Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
maraleia

Rhodes Scholar Reporting the News Show Discussion

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, ruby24 said:

It's sad that it's kinda getting brushed aside (except for during the convention I guess), because Trump sucks all the attention away from everything else.

I've been saying this to my friends for a while now because it's infuriating. If the media mentioned this as often as they mention how disliked she is, I'd be less incensed. Then again, I feel I am in no way settling or choosing the lesser of two evils or whatever other bullshit I keep hearing. I've liked HRC since 1992 and I'm thrilled to be voting for her.

Jut to bring this back on topic - I'd love to see Hillary on Rachel once more before the election.

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post

2 hours ago, Grommet said:

I decided - no, I want to actually go and vote for the 1st woman president. Even if it is just checking a box and putting a sheet in a scanner (I miss the old voting booths and pulling the levers!).

I feel the same way you do--want to go stand in front of others and cast my vote the way it's been done for centuries. 

45 minutes ago, ruby24 said:

This is the case for me too! I'm so proud of that, although I guess it's my first three votes, because I got to go for Obama twice :)

I'm not one of those younger people who doesn't see the significance in electing our first female president, I think it's amazing. It's sad that it's kinda getting brushed aside (except for during the convention I guess), because Trump sucks all the attention away from everything else. I mean, when she stepped on that debate stage, THAT was a historic moment that probably nobody watching even noticed. Only men have ever debated each other for the presidency, so that in itself was big.

I've never felt great about Hillary herself but I'm probably going to cry when she is elected.  I'm of that age, too, where discrimination was blatant and entrenched and if you said something, you were told you were too sensitive (because you're a woman, of course!).

I'm much older than Rachel but I love that she has such a sense of history and she can describe events from the past in terms that feel current.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

TRMS just tweeted this

Rachel Maddow MSNBC ‏@maddow  8m8 minutes ago

2 exclusives at top of the show tonight: (1) new poll, (2) advance look at a bombshell story that will hit the campaign tmro. 9pm ET, MSNBC

Looks promising.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, ruby24 said:

I mean, when she stepped on that debate stage, THAT was a historic moment that probably nobody watching even noticed. Only men have ever debated each other for the presidency, so that in itself was big.

I noticed! That's what I was thinking last night when Rachel said there was one thing that was historic about the debate . . . Trump's stance on nukes. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

If the Castro Connection is really as big a story as Rachel made it out to be, I hope it will at least influence voters in Southern Florida to think again about Trump.  We all know he's a liar, but maybe this will be something they actually care about.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, NextIteration said:

I'm pretty amped to vote as well, I think I'll do so early in the next day or so.  My daughter got her absentee ballot at school yesterday - it's already sent back, she called and was all "Mom, Mom, do you realize that my first two votes were for the first Black president and then the first female president, how cool is that?"

Your daughter's lucky. After college it was 20 years before a Presidential candidate I voted for won - Clinton '92.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Clinton was my 4th presidential vote - I remember actually crying with disappointment when Carter lost, I thought we were headed for a nuclear winter for sure.

Morning Joe hasn't even acknowledged the new Eichenwald piece (no real shock there) I wonder if it will breakthrough to the general cable news media more, later this morning.  To be honest, his first piece about all the worldwide ethical challenges tRump's business interests present - didn't break through as much as it should have.

And I'm terrified again. Every single time I start to feel an equilibrium that this country really does know better than to elect tRump, I quickly start swirling around the drain with worry.  After that debate performance, how can anybody still believe that this man should run the country?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, cattykit said:

but I'm probably going to cry when she is elected.

I've been thinking of taking a day trip to Rochester to do this. And cry. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

While the length of our election system is usually wway way too long, I'm almost thankful for the amount of time that good reporters have to dig up all these illegal and otherwise shady business deals that Trump has been involved in, and can publish them.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Plop.  Heh.

