ebk57 January 18, 2018 Share January 18, 2018 Love Rachel's new sign off - "That's Weird" So perfect. 7 Link to comment
alias1 January 18, 2018 Share January 18, 2018 As much as Rachel hates talking about the sex stuff, she's so good at following the money. I have a feeling we'll be hearing more about the hush money in the future. 5 Link to comment
attica January 18, 2018 Share January 18, 2018 OMG, the b-roll they had on in a loop of Corey Lewandowski descending a spiral-ly staircase was making me dizzy. Blergh. Link to comment
M. Darcy January 18, 2018 Share January 18, 2018 Quote Love Rachel's new sign off - "That's Weird" For a second I thought she was going to mention, Time to go to Prison! While I love Lawrence's show, I do miss that on Friday nights. 4 Link to comment
Hooper January 18, 2018 Share January 18, 2018 Well, happily, we can have our cake and let us eat it too. It's not like Rachel couldn't end pretty much any evening's feature story with "Time to go to Prisons", regardless of what show comes on after hers. 6 Link to comment
meowmommy January 18, 2018 Share January 18, 2018 13 hours ago, ebk57 said: Love Rachel's new sign off - "That's Weird" So perfect. I'm going to be Contrary Cathy here. I didn't like that she's trying to make her sign-off a "thing." If it's something that you want to do, just do it, but don't freaking announce it. That makes it forced and fake and phony. I didn't like that she said she always wanted Chet and David to go back and forth at their sign-off, when she is not old enough to remember Chet and David doing their sign-off. And I thought it was interesting that she included Dan Rather's "Courage," when that sign-off was almost universally mocked at the time for its lameness. And finally, she's running an opinion show, not a news show, for despite her constant efforts to make it seem like she breaks news, she almost always highlights and comments on what someone else has reported, so positioning herself in line with Chet and David and Uncle Walter is disingenuous. JMNSHO; YMMV. 1 Link to comment
ahisma January 19, 2018 Share January 19, 2018 (edited) It was a joke. Those ended up being the last two words she spoke Tuesday night, so she used it as a humorous setup to revisit the story about Bannon's testimony (or lack thereof) and the lawyer situation. She said straight out she doesn't have a sign-off and suggested facetiously that the closest she might come could be "That's weird." But she didn't use it as her sign off last night, nor do I expect she will, unless it becomes a running joke that pops up now and again. Also, she is a total history geek and news nerd, and watches tons of archive footage. I'm sure she has seen hours of Chet and David. Edited January 19, 2018 by ahisma Fixing the autocorrect bobbles 7 Link to comment
M. Darcy January 19, 2018 Share January 19, 2018 Quote It's not like Rachel couldn't end pretty much any evening's feature story with "Time to go to Prisons", regardless of what show comes on after hers. And she can show one of her charts with their names listed of those going - she does love those. Link to comment
Hanahope January 19, 2018 Share January 19, 2018 Glad she reported on the recent news that the FBI is now investigating the NRA for accepting contributions from yet another Russian connected to Putin, and then the NRA made contributions to trump's campaign. Keep following that money. 6 Link to comment
ktwo January 20, 2018 Share January 20, 2018 Quote And I thought it was interesting that she included Dan Rather's "Courage," when that sign-off was almost universally mocked at the time for its lameness. I said the same thing as soon as I saw that in the signoff montage! Rachel is only a year younger than me so if I remember it, she certainly would, plus she loves Dan. Link to comment
ButterQueen January 20, 2018 Share January 20, 2018 For such a busy news night, as she mentioned to Chris Hayes, her show was sorely lacking tonight. Too much about the Queen. Link to comment
Morrigan2575 January 20, 2018 Share January 20, 2018 19 minutes ago, ButterQueen said: For such a busy news night, as she mentioned to Chris Hayes, her show was sorely lacking tonight. Too much about the Queen. I couldn't figure out where she was going with that. Should have known the lead up was to Trump's party celebrating himself. 1 Link to comment
alias1 January 20, 2018 Share January 20, 2018 I thought she was trying not to have too much hard news tonight in case there was real breaking news. Actually I loved seeing the jubilees of the queen. She is so dignified. Something sorely lacking in this country right now. Even though her segment finally lead into Trump, for a shining moment it was not about Trump. 4 Link to comment
