Steve Bannon is an awful father and a wife beater

[GreyhoundFan]

Jennifer Rubin has a good one: "Don’t fall for the White House spin on Stephen Bannon’s ouster"

Spoiler

Stephen K. Bannon, President Trump’s chief strategist, is out: ““White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly and Steve Bannon have mutually agreed today would be Steve’s last day,” according to a White House statement.  Since his interview with the American Prospect trashing his colleagues and undercutting Trump’s North Korea policy, it seemed only a matter of time before he was ousted. The White House will spin this as somehow presidential and responsive to calls for “radical changes,” as Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) put it, maybe even as a way to stave off staff resignations. You should not fall for it.

Maybe Bannon appealed to Trump’s worst instincts, but honestly, does the president have any good ones? It is said that Bannon’s pro-Russian views made for constant tension with hawkish advisers, but does anyone think Trump is not compromised in some fashion when it comes to Russian President Vladimir Putin? Bannon was the faux intellectual giving direction and form to Trump’s views, but Trump’s deeply warped views, glaring ignorance and defective character are the root of the problem. Trump will still talk to allies harboring the same worldview, will still tweet impulsively, will still repeat discredited hoaxes and will still be unfit for the presidency. And most ominously, the Russia investigation will still grind on, and Trump will no doubt lash out at both the special prosecutor and the media. This personnel move may buy him a brief pause in the chaos, but his presidency is living on borrowed time.

How will we know that Bannon’s departure is more than another staff shuffle? Look to see if Trump continues to campaign against Republican incumbents, obsess over news coverage, treat Russia with kid gloves, saber-rattle over North Korea and stoke racial tension.

We find all that highly unlikely. Trump knows very little else and never will imagine his base will defect.

What we don’t know is what would be left if Trump excised the ghost of Bannon and shunned the white nationalists. He’s never had a coherent worldview or domestic agenda. He can, one supposes, go hard right, cozying up to the right wing and trying to be a conventional right-winger. But then that agenda has shown to be wholly unpopular. He could alternatively adopt a strict economic populism, but that will perpetuate a war with the party’s business base.

Indeed, Trump may be in worse shape than ever. Bannon may lead his true believers away from Trump while the rest of the party turns its back on him. Trump could very well find himself utterly isolated, lacking a real agenda or any defense against a vengeful Bannon and determined prosecutor.

 

[Audrey2]

While I'm thrilled that Bannon is gone, it continues to add to the White House as reality show theme. About every week or two, Trump has an overwhelming desire to say "you're fired", so someone else is gone. Fortunately, they've all been the sludge at the bottom of the septic tank.

Edited August 18, 2017 by Audrey2

[Childless]

1 hour ago, Howl said:

Without Bannon, he may have few fans besides the Strumpet in Chief,  and with John Kelly as the gatekeeper, Stephen may not be able to whisper sweet nothings in a little orange ear.

This bothers me more than Bannon, Miller, and Gorka put together.  I despise Kelly in this role.  Yes, he may bring a semblance of maturity and decorum to the WH, but he's military.  He should NOT be in a civilian role.  It's no secret that Trump usually follows the ideas of the last person who strokes his ego.  It's far to easy for this whole thing to become a military take over.  And that scares the fuck out of me.  Nothing good has ever come from a military government take over.

6 minutes ago, Childless said:

 

 

Edited August 18, 2017 by Childless

[Cartmann99]

Please check your bingo cards, everyone. If Bannon's firing has caused you to bingo, today's prize is a five pound block of store brand Velveeta "cheese" and a case of Pabst Blue Ribbon beer.

Congratulations to our lucky winners! 

[Ali]

10 minutes ago, Cartmann99 said:

Please check your bingo cards, everyone. If Bannon's firing has caused you to bingo, today's prize is a five pound block of store brand Velveeta "cheese" and a case of Pabst Blue Ribbon beer.

Congratulations to our lucky winners! 

This is fitting considering I don't like Velveeta cheese and it is a headache trigger for me. Also, I am not much of a drinker and I am supposed to avoid alcohol due to a medication.

I can't win under this administration. 

[Gobsmacked]

I'm now totally gobsmacked!!!!!!

[JMarie]

http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/18/media/steve-bannon-returns-breitbart/index.html

Quote

Steve Bannon returned to Breitbart News as executive chairman on Friday following his ouster from the White House, the far-right website announced in a press release. Bannon chaired the outlet's evening editorial meeting, the press release added.

"I feel jacked up," Bannon told the Weekly Standard. "Now I'm free. I've got my hands back on my weapons. Someone said, 'it's Bannon the Barbarian.' I am definitely going to crush the opposition. There's no doubt. I built a f***ing machine at Breitbart. And now I'm about to go back, knowing what I know, and we're about to rev that machine up. And rev it up we will do."

 

[GreyhoundFan]

To go with the article @JMarie posted: "With Bannon Back at Breitbart, a Right-Wing Army Prepares for War"

Spoiler

Whatever the “alt-right” is or was, it no longer has a spokesman within 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, with the possible exception of the president. A little before noon on Friday, the White House confirmed that Steve Bannon, the embattled “economic nationalist” whose mastery of Breitbart News helped get Donald Trump elected—thus planting the seed of his own demise—had tendered his resignation. Bannon’s exit, while not unexpected, still sent shock waves across the political and media worlds. Would Trump moderate himself in the absence of the self-proclaimed “alt-right” architect, or had he always had such an appreciation for Confederate monuments and affinity for the white nationalists who have rallied around them? With subsequent reports that Bannon allies Sebastian Gorka and Julia Hahn, both former Breitbart employees, might also be on their way out the door, who would be left to counter National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster’s alleged neoconservative plots, or to undermine the “globalist” troika of Gary Cohn, Ivanka Trump, and Dina Powell? Perhaps most important for the president himself: Would Bannon, now unleashed back into the barbarian wilds from whence he came, return to wage war on the administration that ousted him?