If you are ever in Miami - don't let the fact that all the GOPers go to Versailles color your opinion about it, amazing Cuban food.  I was really disappointed when they closed their South Beach outlet, which meant we again had to drive from the beach all the way to Calle Ocho.  Amazing Café Cubano as well.

Oh and you'll see all the retired Cuban men in their guyaberas playing dominoes. :)

Edited by NextIteration
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, attica said:

I've been thinking of taking a day trip to Rochester to do this. And cry. 

Swing by Albany and pick me up.

 

14 hours ago, NextIteration said:

And I'm terrified again. Every single time I start to feel an equilibrium that this country really does know better than to elect tRump, I quickly start swirling around the drain with worry.  After that debate performance, how can anybody still believe that this man should run the country?

I was calm for a few weeks after the convention but now I find myself longing for Steve Kornacki and his map showing Trump can't win.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I hate to say this, but I'm enjoying BriWi's show.  I was a fan before his "fall" because he reminded me of my (dear departed) brother who had a penchant for telling "stories" & embellishing, exaggerating the circumstances.  These stories were always funny & sometimes like BriWi's "close calls" serious, but our whole family of six siblings couldn't resist him & his "take" on life.  I'm glad the brass are giving him another chance & he seems to be appreciating the opportunity.  IMHO, no one can describe a bad situation, like what happened in Hoboken today, like him.  Just sayin'.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

12 hours ago, Grommet said:

I was calm for a few weeks after the convention but now I find myself longing for Steve Kornacki and his map showing Trump can't win.

Read this; it cheered me up.

I was glad that Rachel admitted nobody's going to care much about the Cuban story....except 50k Cuban immigrants in Miami, which may make a difference.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, I howled the whole way through the opening of Friday's show, and I'll bet Rachel is trying to get that Grand Rapids reporter/anchor for an interview.  Wow, that reporter/anchor *does* have stones, to use Rachel's term.  Plus there is the bonus of the random zig-zags of the Trump campaign.  "Surprise, here we are!  *Nobody* expects the Trump campaign!"  (Monty Python reference for some readers.) 

I hope that reporter gets to move to a bigger market, if she wants to.  How thrilling to find yourself being called "having stones" by Rachel Maddow.  When you got up that day to cover an arts fair for your job. 

And Rachel reading the morning news before her fishing expedition.  That quote was wonderful.  I was watching the Peres event, had no idea that Mr. Trump was also up and tweeting that we needed to "check out the sex tape".  Rachel is positing that this is a turning point.  We'll see.  A lot of days left, and a lot of looney tunes yet to be played. 

Now Rachel showing a rogue's gallery of images of Gingrich, Trump, Giuliani, and asking if *these* men are the ones to try to make an issue for a cheated-upon wife who stood by her man.  (To quote HRC from 1992, although she was saying she was not the "stand by your man" type in the famous 60 Minutes interview.) 

Okay, now she is reading a friggin' description of Trump's appearance in a Playboy softcore porn video.

It is now twenty minutes into the show.  You and your staff should go fishing now, Rachel, and leave the screen blank for the rest of the hour.  You have just earned a month's salary, and given us the best twenty minutes of television I have seen in a very long time.

OMG, the graphic behind her.  The escalator, the little geometric figure on it, with a downward arrow. 

Edited by jjj
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

Rachel was so lit up re the MI reporter's ambush that fireworks were shooting out of her butt. I love it when she lights up like that.

Edited by suomi
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎9‎/‎30‎/‎2016 at 8:14 PM, jjj said:

Okay, now she is reading a friggin' description of Trump's appearance in a Playboy softcore porn video.

I can't recall the exact quote but it was something like "I'm sure the guys at the newspaper were not at all happy that Donald Trump made them view a porn video, but professionally, somebody had to do it."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Quilt Fairy said:

I can't recall the exact quote but it was something like "I'm sure the guys at the newspaper were not at all happy that Donald Trump made them view a porn video, but professionally, somebody had to do it."

Yes, she was hilarious, lamenting that the Buzzfeed reporters had to resort to digging through the bargain bins of adult videos. 