jjj January 20, 2018 Share January 20, 2018 I loved all the updates to the Coronation Chicken recipes! I never heard those previously. I can't even remember where that segment ended up. 2 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs January 21, 2018 Share January 21, 2018 On 1/19/2018 at 10:01 AM, Hanahope said: Glad she reported on the recent news that the FBI is now investigating the NRA for accepting contributions from yet another Russian connected to Putin, and then the NRA made contributions to trump's campaign. Keep following that money. And keep on following the Inauguration 100 mil & the Stormy dough! Yeah, Rach, the sex part of the Stormy story is "oogy". Was that the word she used? I was thinking . . . icky, gross, disgusting & barf-inducing, but I think we're thinking alike, right? Just keep concentrating on the Stormy dough & that slimy character Michael Cohen's part in it. Yeah, Rach, you keep trying to contact Michael Cohen & see if he issues more lame denials -- as well as the sleazy characters who are apparently "slushing" around in that 100 mil Inaugural windfall. Btw, I luv, luv, luv the pic in the background labeled "SLUSH" when Rach talks about that 100 mil Inaugural fund! Link to comment
Hanahope January 21, 2018 Share January 21, 2018 Yes, that inauguration slush fund needs to be investigated. Keep up the pressure Rachel. Don’t let them think we’ve forgotten about it. I’m sure they wish we would. 1 Link to comment
teddysmom January 22, 2018 Share January 22, 2018 Has anyone else read the Glenn Simpson transcript? Rachel is right, it is like a spy novel. I can't figure out the Bill Browder stuff. He's in cahoots with the Russians but he blew the whistle on them? Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs January 23, 2018 Share January 23, 2018 Yeah, Rach, yeah! You asked yet another question I'd luv, luv, luv for you to ask EVERY nite -- just why does Jared get to see the President's Daily Brief when he has NOT gotten FULL security clearance? AND also what you asked in addition, Rach -- just WHY has Jared FAILED to receive full security clearance, in spite of having tried to get it for the past year? Why, grinning Jared, why? Keep the hot spotlight on him, Rach! Link to comment
Tunia January 23, 2018 Share January 23, 2018 (edited) "Trump was excited that important people were calling him." Good Lord. Hey, that's reason to ignore all security warnings, advice and briefings before actually taking the Oath. Such a pathetic adolescent... ScoobieDoobs asked: Quote just why does Jared get to see the President's Daily Brief when he has NOT gotten FULL security clearance? AND also what you asked in addition, Rach -- just WHY has Jared FAILED to receive full security clearance, in spite of having tried to get it for the past year? Per Rachel, President Obama, at the end of his eight years in office, had seven members of his staff who were authorized to access the President's Daily Brief. trump, by comparison, already has fourteen with such access, including his non-cleared son-in-law Jared Kushner. How many staff members does it take to explain the PDB to the P? Answer: 14 and counting. Edited January 23, 2018 by Tunia 2 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs January 23, 2018 Share January 23, 2018 (edited) That Schumer interview was painful. And Rach seemed very, very skeptical on what he was dishing out. Me too, Rach. Me too. Edited January 24, 2018 by ScoobieDoobs 2 Link to comment
M. Darcy January 23, 2018 Share January 23, 2018 When Rachel was leading up to the Jared story and she was asking "who could it be" I admit, I did yell out "Its Jared!!!". 1 Link to comment
teddysmom January 23, 2018 Share January 23, 2018 Quote When Rachel was leading up to the Jared story and she was asking "who could it be" I admit, I did yell out "Its Jared!!!". Hee! Me too. But I had read the story about Wendy Deng Murdoch over the weekend. Quote Yeah, Rach, yeah! You asked yet another question I'd luv, luv, luv for you to ask EVERY nite -- just why does Jared get to see the President's Daily Brief when he has NOT gotten FULL security clearance? AND also what you asked in addition, Rach -- just WHY has Jared FAILED to receive full security clearance, in spite of having tried to get it for the past year? Why, grinning Jared, why? Keep the hot spotlight on him, Rach! I have a feeling if the Dems take back the House they'll be asking ALL KINDS of questions about why this WH is letting people without proper clearance see PDBs, talk to foreign officials, etc. And it's a pox on the GOP that they aren't. Too busy writing fake memos about what the FBI didn't do I guess. 1 Link to comment
