All Episodes Discussion: 2017 Season

[attica]

"Oh, look, it's a castle! Oh, look, it's a castle!" Aww, I feel your sneezing. But, as a lifelong sufferer, I can attest that anti-allergy treatments have gotten waaaaaay better in the last decade. On my current (over the counter!) regimen, I can now cuddle all the puppies and not die. Which wasn't something I could do in 2005. And even though I still get a tiny bit sneezy in the fall (damn you, goldenrod!!!), I no longer get the allergic rhinitis that used to accompany it, putting me off my feet for a week. Better living through chemistry!

I really enjoyed the Jane Mayer interview. She's always good, but I especially liked her musing about whether or  not Pence is a 'chump.' (My suspicion is that he is both stupid and evil, but I'm not a journalist!) The interview was so good, I couldn't in good conscience switch over to the baseball game, except at commercial! Torment!

[M. Darcy]

Quote

The interview was so good, I couldn't in good conscience switch over to the baseball game, except at commercial! Torment!

As someone who is a Mets fan....and then switched to the Nats....I don't have that problem :-(  A full night of MSNBC for me! 

Quote

I really enjoyed the Jane Mayer interview. She's always good, but I especially liked her musing about whether or  not Pence is a 'chump.' (My suspicion is that he is both stupid and evil, but I'm not a journalist!)

That really was a good interview.  

[M. Darcy]

Another night of mentioning the suckitude of the Bush Administration!  So far Rachel is the only place I seen mentioned that one of the Katrina screw-ups is being nominated to head Homeland Security. 

[Calvada]

I'm not sure why Rachel seems so stunned by Trump's behavior regarding bereaved military families.  Doesn't she remember what he said about McCain being a POW?  His attacks on the Khan family?  He's never shown any understanding of their sacrifice, or any respect for their service.  He seems incapable of any genuine feeling, any normal human emotion.  It is amazing though.  He's a man in his 70s - he's lost family members, I'm sure he's had friends who have lost parents/spouses/children.  Most people by this stage in their life have developed some ability to express sympathy in a non-offensive manner.  I don't expect any president to be as eloquent as Lincoln, but good golly, he's got a staff.  Can't they work up some talking points for him?  Some suggested expressions of sympathy?  Send someone to the nearest Hallmark store to buy out the sympathy card section!

Is Rachel right, and it's all deliberate to distract us from asking what really happened in Niger?  If so, I think that fits my definition of a "high crime."

[jjj]

Wow, the first segment tonight about the losses of Abraham Lincoln's sons -- beautifully done, and the letter, which I have seen before, was a wonderful reminder of compassion in leadership.  I thought she was leading up to a reference to the novel that won the Man Booker Prize in England last night (Lincoln in the Bardo, which is a challenging read, but highly honored -- and about the day of the burial of Willie Lincoln). 

I just want to dwell on the opening minutes, not on the abyss of character she went on to describe. 

3 minutes ago, Calvada said:

I'm not sure why Rachel seems so stunned by Trump's behavior regarding bereaved military families.  Doesn't she remember what he said about McCain being a POW?  His attacks on the Khan family?  He's never shown any understanding of their sacrifice, or any respect for their service.  He seems incapable of any genuine feeling, any normal human emotion.  It is amazing though.  He's a man in his 70s - he's lost family members, I'm sure he's had friends who have lost parents/spouses/children.  Most people by this stage in their life have developed some ability to express sympathy in a non-offensive manner.  I don't expect any president to be as eloquent as Lincoln, but good golly, he's got a staff.  Can't they work up some talking points for him?  Some suggested expressions of sympathy?  Send someone to the nearest Hallmark store to buy out the sympathy card section!

Is Rachel right, and it's all deliberate to distract us from asking what really happened in Niger?  If so, I think that fits my definition of a "high crime."

Yes, this is totally in character-- and not just about bereaved families, but about any other human being he is related to. 

[M. Darcy]

Quote

I'm not sure why Rachel seems so stunned by Trump's behavior regarding bereaved military families.