If Rachel is up late, I know what she is reading.  Or, if she has early fishing plans on Sunday, I know what will distract her like the tweets did early on Friday.  Finally, some actual pages of Trump tax returns, sent anonymously to the New York Times.  Monday's show (and all the MSNBC shows until then) will be lit like the Rockefeller Center Christmas tree:  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html 

Share this post


Link to post

I keep forgetting to talk about Peter Kiernan's return visit the other day, and Rachel's follow up about the matching pledge. First out of the way, the shallow: he blushes adorably. Second, I was really moved about how he expressed in detail what taxes mean to him as a soldier: "Taxes paid for the medevac when my buddies' legs were blown off."  I just checked over at the crowdpac page, and they've reached the match goal. So with the match pledge, they're at almost $6.2 million as I type this.

Now, with the leak of the 95* return, I doubt Trump will release more current ones. But won't it be a great thing if that 6.2 mill can go forth and do some work?

*Side note: I'm tantalized by the notion that Marla Maples might have been the source of the leak, since she and DJT were joint filing back in 95.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, attica said:

*Side note: I'm tantalized by the notion that Marla Maples might have been the source of the leak, since she and DJT were joint filing back in 95.

As soon as I read that Maples had signed the return, I had the same thought!  It did come from a NYC Zip Code, but it is easy to get someone to mail an item for you, and to put any kind of return address on a document (return address was "Trump Tower").  I suggested over in the MSNBC thread that an assiduous investigative reporter surely must have tried to get the 1990s returns from Maples; that is not *this* leak, but it would have been another path to the documents.  But her divorce and financial agreement would not allow her to be known as a source of the leaks.  (It would have been hilarious if someone who is not at Trump Tower had written the "Trump Tower" return address and then attached insufficient postage.)  But I am sure it had plenty of stamps on it.  Whoever sent it a couple of weeks ago must have been wondering if it had ever arrived!

If Rachel goes after a quirky side aspect of this story, it will be that the accountant had to use his Selectric typewriter to add the minus sign and first two digits of the loss on the form, because his software could not handle a number that large.  In fact, another NYT story this morning said that the NYT reporters thought it was a doctored document because of that.  A major reporter on the story went to Florida to meet the former accountant in a bagel shop* to confirm that these were the documents he had prepared.  I can see Rachel with a Selectric in front of her as she reports this story.  "Do you know what this is?  Let's talk about how people created documents in the 20th century."  And we will get a history of the typewriter in two minutes.  I can dream...  (*A bagel shop in Florida is not exactly the Bernstein-Woodward garage meeting with Deep Throat, but it will do.) 

Edited by jjj
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, jjj said:

A bagel shop in Florida is not exactly the Bernstein-Woodward garage meeting with Deep Throat, but it will do.

Where else would a retired NY accountant want to meet?

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

I appreciate the point that Rachel was trying to make vis-a-vis SCOTUS at diminished capacity and the election, but she had to stretch the hypothetical to absurd degrees to make it. No, there really isn't a razor-thin margin in any of the swing states that will push the decision to the court. Pretending otherwise is unattractively alarmist. "But what ifffffffff!" isn't what I come to TRMS for.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

The 2000 election/recount was a freaking nightmare, so Rachel sent my imagination into a tail spin last night over this one and a court that could tie vote.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Just thankful that investigative journalism still exists in the decade of listicles and click bait.  Such a great story about the tax returns.  Would be great if more docs can be leaked.   I have to wonder what were some of the issues the reporters and editor had to consider over whether to release the tax return other than Trump's threat of a lawsuit.  Is there an accountant-client privilege?  Could the accountant give up more details?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I wouldn't be surprised if the daughter sent it, I think her name is Tiffany, the daughter he has with Maples. The one the media treats as the less than attractive daughter.The one that you never really hear Trump complimenting like he does Ivanka.  I don't care how complimentary she was toward him at the convention. 