Hanahope January 23, 2018 Share January 23, 2018 Jared, who has no security clearance meeting with foreign government officials all by his lonesome. Nary a state department or anyone else involved. Jared also getting to view the PDB, again, without a security clearance. What could go wrong? But her emails! Link to comment
ahisma January 23, 2018 Share January 23, 2018 I remember reading about Trump talking foreign phone calls without State briefing after he won the election Electoral College, but Rachel spelled out far more clearly that he had explicitly been given instructions on the order of the calls, procedure, briefings needed, etc. Un-freaking-believable. His picture must be in the dictionary under hubris. 1 Link to comment
Tunia January 24, 2018 Share January 24, 2018 Gee, Rachel ~ Melania can answer the WH phone this weekend...she'll be in town! Link to comment
jjj January 24, 2018 Share January 24, 2018 22 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said: That Schumer interview was painful. And Rach seemed very, very skeptical on what he was dishing out. Me too, Rach. Me too. Was there a Monday Schumer interview as well as on Tuesday? Your post says "22 hours ago", but the thread seems wonky. If this is the Tuesday interview (3 hours ago), yeah, his defense was very defensive and unconvincing. Link to comment
Hanahope January 25, 2018 Share January 25, 2018 Another flipper! Yay! Can't wait to hear who else Mueller flipped. Gates definitely sounds like a possiblity. I wonder if trump realizes that you don't have to be under "oath" to be convicted of lying to the FBI in an interview. Link to comment
alias1 January 25, 2018 Share January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Hanahope said: Another flipper! Yay! Can't wait to hear who else Mueller flipped. Gates definitely sounds like a possiblity. I wonder if trump realizes that you don't have to be under "oath" to be convicted of lying to the FBI in an interview. The way Trump kept harping about Hillary not being under oath, I'm sure he doesn't realize you don't have to be under oath to commit a crime by lying to the FBI. I was kind of disappointed in the press people that no one seemed to know that. On the other hand, maybe they just didn't say anything to keep Trump in the dark. I'm assuming his lawyers must have corrected him later. He is so clueless. 2 Link to comment
attica January 25, 2018 Share January 25, 2018 I thought the National Pancake Day 'flippin' flapjacks' thing was an entirely charming and fun way to ease into the Mueller investigation. Plus, if you're an old like me, you might have been a fan of Carly Simon's back in the day, and your adolescent brain might have undeleteably memorized the following song: Says spittle on the griddle As you drop that batter Into that hot butter Round and brown Piping hot, Like as not What we got is Hotcakes! Hubba, hubba, hubba, Puffing up fluffy and sweet. Now, wait: And now: flip it! [sax break to end] 1 Link to comment
M. Darcy January 26, 2018 Share January 26, 2018 Quote I was kind of disappointed in the press people that no one seemed to know that. On the other hand, maybe they just didn't say anything to keep Trump in the dark. I'm assuming his lawyers must have corrected him later. And, I'm sure for them its like talking to a brick wall sometimes. You know those people you have to explain things over and over and over. Ha! Rachel is suspicious of McGahn because of all those positive stories about him lately. 2 Link to comment
ahisma January 26, 2018 Share January 26, 2018 1 hour ago, M. Darcy said: Ha! Rachel is suspicious of McGahn because of all those positive stories about him lately. That was cracking me up! Setting himself up to be a hero, hmmm? :D 1 Link to comment
jjj January 27, 2018 Share January 27, 2018 Was there a pancake story on Thursday? I have the podcast and will search for it if yes. On 1/25/2018 at 10:38 AM, attica said: I thought the National Pancake Day 'flippin' flapjacks' thing was an entirely charming and fun way to ease into the Mueller investigation. Plus, if you're an old like me, you might have been a fan of Carly Simon's back in the day, and your adolescent brain might have undeleteably memorized the following song: Link to comment
