CNN Whines at Twitter to Get Trump Kicked Off

Children, children.

Trump's tweet:

Sad sack fat clown Brian Stelter:

Does Trump's anti-CNN tweet violate Twitter's terms? This is the "hateful conduct" policy https://t.co/1oCoXPNNul https://t.co/AhEu7Hwn12 — Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) July 2, 2017





Here's a good point. For background, see Tom Price fencing words with Chuck Todd. Price keeps saying he wants to discuss real issues, Chuck Todd insists no, Trump is talking nonstop about Joe and Mika, so that's the story.

SECY. TOM PRICE: Let me suggest to you that the American people want to talk about the challenges. CHUCK TODD: Mr. Secretary, I don't. Mr. Secretary, with all due respect, you're blaming me for what the president of the United States has spent his entire week focused on?

Did Trump spend the entire week talking about that, or was it just the media?

Steven Kruiser says it's the latter, and I can't see how one can disagree, unless one is retarded.

The press has been fond of saying that Trump's tweets are a distraction from things that aren't going well for the administration so far. If they are, it is only because the MSM turns them into one. If the president spends 12 seconds tweeting, the media covering him don't have to dwell on it for the next 10 hours.

This is obvious, but it really can't be said enough: Tweets take three seconds to write. So Trump writes three poorly-considered tweets -- and being "poorly-considered' means he spent less time on them than the normal 3-second tweet -- and then the media says "That's why we have to spend 24 hours per day of our own time covering this"?

Does that make any sense?

They're talking about it because they want to talk about it -- because they're #TheResistance, and they are trying to get Trump kicked out of office, and with the Russia Hoax revealed as a scam, they're now trying for either impeachment over a tweet (Keith Olbermann's suggestion) or a Democrat initiative to rewrite the procedure for a 25th Amendment removal-from-office-on-grounds-of-incompetency.

One last point: CNN's corporate parent, Time Warner, donates to the theatrical troupe that staged a Trump assassination play, with Trump dressed up as Caesar, being butchered. They refused to stop donating to them during the tempest over that.

CNN's Fareed Zakaria gushed over the play like "Trump's" wounds after he was stabbed a dozen times.

What was that play? It was a recontextualization of an existing bit of drama, right?

It was taking "Julius Caesar" and putting Trump's face on it.

CNN had no problem with it -- they rather seemed to like it.

So now Trump takes another bit of staged drama -- low drama, but drama nonetheless -- and sticks a CNN logo over the head of the guy Trump tackled during a WWE event.

What's the difference?

I can only think of two differences:

1. Trump's "attack" is nonlethal and silly.

2. You can't stab a corporate entity -- corporations, oddly enough, are incorporeal -- but you certainly can stab (or shoot) a president.

So once again we have the media in hysterics over the speculative possiblity that their collective, many-thousands-of-lives could be at some hypothetical level of increased risk, while not giving a fuck at all that the only president this country has is routinely being exposed to much more toxic levels of direct personal incitement to harm.