Although, Tiffany might consider herself lucky on this front as I find him crossing the appropriate line when it comes to how dads should speak about their daughters when it comes to some things he's said about Ivanka. 

Edited by Keepitmoving
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

5 hours ago, Hanahope said:

Just thankful that investigative journalism still exists in the decade of listicles and click bait.  Such a great story about the tax returns.  Would be great if more docs can be leaked.   I have to wonder what were some of the issues the reporters and editor had to consider over whether to release the tax return other than Trump's threat of a lawsuit.  Is there an accountant-client privilege?  Could the accountant give up more details?

Yes, there is an accountant/client privilege, like the one for doctors/patients & lawyers/clients.  It's a matter of state law, but I expect that most states have it -- here, it would be NY (where the client lives & where the transaction occurred) & maybe Florida  (where the accountant now lives), both of which are sophisticated in terms of legal matters.  But the newspaper reporters had seen the returns by the time they interviewed the accountant, so the accountant was free to discuss what those parts of the returns showed (though not any background info, etc.).  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, 3pwood said:

Yes, there is an accountant/client privilege, like the one for doctors/patients & lawyers/clients.  It's a matter of state law, but I expect that most states have it -- here, it would be NY (where the client lives & where the transaction occurred) & maybe Florida  (where the accountant now lives), both of which are sophisticated in terms of legal matters.  But the newspaper reporters had seen the returns by the time they interviewed the accountant, so the accountant was free to discuss what those parts of the returns showed (though not any background info, etc.).  

If, as rumor suggests, the tax returns were sent by wife number two Marla Maples, then I think that accountant/client privilege does not apply (I am not a lawyer, and I do not play one on television).  Maples was the Trump spouse in 1995 and signer of the joint return, so I assume she has the right to release her own tax return.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, attica said:

I guess there's privilege and there's privilege: Trump accountant disses Donald.

With regard to the original NYT story, he only confirmed that the items he was shown were true copies of documents had had signed as tax preparer.

The article you attached strikes me as a form of professional advertising.  Like the TV commercials by lawyers who say "Have you been injured in at work?  I can get you millions of dollars in settlement money, just as I've gotten for other victims."

Granted, I haven't read every word of every story, but I don't believe the accountant revealed details of the returns or the work he did for Trump.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I never thought I'd say this in a million years but I kind of felt sorry for Sarah Palin last night.  When they were talking to Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace about Palin's VP debate and everyone was just laughing at her.  It just struck me as being mean for no reason.  Its one thing to talk about problems she had but just the laughter was unnecessary.  Especially since you were the idiots who chose her.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, M. Darcy said:

 

I never thought I'd say this in a million years but I kind of felt sorry for Sarah Palin last night.  When they were talking to Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace about Palin's VP debate and everyone was just laughing at her.  It just struck me as being mean for no reason.  Its one thing to talk about problems she had but just the laughter was unnecessary.  Especially since you were the idiots who chose her.

 

Steve Schmidt had a big hand in choosing Palin for the VP spot.  They wanted a "Game Changer" and did not do enough research on her and it bit them on the ass.  Nicole Wallace was left with the day to day handling of the nightmare that is Sarah Palin.   Palin went off the rails and became nothing but a headache for the campaign.  I have no sympathy for anyone involved in that mess, however, I can see why Schmidt and Wallace can't control their snark levels where Palin is concerned.    

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

6 hours ago, clb1016 said:

With regard to the original NYT story, he only confirmed that the items he was shown were true copies of documents had had signed as tax preparer.

The article you attached strikes me as a form of professional advertising.  Like the TV commercials by lawyers who say "Have you been injured in at work?  I can get you millions of dollars in settlement money, just as I've gotten for other victims."

Granted, I haven't read every word of every story, but I don't believe the accountant revealed details of the returns or the work he did for Trump.