attica January 27, 2018 Share January 27, 2018 1 hour ago, jjj said: Was there a pancake story on Thursday? No, not quite. Rachel just mentioned the existence of National Pancake Day as a way to tease that Mueller was about to flip some more witnesses. It was filler for a between-commercial bumper. Link to comment
jjj January 27, 2018 Share January 27, 2018 1 hour ago, attica said: No, not quite. Rachel just mentioned the existence of National Pancake Day as a way to tease that Mueller was about to flip some more witnesses. It was filler for a between-commercial bumper. Thank you! I'll see if that made it onto the podcast. Nice segue. Pancake Day (for observers) in 2018 is February 13 -- it is always on Shrove Tuesday in Great Britain and the USA. Link to comment
Hanahope January 28, 2018 Share January 28, 2018 Joy Reid on for Rachel on Friday. She interviewed Nick Ackerman, former Watergate prosecutor, who said not only can trump be indicted even as a sitting president, he very likely cannot pardon his family if they are indicted and/or prosecuted due to conflicts of interest from the Constitution. Great news! 4 Link to comment
ScoobieDoobs January 30, 2018 Share January 30, 2018 Rachel pushing & pushing & pushing & pushing this icky State of the Union makes me sad. Ugh, it really is all about ratings & working for the big corp & sucking up for advertiser $'s, eh? Ugh. I'd like to believe better of you, Rach, I really would. Ew, just ew. I can't watch . . . Link to comment
Calvada February 1, 2018 Share February 1, 2018 That tiny font on the departures list hurts my eyes. I feel like I've just visited the optometrist. I think they are going to have to go to a scroll across the bottom of the screen, maybe job title, name, and departure date. And I'm glad that Lawrence addressed Rachel turning her back to the camera. I thought of someone just tuning in at that point, and wondering what was going on. I was happy it was back to just Rachel tonight. I hate those panels they do for things like the SOTU - too much talking over each other. Any more than 3 people makes me crazy. 3 Link to comment
ottoDbusdriver February 1, 2018 Share February 1, 2018 The whole spy v. spy meeting definitely story needs more explaining -- why wouldn't they just meet in a neutral nation vs.s sneaking the senior Russian spy officials into the country ? And it's true that all sorts of shit goes down on a daily basis now and gets buried because there so many more outrageous incidents,--- stories like the CDC director resignation (apparently due to trading tobacco stocks), Trey Gowdy announces he's not running for re-election, the spy meeting that appears way more important than the coverage it is getting.. All of it is getting buried by 'the memo'. 4 Link to comment
Quilt Fairy February 1, 2018 Share February 1, 2018 4 hours ago, ottoDbusdriver said: All of it is getting buried by 'the memo' You forgot the Ben Carson business. 7 Link to comment
attica February 1, 2018 Share February 1, 2018 11 hours ago, Calvada said: And I'm glad that Lawrence addressed Rachel turning her back to the camera. I thought of someone just tuning in at that point, and wondering what was going on. I actually laughed when she turned conspiratorially over her shoulder and mouth "Steve Bannon!" 5 Link to comment
BuckeyeLou February 2, 2018 Share February 2, 2018 Gads, Rachel had me freaking out on Wed. night talking about the Top Russian Spy master was in the US discussing secret stuff, and this was Never revealed to our news media! Media outlets in Europe saw it reported in Russian news sources....WHY were the Russians having secret meetings in DC?! And the head Russian guy was on the Sanctions list to NOT be allowed in the United States! 5 Link to comment
izabella February 2, 2018 Share February 2, 2018 (edited) Rachel also pointed out the suspicious coincidence that, right after the Russian spy chief came to town, Trump decided not to implement the additional sanctions that Congress had passed and he had signed. I'm glad Rachel has not taken her eye off all things Russia. The Nunes memo has taken over cable news and that makes it easy for news about things Russia did or is currently doing with the administration gets lost in the deluge. Which, I guess, is the point of the Nunes memo in the first place. I'm glad she explained the memo stuff, though. It's important to know that it's a ruse about Carter Page's FISA warrant and that Nunes worked with the WH to draft it. Edited February 2, 2018 by izabella 11 Link to comment
