? Did he not tell McGahn to get rid of Mueller?

Because, if he didn’t, then Trump should come out and say “I absolutely did not — at any time or ever — ask Don McGahn to remove Bob Mueller from the special counsel investigation.”

He didn’t say that. And White House lawyer Ty Cobb didn’t either, refusing to comment on the reports of the Mueller firing out of “respect for the Office of the Special Counsel and its process.”

Which means, almost certainly, that it did happen.

‘Fake news’ has become an overused Trump euphemism for ‘fuck the news’.

The broad point here is that saying “fake news” is not a denial of the details reported first by the New York Times and subsequently confirmed by a number of other outlets.

What Trump is doing is a sidestep in hopes of creating a sideshow.

A typical Trump tactic. Sideshow Don.

Sure, there is a chunk of people who will take his “fake news” comment as an ironclad assertion that The New York Times is wrong about his move to fire Mueller.

There will probably be a few comments here supporting the ‘fake news’ dismissal plus a few other repeated anti-Trump criticism slogans.

But, that doesn’t mean that saying “fake news” in any way, shape or form clears the air as to what Trump actually did.

It’s an attempt to distract from the serious allegation.

 

29 Comments

  1. David

     /  January 27, 2018

    CNN is no longer a credible source and this is just a dirty little opinion piece, CNN have given up on news and now its just 24/7 attack Trump.
    Trump has literally done nothing but maintain he is allowing the investigation to run its course and repeatedly say he is not firing Mueller over the last year..and he hasnt. The investigation is now obstruction of justice with seemingly nothing Russian and no collusion.
    No coverage of the FBI head of counter intelligence fired by Mueller for his virulent anti Trump texts to his mistress saying that there was nothing to investigate because there was nothing there ? Nope because the anti Trump media are diverting your attention. No coverage of the missing texts the FBI couldnt retrieve that the inspector general found withing 10 minutes ?

    • Joe Bloggs

       /  January 28, 2018

      Speaking of dirty little opinion pieces, your own comments consistently fill the bill David.

      Even Sean Hannity acknowledged earlier in the week, live on Fox, that trump had attempted to fire Mueller.

      You’re a smart-ish person, David. You know very well that the totality of the evidence that trump attempted to fire Mueller makes it crystal clear that the original New York Times story is true in all but perhaps the most insignificant particulars. Yet you put up this whole facade of ostrich-like denialism.

      You disappoint me.

  2. Blazer

     /  January 27, 2018

    CNN and the New York TIMES…=fake news…lucky you get the real..’sauce’ from..Fox eh..David.

  3. unitedtribes2

     /  January 27, 2018

    I would have fired the prick

    • Gezza

       /  January 27, 2018

      What for? The blowback from that wouldn’t be worth it. Far better to let the investigation conclude with nothing much of note & try to steer it into Clinton & Obama & illegal spying on Trump territory.

    • Joe Bloggs

       /  January 28, 2018

      Why fire him if you haven’t colluded with the Russians?
      Why fire him if you hadn’t obstructed justice?
      Why fire him if you haven’t laundered Russian money?
      Why fire him if you haven’t done anything wrong to fear him discovering?

      The very fact you’d fire him suggests you have something to hide, and due process to obstruct.

      Fire Mueller after he’s brought charges against members of your campaign, and after he’s produced guilty pleas? After he’s found evidence of money laundering, tax fraud, and lying to federal investigators?

      Only a fool would commit political suicide that way.

      • David

         /  January 28, 2018

        “Why fire him if you haven’t colluded with the Russians?
        Why fire him if you hadn’t obstructed justice?
        Why fire him if you haven’t laundered Russian money?
        Why fire him if you haven’t done anything wrong to fear him discovering?”

        For the same reason he fired Comey. Mullar knows full well there is nothing significant to find, so he is just going after a perjury trap, that then gives Dems something to carry into an impeachment action even if no ‘actual’ crime has been committed.

        “The very fact you’d fire him suggests you have something to hide, and due process to obstruct.”

        Nonsense argument. This is just the ‘if you have nothing to hide’ approach to justice.

        “After he’s found evidence of money laundering, tax fraud, and lying to federal investigators?”

        Where are the Russians?

  4. Trevors_elbow

     /  January 27, 2018

    And on it goes….. CNN which has been a paragon of reporting the last couple of years and the NYT which was so right in its reporting of the election.

    I like the little dismissal, “There will probably be a few comments here supporting the ‘fake news’ dismissal plus a few other repeated anti-Trump criticism slogans.” Nice ….

    Wake us up when something real is tabled. Not endless rehashs of the same claims with little to support them…

    • This is a new claim, corroborated by several media with multiple sources. It may or may not be accurate, and it’s fair to question why it has been leaked, and why now, but it can’t just be dismissed as “same claims’.

      • Trevors_elbow

         /  January 27, 2018

        And why the piece tacked on I quoted Pete… seems a nice little put down of those who arent convinced by the steady stream of anti Trump stories which have often and regularly been shown to be wrong, half baked, and rather large strectches of the facts…

        Im no Trump supporter but the constant Democrat back propaganda campaign is just tedious and petty. They should focus in building America nit trying to tear it down

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  January 27, 2018

          Trump is the nit who will tear it down if he’s not stopped,

          I know that nit was a typo, but it was apposite.

        • “And why the piece tacked on I quoted Pete”

          Because some people are predictable, they make the same vague assertions without addressing what has actually been posted.

        • Corky

           /  January 27, 2018

          ”Trump is the nit who will tear it down if he’s not stopped,”

          No, Trump is the best thing happening to America at the present time. How anyone can criticise Trump after Obama’s presidency is honestly beyond me.

          But don’t take my word for it…wait for the next president to arrive, and then compare.

  5. Alan Wilkinson

     /  January 27, 2018

    Why is it a serious allegation? It is abundantly clear Mueller is on a partisan witch hunt. Firing him would have been eminently reasonable.

    • Gezza

       /  January 27, 2018

      You can’t really conclude he’s on a partisan witch hunt until he delivers his findings & any indictments. If it amounts to nothing significant connecting the Russians to Trump, firing him now carries more downside risks than letting him carry on.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  January 27, 2018

        The fact that he has stacked his team with Dems, leaked selectively to the Dem press, indicted Manafort for activities prior to Trump’s campaign that were well-known and allegedly violated a farcical law that is rarely ever prosecuted, indicted Flynn for another well-known transgression for which Trump had already fired him and then picked off a tiny bit player with a perjury trap.

        Apart from that he has acted with utmost probity, impartiality and focus on the issue he was supposedly engaged for, not.

  6. Kitty Catkin

     /  January 27, 2018

    It’s never fake news when it is on Trump’s side-why is this ?

  7. sorethumb

     /  January 27, 2018

    Down with Trump!

  8. Griff

     /  January 28, 2018

    Indeed oh
    Those who support Trump believe
    Faith makes them blind
    The same who believe the nonsense about Hillary and Obama birth certificate
    Thank(insert deity of choice or acceptable alternatives) we don’t have the same propaganda here.
    Democracy only works with a free and reliable press.
    Trump is doing his best to destroy democracy by attacking the press in the way he is.

    • MaureenW

       /  January 28, 2018

      Dry behind your ears before you press send

      • Griff

         /  January 28, 2018

        You my mum?
        Try to comment with contetent not just troll
        Or are you another trumpie who believes without question a property devolper and all round con man without gestion?

  9. Joe Bloggs

     /  January 28, 2018

    Another graduate of the Wilkinson school for trolls.