Did I hear this right? President: She's shocked that I picked her. She's in a state a shock. Reporter: I'm not, thank you Mr. President. Trump: That's OK, I know you're not thinking, you never do. Reporter. I'm sorry? Trump: No, go ahead. Go ahead.pic.twitter.com/Ss280FA7mK
-
-
Replying to @Kamuela @TalalNAnsari
The POTUS belittling a reporter is a strong and reliable signal of fuckery -- not to mention, a generator of the "pettiness" that he relies upon for exploitation. This would be unconditionally condemned a few years. That it's only a passing sound bite is a sign of normalization.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Kamuela @TalalNAnsari
But wildly asymmetric justifications and consequences.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Kamuela @TalalNAnsari
He's the head of a government. His actions deliberately and malignantly stoke partisan animus as a means of maintaining power. The idea that he gets "do to whatever the hell he wants" willingly defends and solicits tyrannical powers -- like, definitionally.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Kamuela @TalalNAnsari
Belittling and debasing journalists is very much part of carving out a space wherein his supporters reject all information that doesn't align with what he says. It's creates power in it's purist form -- raw allegiance without regard for principles or evidence.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes. They're almost universally bad because profit has primacy. EG CNN has panels that create emotional salience divorced from the topic and shifted to partisanship. It's not an educational medium. But, the reaction against Trump itself is an immunological response.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.