New Yorker Magazine article: The Making of the Fox News White House

Agreed. Democrats calling for impeachment are few and far between.

 

Too few and too far between.

Trump is the reason why impeachment exists.

This is true regardless of party.

 

If he's done something impeachable, then I am in favor of impeachment. What I don't like is people claiming Democrats keep talking about impeachment when they aren't... at least at this point.

 

Libs are certainly talking about impeachment, so I can see why the other side generalizes.

 

I will agree with that, but it's tough to give it to the right. The Right believes that half of the Republican party are liberals. Yet it is only some of the liberals in the Democratic party that are calling for impeachment. Bernie Sanders has said that we aren't there yet. He's certainly a liberal. Elizabeth Warren is a liberal and she's not currently in favor of impeachment, yet.

So, it isn't like even the liberals are unified in calling for impeachment. But many of those on the right would call Obama a liberal so I don't think they are making any distinction. So Democrats that aren't super liberal aren't calling for impeachment, many of the liberal Democrats aren't calling for impeachment, but still, they are claiming that the Democrats keep griping about impeachment. So I don't really cut them any slack for their inaccurate whining.

 

Pelosi too.

I see what you're getting at. At their extremes Republicans are way more restrained with calling out lunatic cpac issues than Democrats are (is there an LPac? LPacca?).

I'm more prone to call Dem leadership corporate sellouts though.

 

Yes. Democratic Leadership are absolutely corporate sellouts.

 

Exactly.

 

how did you get to be so mistrustful of your fellow man?

 

Experience.

 

biff, if you say Tlaib doesn't matter I'm gonna call "wasism" and "sexism" on you

Tlaib joins a small but growing group of House Democrats who are pressing forward with formal efforts to unseat the president against the wishes of party leaders.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) introduced articles of impeachment on the first day of the new Congress, in January. And Rep. Al Green (D-Texas), who had championed his own articles in the last Congress, is vowing both to reintroduce a similar resolution in the coming months — and to force lawmakers to vote on it on the floor.

Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), another vocal impeachment supporter, has not reintroduced his articles in the new Congress. But after last week's House hearing featuring damning allegations from Trump's former personal attorney, Cohen told The New York Times that impeachment "is almost going to be impossible not to deal with."
​

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...chment-articles-against-trump-by-end-of-month

 

I think there should be some representation for conservative media in those debate panels if Fox News is struck out.

Not Federalist level, the political opposite of HuffPo..., but Heritage or National Review level.

 

The other side should be talking about why any responsible person fulfilling their sworn oath of office would not be compelled to hold an impeachment trial.

I have not heard anything yet as to why Trump should not be impeached.

 

Maybe people are too PC when it comes to their fundamentalist cousins...

Bill Maher has a word or two to say about that.

 

And Bret somewhat nails it, the news like substance, or "news product" as he puts its, has to be artificially differentiated from the puddle of toxic poop, insanity and disinformation that draws in most of its viewership. I'll leave you to imagine how realistic that is, even on a good day.

The only part that he missed is the article itself.

Even this lonely fig leaf is itself now covered in **** and designed to appease rather than apprise or appraise. Hence the spiking of stories and such.

It's Russia Today, but more boorish and obvious.

Maybe Bret can lead a rebrand - from "Fox News Channel" to "Fox Batshit Insane Racist Authoritarian Propaganda Spreader with Added News Product" to more clearly differentiate the sides of the house.

 

One thing that I find frustrating in regards to Fox News is that nearly all over their main stories on their home page are political. Looking right now, out of the 5 large pictured links, 2 are anti-democrats, 1 is pro Trump, 1 is anti CNN, and the other is a random story. On CNN, the 3 big pictured links are Royal Family, R Kelly, and anti-vax. Don't get me wrong, CNN does that same as Fox, but just doesn't seem to be at the same level.

I try to pay attention to what both sides are saying, but sometimes it's so painful to look at Fox News.