I think its because this is still way beyond anything he has done before.  Insulting the family on the way to meet the body (I'm blanking in the correct term) is a new low even for him.  And, I also think she is right - something happened in Niger that he can't deal with (which is par for the course). 

That really is a beautiful letter that she read.  She must have the bat phone for all the times she has needed to contact Michael Beschloss this past year. 

[teddysmom]

Agree, she was really upset last night to the point that it seemed she couldn't even find the words for how angry she was. 

I don't know if he's trying to cover something up, or if he just went to "I've done more than anyone" default when asked why he hadn't mentioned it and had he contacted the families. 

I would be surprised if, had he been briefed on our mission in Niger, he was even paying attention or remembered what he was told.  All he seems to remember for more than three hours is what Sean Hannity says the previous night. 

When he said "When the Congresswoman says it again, you'll find out" I thought, man you need to come up with better bullshit. You use the same lame threat every time. No one is scared of you.  

[sistermagpie]

51 minutes ago, teddysmom said:

I would be surprised if, had he been briefed on our mission in Niger, he was even paying attention or remembered what he was told.  All he seems to remember for more than three hours is what Sean Hannity says the previous night. 

 

Yeah, this is another time where to me it doesn't sound like he was intentionally distracting from anything he was actually worried about. I don't think he has a clue what was going on in Niger any more than I do. I think he started the whole thing based not on any distraction but just his usual way of turning everything into a way to flatter himself. In that moment it seemed to him that he hadn't contacted people because it was a big deal for him to do, which led to him talking about how great he was for doing it, which led to the fantasy where he was the guy who invented it, along with expressions like "prime the pump." I don't think for a second he had a clue that it would cause an uproar. And when he was talking to the widow, he thought he was being sensitive and then barely remembered what he said.

This is a guy who wasn't able to think of anything nice to say about his own newborn daughter being like her mother besides that she didn't yet have a body he could judge sexually. 

[teddysmom]

Trump isn't brilliant enough to be that devious. Look at how he basically fucks himself over with his tweets.  He might as well take out a billboard "I KNEW EVERYTHING FROM THE BEGINNING. I DID IT. I WANT OUT. IF I RESIGN WILL YOU JUST LEAVE ME ALONE?" 

When Rachel was doing her whole "This is diversion, this is diversion", i kept thinking, you are giving this man way too much credit.  If it was Dick Cheney, then yeah I'd agree. But Donald Trump just defaults to "I'm the best Obama sucks" whenever he's questioned on anything. 

[ahisma]

Tonight's episode was a stunning furtherance of the Niger story. The fact that he had the statement in hand ready to be read but avoided it sounds like he knew something. He probably had some of his beloved generals (Pentagon or White House staff) explain forcefully that his travel ban screwed over their best anti-terrorism partner in Niger and then, oops, dead soldiers in Niger. All I could think was a very long, drawn out expletive.

[Hanahope]

On 9/22/2017 at 0:22 PM, ScoobieDoobs said:

Still, if this is all "awful, but lawful", what can Rach accomplish by covering this story?  Not sure.  But certainly, at best, it can be extremely embarrassing, right?  Or is this a waste of time, and nothing effectively taints Trump & sticks?  I refuse to believe that.  I suspect Rach does too 

My hope is that in a future administration, with a more honorable Congress and an honest president, a law will be pass requiring an accounting for these funds as well.

 

10 hours ago, ahisma said:

He probably had some of his beloved generals (Pentagon or White House staff) explain forcefully that his travel ban screwed over their best anti-terrorism partner in Niger and then, oops, dead soldiers in Niger.

And now we wonder why was Chad on the list?  Because of Exxon?  or just because he wanted some countries on the list that weren't automatically connected to muslims, so that people would stop calling it a "muslim ban?"  Either way, trump really blew things due to his incompetency, and lack of caring about anyone but himself.

[teddysmom]

Well now the Niger story gets a little more interesting. Problem is, by acting all squirrelly about it, they just drew more attention to it.  Journalists realize maybe they are trying to cover something up, and start digging. 