jjj February 3, 2018 Share February 3, 2018 Well, I have to hand it to Rachel, she's got game. We already knew that. But in a day of stricken anchor faces on MSNBC and stricken commentators, it takes some verve to come out and say, "Really? This is all it is?" I appreciate that Rachel put such a positive spin on the release of that memo, but it just did not ring true to me. And I want to believe her! The memo is not the point, but the way the memo will be used as justification for the next phase of DT protection is where the concern is. But she spent a lot of the show trying to convince us (and herself?) that the memo was not as significant as the buildup. 1 Link to comment
ahisma February 3, 2018 Share February 3, 2018 1 hour ago, jjj said: But she spent a lot of the show trying to convince us (and herself?) that the memo was not as significant as the buildup. I haven't been watching other tv news besides Rachel, but most of the print media agrees with her. The memo is a nothingburger with deep flaws. It has just enough buzzwords in it to keep the base slavering, but anyone who reads it critically will agree with Chuck Rosenberg that it's just three pieces of a jigsaw puzzle with 997 missing and no box top. (Don't know that Trump will get that even after several hours with it! So you could be right about him using it for justification anyway.) Chuck was also great at describing why keeping FISA classified info secret is important, and Adam Schiff was great at describing why Nunes has done so much damage to the Intelligence Committee. And we got our tv boyfriend, Michael Beschloss, too. Wild story about Nixon and Ailes! Great show tonight. 5 Link to comment
jjj February 3, 2018 Share February 3, 2018 Oh, I want to believe Rachel! I thought I heard the Michael Beschloss segment, but will have to listen again for the Ailes/Nixon story! And I think they have been rerunning most of the Friday evening shows on Saturday afternoons, so maybe Rachel's attitude will make more sense to me by then. 7 minutes ago, ahisma said: I haven't been watching other tv news besides Rachel, but most of the print media agrees with her. The memo is a nothingburger with deep flaws. It has just enough buzzwords in it to keep the base slavering, but anyone who reads it critically will agree with Chuck Rosenberg that it's just three pieces of a jigsaw puzzle with 997 missing and no box top. (Don't know that Trump will get that even after several hours with it! So you could be right about him using it for justification anyway.) Chuck was also great at describing why keeping FISA classified info secret is important, and Adam Schiff was great at describing why Nunes has done so much damage to the Intelligence Committee. And we got our tv boyfriend, Michael Beschloss, too. Wild story about Nixon and Ailes! Great show tonight. 2 Link to comment
izabella February 3, 2018 Share February 3, 2018 I would believe Rachel long before I'd believe anything coming from Nunes. 6 Link to comment
Morrigan2575 February 3, 2018 Share February 3, 2018 #YoMemoJokes is trending on Twitter. I'm still bracing for a Saturday Night Massacre but, almost everything I've seen points to this being a nothingburger that won't provide the coverage he wants/needs to fire Rosenstein. I'm hoping that Rachel is right to laugh at the absurdity of the memo. 2 Link to comment
chessiegal February 3, 2018 Share February 3, 2018 They left Trump alone for 3 hours to read it? My husband had outpatient surgery yesterday. We were in the waiting room when it was released. He spent between 5 and 10 minutes reading it, turned to me and said, this is a joke. There's nothing here. On the way home, he said he was looking forward to what Rachel had to say. She didn't disappoint. 5 Link to comment
Happycatisfine February 3, 2018 Share February 3, 2018 (edited) Re: Friday's show - I literally DIED when they put up the background headline or whatever that is in the upper right corner of the screen: " I don't think this means what you think it means" during the Nunes memo segments. From my favorite movie "The Princess Bride". Good lord almighty, I love TRMS and their production staff! btw, I literally came back to life to watch it some more. Edited February 3, 2018 by Happycatisfine 5 Link to comment
attica February 3, 2018 Share February 3, 2018 Before its release, Ted Lieu tweeted that the memo was lamer than Geraldo Rivera and Al Capone 's vault. Those of you of a certain age will appreciate the reference. So Rachel's mocking was right on target. 14 Link to comment
Recommended Posts