If I remember yesterday's reports clearly enough, the accountant is retired, living in Florida, and possibly in his 80s.  Doubt he wants new clients.  Doesn't seem like to vote Trump/Pence either.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, kassygreene said:

If I remember yesterday's reports clearly enough, the accountant is retired, living in Florida, and possibly in his 80s.  Doubt he wants new clients.  Doesn't seem like to vote Trump/Pence either.

I didn't mean to imply that he's looking for new clients.  I was just responding to a suggestion that he might have been guilty of a breach of client confidentiality.  In my opinion (but what do I know?) what he did was no worse than saying "I've done a great job for my clients" since he didn't reveal any specifics of the tax returns that had not appeared in the NYT.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm going to have to re-watch.  she said something about the media understanding one story but not another in a tease.  which story was she talking about?  i missed it.  thx.  

Share this post


Link to post

I was glad Rachel, Joy Reid, et al. didn't try to spin the vice presidential debate in favor of Tim Kaine. 

The story about Sarah Palin calling Joe Biden Obiden was hilarious. I don't think I'd heard that one before. 

Rachel's bit today about how all the big guns in the Democratic party are out in force for Hillary right now gave me a huge warm fuzzy. Special kudos to Bernie Sanders, who is really coming through.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

8 minutes ago, SierraMist said:

Is there no longer an MSNBC forum?

Nope.

All the individual news network forums are gone per this announcement

I'm trying to ask if a 24Hr News thread is ok in the Genre forum before I start one. That announcement is confusing for those of us who want to talk about the anchors/hosts and stories that appear on these networks which don't garner enough discussion for their own dedicated show forums. I guess this is a way to cut down on unwanted discussion... *shrugs*

Edited by Jaded
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, no more good bad and ugly.  Anyway, Rachel Maddow is the number one reporter on the news networks, AFAIC.  I had no idea that a forum existed just for her show.  The Atlantic story yesterday, with the background of the Lincoln Douglas debates, was a terrific piece of journalism. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Was there an actual show at 9 on Thursday night? I had people over and was looking forward to watching the midnight rerun during cleanup/dishwashing but at that point there were only hurricane updates. Which I totally understand. Fingers, toes, arms and legs crossed for Florida/Georgia/South Carolina.

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, atomationage said:

The Atlantic story yesterday, with the background of the Lincoln Douglas debates, was a terrific piece of journalism. 

Agreed, but it was soooo topped by the Russian submarine popping up by the rubber fishing dinghy video. That was damn fine television. Amb. McFaul's mock-pearl-clutching at the Russian profanity delighted me too.

I hate hurricane season on the news. Breaking: it's gonna rain pretty hard. People should evacuate. Here's 20 minutes of footage of empty streets because people evacuated like you've been screaming at them to do. Here's Stalwart Reporter standing by a tree bending in the wind. And on and one for hours at a time. Everybody does it, so I deduce it must garner ratings. But: gah. Upside? I have a free hour to whittle down my dvr backlog.

Edited by attica
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

It's been so weird--I'm so used to all politics all the time--I really missed Rachel last night.   I understand the hurricane coverage--altho I question the safety of all the media sending reporters IN to the hurricane for the sake of coverage, but I'm appreciating a little political break before the debate this weekend.

But Rachel could come back with her "lesson of the day" like the Lincoln/Douglas piece and I'd love it--I learn something every time I watch her show.  She's a good teacher.   And I loved the submarine--I like when the crew gets to laughing at her.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, Medicine Crow said:

I don't think "anyone" saw the Donald Trump "news" coming.

But is anyone really surprised?   I'm looking forward to Rachel's show tonight (Pacific Time Zone here)

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Nice try Rachel--I know Mark Burnett's gotten religion, but if he has/had that footage it will never see the light of day---he'd be admitting to running a hostile workplace for women.    Not the only one of his shows where this has probably happened.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Medicine Crow said:

SO, bible-thumping, lily-white Mark Burnett is hiding evidence of Trump's misogynistic behavior towards women on The Apprentice.  They're both pigs!!!

Also, Burnett is married to Roma Downey. I wonder how she is reacting to this latest news.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size