726

CNN hosts told they're "complicit" in Trump re-election in live interview (www.newsweek.com)

submitted 1 year ago by Rapidcreek@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

208 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] doc@fedia.io 289 points 1 year ago

Published July 1st.

Presidential historian Allan Lichtman took aim at CNN's News Central hosts Monday morning for being "complicit" in Donald Trump's political rise amid the presumptive Republican nominee's bid for a second term.

Lichtman, appearing with hosts John Berman and Sara Sidner, shifted gears during his comments about recent polls between Trump and Democratic incumbent Joe Biden.

He believes Trump's remarks during last week's debate should have grabbed more headlines than Biden's much-discussed struggles.

"I love you guys in the media, but I have to say, you are complicit in Donald Trump lying and conning his way to the presidency. All of the attention has been on Biden's faltering debate, but Donald Trump's debate was vastly worse," Lichtman said. "It was based entirely on lies. More than 30 significant lies.

"He threatened our democracy by saying he wouldn't accept the results of a fair election. That he would seek retribution. Why wasn't that the headlines? Why wasn't that the greatest concern from the debate, rather than all of the focus on Joe Biden."

In his rebuke of the media's coverage of Trump, he continued:

"There's an old saying, it's not just the evil people who wreak havoc on the world, it's the good people who don't do enough to stop them. And the media right now is complicit in Donald Trump gaslighting his way to the presidency and threatening our democracy," Lichtman added.

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 255 points 1 year ago

I feel so fucking vindicated right now that a presidential historian is saying the same exact thing I've been saying. Trump's "performance" was horrifying and nobody said a word. Its infuriating.

[-] hypnoton@discuss.online 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You must only care about the horse race aspect of the election then.

There are people who don't see "beat the other guy no matter what" as the aim of our great political project.

The aim of our great political project is "Lets work together to create a world worth living in, a world of broadly shared prosperity, a world with the infrastructure that is the envy of the world, a world where housing is a human right, and so are healthcare (including in the rural areas), retirement, food, education and transportation. Let's work together to explore space and to discover new science. A world that's unpolluted. A world where being poor is not a slow motion death sentence. A world where everyone is in a position to build some savings instead of living paycheck to paycheck. A world of internet connectivity as a human right, including in the most rural area. A world of net neutrality. A world of limited copyrights and limited patents. A world void of monopolies as a matter of principle. A world of personal bodily autonomy. A world where privacy is protected for most people but where the superrich have transparency requirements because they can greatly affect our wellbeing with a stroke of a pen. A world with a wealth ceiling and no billionaires."

[-] STUPIDVIPGUY@lemmy.world 98 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No shit dude. You need to focus on the present first, though, so that we can continue to work towards that future you speak of. Because right now, the authoritarians threatening to make that future inaccessible are more relevant.

[-] skeptomatic@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago

He's complicit

load more comments (57 replies)

[-] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 45 points 1 year ago

One option, and that's a possibility.

The other, and that possibility disappears.

The fact that you don't recognize that is, to me,a huge problem for the upcoming election.

load more comments (18 replies)

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago

What? Take out Biden completely. Remove his parts from the debate. Every single one of Trump's non-answers were antidemocratic. He was racist, what are "black jobs', Mr Trump? He was disconnected, talking about murder and rape crisis that dont exist. He was unhinged, and sounded like he lived in a different universe. There was nothing constructive or attractive about his remarks. You can't build America with them. None of those ideals belong in a egalitarian democracy.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

The aim of our great political project is "Lets work together to create a world worth living in,

That's all fine and dandy in theory when assuming good faith from all parts of the project.

In reality, though, one of the two major US parties is literally a fascist party now. By definition, fascists don't argue or negotiate in good faith. Furthermore, their goals are so horrid that compromising towards them at all is inevitably a worse concession than reasonably acceptable.