The world isn't dangerous enough, these idiots have to keep fucking over our allies.  For oil. Or running out of copy paper. JFC

[Morrigan2575]

I was on another board this morning where they talked about Rachel's coverage of this story. I didn't watch last night but, I'm so glad Rachel is continuing to look at the Niger part of the story and not get distracted by the parade of Trump lackeys putting the focus on the phone call.

[ScoobieDoobs]

Rachel's discussion of Chad last nite was fascinating.  Is she the only one trying to come up with an answer as to why Trump ignored the issue of these soldiers killed in Niger for nearly 2 weeks?  Shady connection to Exxon & Tillerson?  Stay all over it, Rach!

LOD centered his show last nite on Kelly & why his speech was so off-base & just wrong.  Rach didn't go there at all.  She didn't need to.  She was covering plenty of vital stuff & asking the questions nobody seems to be asking.  Just confirmed to me why both Rach & LOD are each providing such different but important coverage & commentary on daily Trumpisms.

Hoping she continues to cover the latest on Puerto Rico, particularly as Trump just gave himself a 10 on his handling of it.  Take that as a challenge, Rach!

Edited October 20, 2017 by ScoobieDoobs

[teddysmom]

22 minutes ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Rachel's discussion of Chad last nite was fascinating.  Is she the only one trying to come up with an answer as to why Trump ignored the issue of these soldiers killed in Niger for nearly 2 weeks?  Shady connection to Exxon & Tillerson?  Stay all over it, Rach!

LOD centered his show last nite on Kelly & why his speech was so off-base & just wrong.  Rach didn't go there at all.  She didn't need to.  She was covering plenty of vital stuff & asking the questions nobody seems to be asking.  Just confirmed to me why both Rach & LOD are each providing such different but important coverage & commentary on daily Trumpisms.

Hoping she continues to cover the latest on Puerto Rico, particularly as Trump just gave himself a 10 on his handling of it.  Take that as a challenge, Rach!

Agree. I was wondering where she was going with the "diversion diversion" stuff on Wednesday, I just thought it was Trump being his usual dumbass self, not knowing what had happened and just using the opportunity for more self aggrandizement.  But the stuff with Chad, from Exxon's fines, to our State Dept fucking with them over a copy of a passport, it's starting to make sense.  Gosh, four people killed because this Admin is destroying relationships with allies left and right.  Where are the hearings, Congress? 

I watched LOD's stuff on Kelly and it is spot on.  It seems like Chris, Rachel & LOD do a great job complimenting each other's shows, and BriWi wraps up the day's news at 11 with his own great guests. No wonder ratings are up so much for the network. 

[Calvada]

Someone needs to point out to Sarah Huckabee that Gen. Kelly is just a man, not a saint.  The American people have every right (some might view it an obligation) to question those in government, whether in the military, the White House, the Congress, the judiciary, or a GS-6 employee in the Department of Agriculture.  Pointing out that a government employee has misspoken is what we're supposed to do.  And it is completely fair to ask whether he was repeating bad information he had been given, or was he deliberately lying about the Congresswoman's statements.  Gen. Kelly and his family have my sympathy on the loss of his son, but that doesn't give him a free pass on telling the truth, especially when he's doing it from the White House.      

[ScoobieDoobs]

MSNBC is pushing Rach's Monday interview with Eric Holder like crazy, but I can't see how it could be any better than the interview she did with Sarah Chayes.  Wow, this should be required viewing for all.

Great coverage tonite on Puerto Rico, Rach, and expressing specifically that what's happening there now is not because of the hurricane anymore, but directly because of "failed recovery".  Glad she did a brief comparison to the TX hurricane recovery.  Really liked her deservedly snarky retort to Trump's grading the Puerto Rico hurricane recovery as a 10.

And Barbara McQuade was back, but only said Trump was "raising red flags", & NOT doing anything "lawful but awful", as she has described Trump's actions in the past.  Luv that Rach is focusing on Trump interviewing US AG's in ONLY areas which directly affect his businesses -- NYC, DC & Palm Beach.  Suspicious much?  Stay on it, Rach!