A lot of the reason why it got this far and continues to get even worse is the Dem party insisting that "bipartisanship" is the highest political virtue of all. No matter what you're giving up.

a world of broadly shared prosperity, a world with the infrastructure that is the envy of the world, a world where housing is a human right, and so are healthcare (including in the rural areas), retirement, food, education and transportation

That the Dems almost always fail to move society in that direction is in large part BECAUSE they insist on cooperation with people who are pathologically opposed to honest good faith cooperatiLet's work together to explore space and to discover new science. A world that's unpolluted. A world where being poor is not a slow motion death sentence. A world where everyone is in a position to build some savings instead of living paycheck to paycheck. A world of internet connectivity as a human right, including in the most rural area. A world of net neutrality. A world of limited copyrights and limited patents. A world void of monopolies as a matter of principle. A world of personal bodily autonomy. A world where privacy is protected for most people but where the superrich have transparency requirements because they can greatly affect our wellbeing with a stroke of a pen. A world with a wealth ceiling and no billionaires."

All good ideas. And all impossible to achieve through cooperation with fascists.

Not only do they by definition argue in bad faith. They're also ideologically opposed to ALL of it.

[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

Compromising with an opponent who refuses to compromise in return is not compromise - it's surrender.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] btaf45@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

There are people who don’t see “beat the other guy no matter what” as the aim of our great political project.

If the neofascist movement captures America the 'great political project' will be over. End of story.

load more comments (11 replies)

[-] krashmo@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

Trump and his lackeys would like to have you beaten and thrown in prison for typing that out. Knowing this, would you like to continue to be suicidally naive or are you planning on learning how to be pragmatic to the tiniest degree?

[-] Arbiter@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

And your solution is..?

load more comments (5 replies)

[-] capt_wolf@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The man has continuously been given visibility and a platform for the past 4 years to whine and carry on about a stolen election that wasn't and the failings of America that aren't. Ask yourself, was the same thing done for Obama? Bush? Clinton? Bush Sr.? Certainly not... What about Romney? Perot? McCain? Hillary? Gore? Dole? Why not?

Why is this fellonious, mutant Cheeto still being given a voice and opportunity to continue to influence American history? Whether it's for ratings or for some ulterior agenda, we'll probably never know. Shame on all of them, either way. I'm sure it all comes down to money, but whatever it is, it's disgusting...

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 119 points 1 year ago

They treated Trump as a real candidate back in 2016, artifically elevating him, all because Hillary thought it was an easy win.. CNN is absolutely complacent

[-] UntitledQuitting@reddthat.com 30 points 1 year ago

Complicit. But complacently so.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] NutWrench@lemmy.world 73 points 1 year ago

CNN: "Biden's too old! He's unfit to be president."

"What about the convicted felon and rapist? Isn't he unfit?"

CNN: * crickets *

load more comments (9 replies)

[-] Veneroso@lemmy.world 65 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Biden is boring and poor for ratings. Biden has dementia!? That's ratings!

Trump: (Ratings intensify)

Literally every day from 2016 to 2020 there was a new scandal. Some new horrible thing he said. It was never ending. Then there was January 6th and it was finally quiet. Quiet for nearly two years....

RNC: if you announce your candidacy, we won't pay your legal bills.

DOJ: About those classified documents.....

Trump: I'm running for president!

RNC: ...

Trump: RNC needs new leadership, here's my daughter in law. Also all funding goes to me first.

RNC: Trump is your God Emperor!

...

Supreme Court: Trump is your God Emperor!

Project 2024: Trump is your God Emperor!

Project 2024: Submit and there won't be bloodshed!

CNN: Yes!!!

MSNBC: Yes!!!

[-] NutWrench@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Yup. This is that "liberal news media" that conservatives keep yammering on about. The one that's owned by six corporations.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 51 points 1 year ago

The real issue is that today's Republican party is not based on facts at all, it's based on a collective hallucination, wishful thinking, alternative facts, which Republicans believe instead of actual facts.