Btw, anyone catch what Rach said about getting criticism for her report last nite on Chad?  She seemed pretty happy that people were watching.  But as she emphasized -- she said nothing that was untrue.  I think she's onto something big, and I agree with her that something doesn't seem right here -- particularly how Trump has refused (& continues to refuse) to discuss what happened to the soldiers in Niger.

Edited October 21, 2017 by ScoobieDoobs

[izabella]

3 hours ago, Calvada said:

Someone needs to point out to Sarah Huckabee that Gen. Kelly is just a man, not a saint.  The American people have every right (some might view it an obligation) to question those in government, whether in the military, the White House, the Congress, the judiciary, or a GS-6 employee in the Department of Agriculture.  Pointing out that a government employee has misspoken is what we're supposed to do.  And it is completely fair to ask whether he was repeating bad information he had been given, or was he deliberately lying about the Congresswoman's statements.  Gen. Kelly and his family have my sympathy on the loss of his son, but that doesn't give him a free pass on telling the truth, especially when he's doing it from the White House.      

Kelly said he was at the ceremeny, and he remembered her remarks, and he was stunned at what she said.  So he doesn't have the excuse that Trump always uses when caught in a lie, "Well, that's what I was told."

[alias1]

I don't know if Rachel is on to something about the secrecy on what happened in Chad, but it seems like everyone watches her program now.  Did John McCain express concern about that mission before Rachel's show?  Suddenly there's going to be an investigation.  Maybe it's just that Trump didn't want any attention brought to it until he was forced to address it, but it is suspicious that they are just now sending people to investigate.

[ScoobieDoobs]

As I've watched today & will watch tomorrow, I've noticed nobody else but Rachel is talking about Chad -- and a possible tie-in to what happened in Niger.  Why?  Is Rachel alone on this?

[Keepitmoving]

21 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

As I've watched today & will watch tomorrow, I've noticed nobody else but Rachel is talking about Chad -- and a possible tie-in to what happened in Niger.  Why?  Is Rachel alone on this?

Rachel is alone a lot of times IMO, that's one of the reasons why I watch her. The other tv journalists are usually late to the game when it comes to the real important stuff. She, that staff of hers, which she admitted in and interview goes through a fast turnover because of how hard they work. They do their homework unlike these other news programs on the other networks and some of the others on MSNBC. But some other show did cover Chad a bit and they focused on the country being on the Muslim ban list. But I'm not sure I heard them cover in detail on how they pulled out of Niger and how they were a huge presence there in fighting ISIS.  I think it might have been on Morning Joe after Rachel covered it. But of course Rachel is relentless on shit that matters so no one is covering this like her.  Nope, they are overly focused on Trump's latest diversion, fanning the culture war flames with the back and forth between he and this congresswoman over his shitty phone call to our deceased soldier's wife.

But Rachel's credibility is in tact, down to investigating they model/type printer markings on paper to detect fraudulent information, so freaking impressive. So if she's covering, the only question I have is why are other journalist not doing their job like she is? Which is a rhetorical question, because the rest of them are just lazy and/or just aren't as smart to know how to cut through the bullshit "news" and get to what's most important and informative like she can. I think it's the latter, they just aren't as skilled as she is to cut through it all in this era of Trump fake news and diversion.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Keepitmoving

[AmandaPanda]

If you want to talk about your feelings on Sarah Huckabee Sanders, positive or negative, there are many places on the Internet where you can do so. This is not one of them. 

[jjj]

I loved the footage from Rachel's 2010 trip to Alaska, where she suddenly found herself in the middle of the street in a discussion of Eric Holder's "record" as an anti-gun activist:  Alaskan:  "Look at his voting record!"  Rachel:  "Uh, he never held elected office".  Alaskan #2: "He's anti-gun".  Rachel: "What has he done that is anti-gun?"  Alaskan #2: "I don't have the specifics, but I know he is anti-gun".   And a few more riffs like this.  (I remember that trip to Alaska, but don't think we ever saw that.  She seemed to have a great time there in the bar where they broadcast!) 

[Calvada]

The irrational beliefs about Holder made me think of my late grandmother, who loathed Ronald Reagan because she was convinced he was going to abolish Social Security and steal all the money people had paid in..  She said he liked to pretend he wasn't a senior citizen (after all, he wore makeup) and he was going to go after all seniors.  There was nothing we could say to convince her that this would not happen.  

You have to love Rachel, so politely persistent until she got the Alaskans to admit they didn't know the facts.  I've seen that clip before and enjoyed seeing it again. 

[ktwo]

3 hours ago, jjj said:

I loved the footage from Rachel's 2010 trip to Alaska, where she suddenly found herself in the middle of the street in a discussion of Eric Holder's "record" as an anti-gun activist:  Alaskan:  "Look at his voting record!"  Rachel:  "Uh, he never held elected office".  Alaskan #2: "He's anti-gun".  Rachel: "What has he done that is anti-gun?"  Alaskan #2: "I don't have the specifics, but I know he is anti-gun".   And a few more riffs like this.  (I remember that trip to Alaska, but don't think we ever saw that.  She seemed to have a great time there in the bar where they broadcast!) 

I don't remember that trip to Alaska, I remember this trip to Alaska!  http://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/rachel-maddow-show/2015-09-02 

"President Obama is a thin person. I have seen him eat before, but I have never seen him eat like a whole thing. He eats a little of something and then doesn`t finish the thing. I have seen it myself. 
Do you know what? He ate all of that salmon jerky. He wolfed it."

[ScoobieDoobs]

Honestly, I was more interested in Rachel's excellent latest update on what we now know as the likely reason for the deaths of the soldiers in Niger, than the Eric Holder interview.  Did Rach just want to make extra sure she got the story right, given she was asking about a possible connection to Chad last week (which does not seem to be the case)?  Maybe, maybe not.  I have no prob with what she said last week about Chad -- because everything she said & all the questions she was asking were dead on right.  OK, so what she discussed about Chad & what happened to the soldiers in Niger were not connected.  So what?  I still hope Rachel follows up on what she was discussing on Chad.

[jjj]

1 hour ago, ktwo said:

I don't remember that trip to Alaska, I remember this trip to Alaska!  http://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/rachel-maddow-show/2015-09-02 

Here you are, Rachel live at the Tap Root tavern in 2010:  http://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/rachel-maddow-show/2010-10-26   With a handoff from Keith Olbermann.  Hard to believe that was only seven years ago.  I remember because she flew through Seattle, and just having her fly through our airport was energizing.

[M. Darcy]

I am glad that Eric Holder finally said that racism was probably one of the reasons that people were so irrational about him.  

Quote

I've seen that clip before and enjoyed seeing it again. 

It feels like it was yesterday - but it was a few elections ago now. 

[Galloway Cave]

10 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Did Rach just want to make extra sure she got the story right, given she was asking about a possible connection to Chad last week (which does not seem to be the case)? 

There still isn't an answer as to why Chad pulled their military out of Niger. If the Chad military had been there, would they have been in that area and would the terrorists have ambushed the Americans? There still may be a connection there, but it may never be made. I would still like to know why Chad removed their military.

[Hanahope]

14 hours ago, jjj said:

I loved the footage from Rachel's 2010 trip to Alaska, where she suddenly found herself in the middle of the street in a discussion of Eric Holder's "record" as an anti-gun activist:  Alaskan:  "Look at his voting record!"  Rachel:  "Uh, he never held elected office".  Alaskan #2: "He's anti-gun".  Rachel: "What has he done that is anti-gun?"  Alaskan #2: "I don't have the specifics, but I know he is anti-gun".   And a few more riffs like this.  (I remember that trip to Alaska, but don't think we ever saw that.  She seemed to have a great time there in the bar where they broadcast!) 

Yeah, don't you just love how they have no facts,  just feelings and an unsupported belief.  One might say a "heartfelt" belief.  

[attica]

5 hours ago, M. Darcy said:

I am glad that Eric Holder finally said that racism was probably one of the reasons that people were so irrational about him.  

Yeah, agreed. He was sitting there dancing around that, and I was, Really, EH? Can't think of anything? Anything? Bueller? Come on!