The vast majority of the lies Trump spewed during the debate are things that Republicans believe are true. When each side has their own facts, the simple act of fact checking becomes a partisan exercise. And holding their candidate to account equals a partisan witch hunt.

This forces each media outlet to choose a side. If they want any attention at all from the Right, they have to lie like them. Outlets that stick to objective facts will be immediately dismissed by half the electorate. While we'd like to think most outlets worth following will choose actual facts, alternative facts increase your base and may lead to more profits.

[-] hypnoton@discuss.online 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

While we'd like to think most outlets worth following will choose actual facts, alternative facts increase your base and may lead to more profits.

Capitalism is agnostic on facts. It is profit and wealth accumulation driven.

A lot of people were assuming that no fake product would ever be in demand, and thus profit seeking was at least aligned to reality. Greed is good they said.

Ha!

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If I have to see this false prophet Lichtman's bowl cut one more time, I swear to god... Here are just a few facts about this asshole:

It's really not some miracle that he got these elections right, considering he waits until last-minute to predict them.
He gave a full-throated endorsement of Hillary Clinton... only to predict she'd lose later on in the race.
He hasn't given his fucking prediction for THIS cycle yet.
Even based on his own "keys," he is not remaining impartial because he has no idea whether an alternative candidate would get all the keys just the same.
He inflates incumbency despite Biden's 37% approval-rating and losing pre and post-first debate in polls... Which if you look at historical trends, that NEVER bodes well for the incumbent.

By the way I emailed this shithead challenging his methodology (and I remained much more neutral than this) to no response. In fact I wouldn't be the least-bit surprised if the only reason he wants Biden to remain the nominee is to ensure he maintains record for election predictions by later predicting his easy defeat.

Nate Silver has a far more predictive, mathematical model than this dumb fuck. He can Lichtma balls. (ok that last one I just had to out of adolescent gallows humor, but he threw the first punch with name-calling those wanting Biden to step down).

[-] TurtleJoe@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

We are long past the point where it would have been feasible for Biden to withdraw. We were past that point well before the first debate. It is too late to get somebody else on the ballot in many states, including states that then Dems potentially need, like Nevada.

Anybody still repeating the line that Biden needs to withdraw is either:

Ignorant of how election law works
A bad actor, pushing right wing/Russian talking points.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

lol says who? I can name Senators, US House representatives, senior strategists for Obama, even a former DNC Chair who fucking say otherwise. Don't bullshit me.

You're not just wrong, you may very well be outright lying. Now show me your evidence or walk away.

load more comments (12 replies)

load more comments (14 replies)

[-] lone_faerie 33 points 1 year ago

Is anyone surprised? They basically said as much when CNN was acquired by Warner Bros

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] gardylou@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

NYT too.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

My Poli sci professors and half the people I went to college with predicted most of our modern elections too.

This guy is a hack who seeks attention. The media, including CNN has talked about Trump's lies ad nauseam. Literally right after the debate they started fact checking. And they gave Biden personal interview time to patch up his debate performance but he instead used it to show us he is out of touch and considers this either a game or a personal vendetta.

What you guys and this "historian" are actually mad about is that the media won't cover for Biden in the same way Fox and friends cover for Trump.

[-] UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

They do have more conservative donors

[-] vxx@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I was going to comment again that you can't donate to CNN, because they're publicly traded, but then I found out that billionaires find workarounds.

Here's a CNN article about Jeff Bezos donatimg 100 million directly to two political CNN commenters:

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/07/20/media/van-jones-bezos-100-million/index.html

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] hypnoton@discuss.online 15 points 1 year ago

The Democratic Party cannot fail us.

It is only us who can fail the Democratic Party.

[-] Glytch@lemmy.world 53 points 1 year ago

The democratic party had consistently failed us, at least since the continuation Reaganism under the Clinton administration, but that's just my lifetime and probably started before then.

[-] magnetosphere@fedia.io 16 points 1 year ago

Well, that certainly is one interpretation.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (11 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024

726 points (100.0% liked)

politics

25059 readers

2364 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News