[teddysmom]

2 hours ago, Hanahope said:

Yeah, don't you just love how they have no facts,  just feelings and an unsupported belief.  One might say a "heartfelt" belief.  

It's as if The Colbert Report and The Opposition are based on actual people who don't care about facts, just feelings. 

[M. Darcy]

Quote

He was sitting there dancing around that, and I was, Really, EH? Can't think of anything? Anything? Bueller? Come on!

I just kept saying out loud - racism, racism, racism....He finally heard me.  I understand why he didn't just say it but at this point, just go for it. 

[jjj]

Okay, where is the diner where Rachel gets her ginormous breakfast after PT?  I would just lose it if I were sitting at a diner counter and Rachel plunked down and ordered  breakfast and a gallon of coffee! 

[attica]

I know!! But calling him 'Larry' O'Donnell just sounds weird. Do people call him that? (If we were in England, I suppose it would be Lozzie. But we're not.)

Going back a few days to the condolence letter coverage. I mentioned to a friend of mine, who is a Lincoln scholar, that Rachel read one of Lincoln's letters on air. He approved of going to the 'gold standard' of condolence letters. He immediately guessed, "The Bixby letter, right?" "No," I said, "it was the one to Fanny..." He cut me off. "Not Fanny McCullough!?" "Yep, that's it." "OMG, I can't read that one without The Feels. Onions, cutting everywhere." He even got slightly choked up in our exchange. So Bechloss gets points from my pointy-headed Lincoln friend for pulling out the big guns for Rachel.

[M. Darcy]

Its good that Rachel is giving updates on that poor kid that the Trump Administration is holding hostage (because really, that's what happening).  Hopefully she can get to a doctor very soon.  

[Morrigan2575]

I have to admit I was disappointed and annoyed with Rachel last night. I found her interview f that Wapo writer who "broke" the story followed the same MSM bullshit. Focusing on the Clinton/DNC aspect (which we sort of 'knew' but, not confirmed) and, allowing for people to detract and distract from the fact that the initial request/money came from a Republican Candidate (probably Jeb). Yes she brought it up but, it was mostly just a oh BTW. Plus totally overlooked the fact that it didn't matter who paid for it because the fraking thing was right and confirmed! Yes, again she did mention it but, she didn't give it any weight IMO.

I expect better from Rachel, she usually covers the heart of the matter and doesn't get distracted. Here, I felt she fell for the same salivating 24 news MSM bullshit. ??

Edited October 25, 2017 by Morrigan2575

[attica]

2 hours ago, M. Darcy said:

Its good that Rachel is giving updates on that poor kid that the Trump Administration is holding hostage (because really, that's what happening).  Hopefully she can get to a doctor very soon.  

Success! Money quote from the ruling:

Quote

It is unclear why undocumented status should change everything. Surely the mere act of entry into the United States without documentation does not mean that an immigrant’s body is no longer her or his own. Nor can the sanction for unlawful entry be forcing a child to have a baby.

Edited October 25, 2017 by attica

[meowmommy]

I cannot believe Rachel spent so much time on the JFK document snafu.  I guess she's using it as a metaphor for 45's general incompetence, but really, why is this such a big deal?  Who, other than conspiracy junkies, really cares?

[kassygreene]

Ow.  Are you to young for 1993?  Back then, who didn't care?  Even Don Bellasario, who was apparently the only producer in Hollywood who had actually met LHO and been vastly unimpressed by him, wrote an episode of Quantum Leap about the Kennedy assassination.  Believe me, lots of grizzled people care, and they are probably going to be bitching right through the weekend.

And it's not a metaphor, it's a concrete example of the incompetence.  He's been boasting about the document release for days, and it's been scheduled for twenty-five years.

[meowmommy]

3 hours ago, kassygreene said:

Ow.  Are you to young for 1993? 

I wish.  I turn 60 on Sunday.  I remember, as a first-grader, the Kennedy assassination.  I remember Mark Lane speaking at my college campus in the 1970s.  I get that it's been a pop culture reference for decades.  I don't know why it's a big deal now for Rachel to focus on, when there are so many other issues that are actually relevant to our current society.  JMNSHO.

[jjj]

Heh, Rachel checking in with Barbara McQuade, former U.S. Asst. Attorney General who was fired in the massacre with the other 47 or so by the Trump DOJ earlier this year:  Ms. McQuade expressed regret about the surprise and unexplained (so far) sudden resignation of Dana Boente, the US attorney for Eastern District of Virginia who was running so many DOJ operations (as described by Rachel).  And Ms. McQuade said Boente was the person who called to fire her; when she saw his name on the phone call, she said "Is this my Grim Reaper call?"  He said, "Yes, I'm afraid it is."  I don't think I had heard this conversation described previously.

And cute, Rachel offering Joy (filling in for Lawrence O'D) her blocks of news that never got used in Rachel's show tonight, because of the breaking Mueller news.  Hopefully some of it can still be used on Monday, but if arrests really happen on Monday, those blocks will never be seen...

I think Rachel and Joy get talking and kind of forget that they actually are supposed to be handing off the shows -- they are treating the handoff as a little mutual interview/conversation.  Five minutes of "handoff" tonight!  I loved it.  Basically, we are getting a mind dump of all the thoughts running through Rachel's head during her own show. 

36 minutes ago, meowmommy said:

I wish.  I turn 60 on Sunday.  I remember, as a first-grader, the Kennedy assassination.  I remember Mark Lane speaking at my college campus in the 1970s.  I get that it's been a pop culture reference for decades.  I don't know why it's a big deal now for Rachel to focus on, when there are so many other issues that are actually relevant to our current society.  JMNSHO.

Hey, Happy Birthday!!!

Edited October 28, 2017 by jjj

[possibilities]

1 hour ago, jjj said:

if arrests really happen on Monday, those blocks will never be seen...

I wish they'd put it all on the website; they have scripts, and it would be such a waste if they never got used.

[bad things are bad]

Quote

 I remember Mark Lane speaking at my college campus in the 1970s

OMG, Meowmommy, me too! I roared at the Keith Hernandez Seinfeld episode with the "re-enactment" and the magic loogie; clearly one of the writers had seen the Mark Lane roadshow as well

Rachel gonna have some fun tonight!

[Morrigan2575]

On 10/27/2017 at 11:53 PM, possibilities said:

I wish they'd put it all on the website; they have scripts, and it would be such a waste if they never got used.

That's a great idea, it would be nice if they has a few web videos of stories that get bumped for breaking news. I'd totally watch them.

[jjj]

1 hour ago, Morrigan2575 said:

That's a great idea, it would be nice if they has a few web videos of stories that get bumped for breaking news. I'd totally watch them.

Yes, as I said on Friday, it was hard to imagine that any of the prepared segments would air on Monday if there were arrests -- and here we are.  Yes indeed, I'd read the un-used scripts and watch the film clips!!! 

[Hanahope]

Rachel asking a lot of good questions.  Where’s the rest of the money?  Who are the ‘high-ranking’ trump campaign officials?  How high did Papadopoulos’ emails go?  Why did P’s indictment say so much about Russia while  the others did not?  Are there more to come? I’m sure.  I’m curious as to what real estate Manafort bought or from who?

The lack of leaks of such blockbuster information is fantastic and amazing. 

[jjj]

No, Rachel, do not play the "Election Night" theme music without a trigger warning.  In fact, NBC or MSNBC needs to get new theme music, because it was like hearing the worst breakup song ever.  It made me shiver just to hear that music for the first time since November 8.   356 days ago, and that music made me feel like it was happening again.

[Hanahope]

More questions by Rachel.  Why was P’s indictment sealed for months?  Who did he surreptitiously get admissions from and are they on tape?

[M. Darcy]

Quote

No, Rachel, do not play the "Election Night" theme music without a trigger warning

Heads up - you'll hear it a week from tonight!  I'm guessing she'll mention who wins the VA Governors race.  

Quote

Who did he surreptitiously get admissions from and are they on tape?

I bet he got lots of stuff.  Because honestly, I bet there none of them were thinking that someone could be wearing a wire.