Outside the White House, Bannon’s supporters, who had watched him struggle to enact his populist-nationalist agenda, were thrilled at the prospect. “This is good for the movement. This is good for populism,” gloated Lee Stranahan, a former Breitbart reporter, who predicted that once Bannon was gone, Trump would be able to see who was really against his agenda, because if he followed the advice of his remaining staffers, “his general approval will plummet.”

Mike Cernovich, a right-wing muckraker and reformed Pizzagate truther who was one of the main forces behind the #FireMcMaster campaign, told me that he was anticipating the fireworks. “Oh, it’s going to be a lot of fun. People think Bannon will go after Trump, which actually isn’t correct,” he said, hinting that Bannon would focus his ire on his “globalist” enemies instead. “Bannon especially dislikes Gary Cohn and Dina Powell, so you can look for a lot of interesting articles about the two of them,” Cernovich promised.

Bannon seemed to have been preparing for his exit. He has reportedly told people he actually resigned on August 7, effective earlier this week, but that the announcement was delayed by events in Charlottesville (other reporting suggests Trump was still debating the timing of Bannon’s ouster this morning). In that time, he made an unusual media circuit, giving an interview to a progressive magazine (in which he bashed his colleagues, specifically Cohn), and gave on-the-record comments to three others. Both Stranahan and Cernovich pointed out that these interviews came only days before Trump went to Camp David with his national security team. “So Trump might just be mad at the generals and at McMaster this weekend, because they’re going to suggest a troop surge” in Afghanistan, said Cernovich, invoking a prominent fear among some on the far-right. Bannon also reportedly met with Bob Mercer, Breitbart’s wealthiest investor and patron, for four hours on Wednesday to plot his next moves. The source for that news told Axios’s Jonathan Swan that Mercer and Bannon “remain strong supporters of President Trump's and his agenda.”

Hours later, several outlets confirmed that Bannon had, indeed, returned to lead Breitbart, resuming his position as executive chairman. “I feel jacked up,” Bannon told the Weekly Standard. “Now I’m free. I’ve got my hands back on my weapons. Someone said, ‘it’s Bannon the Barbarian.’ I am definitely going to crush the opposition. There’s no doubt. I built a fucking machine at Breitbart. And now I'm about to go back, knowing what I know, and we’re about to rev that machine up. And rev it up we will do.”

Bannon’s return is likely to boost both himself and the site. “Breitbart is kind of rudderless right now,” said Cernovich, an Infowars contributor who has been critical of Breitbart but echoed similar grumblings that I have heard from several people within the right-wing media orbit over the last several months. “There’s a lot of discontent. People are claiming that Breitbart is being run by lawyers, and they lack an editorial vision. With Bannon back at the helm, they’ll have an editorial vision again, and they’ll get back to doing what they do best.”

Even before Bannon’s return was made official, the site’s writers had a field day on Twitter, either declaring that they, too, were prepared to fight the globalist agenda with their former chairman, or trolling the jumpy politicos trying to figure out what the populist-nationalist organ would do next.

... < scary tweets >

Stranahan suggested that the White House’s loss could be Breitbart’s gain, and vice versa. “It wouldn’t shock me if the president reconsiders this pretty quickly. But the only way he’ll reconsider it is if he gets rid of the other globalists in the White House.” As any good military strategist will tell you—even, perhaps, McMaster himself—sometimes you have to lose a battle in order to win a war.

 

It will be interesting to see if Sleeping Giants has a renewed push with Bannon back at Blechbart.

[LeftCoastLurker]

It makes me wonder if this was his plan all along. Hang out in the white house with a security clearance and gather information until he felt the ceiling was falling down on the administration. Once that started, move back to Breitbart with a shit-ton of juicy info for his alt-right followers.

[JMarie]

3 hours ago, LeftCoastLurker said:

It makes me wonder if this was his plan all along. Hang out in the white house with a security clearance and gather information until he felt the ceiling was falling down on the administration. Once that started, move back to Breitbart with a shit-ton of juicy info for his alt-right followers.

And write a book.  You know he'll write a book.

[fraurosena]

Is it me, or does he sound ever so slightly miffed? It seems to me he's just putting a thin veneer of positive spin on his ousting.

Bannon: 'The Trump Presidency That We Fought For, and Won, Is Over.'

Spoiler

With the departure from the White House of strategist Stephen K. Bannon, who helped shape the so-called nationalist-populist program embraced by Donald Trump in his unlikely path to election, a new phase of the Trump presidency begins. Given Trump’s nature, what comes next will hardly be conventional, but it may well be less willfully disruptive—which, to Bannon, had been the point of winning the White House.

“The Trump presidency that we fought for, and won, is over,” Bannon said Friday, shortly after confirming his departure. “We still have a huge movement, and we will make something of this Trump presidency. But that presidency is over. It’ll be something else. And there’ll be all kinds of fights, and there’ll be good days and bad days, but that presidency is over.”

Bannon says that he will return to the helm of Breitbart, the rambunctious right-wing media enterprise he ran until joining the Trump campaign as chief executive last August. At the time, the campaign was at its nadir, and Trump was trailing Hillary Clinton in the polls by double digits.

Although his influence with the president waxed and waned, Bannon’s standing in the Trump circle was always precarious. Among the senior advisers competing with Bannon in trying to shape Trump’s agenda, and his tone, were the president’s daughter, Ivanka, and son-in-law, Jared. Bannon pointedly voiced criticism of those in the president’s sphere whom he considered to be globalists, or liberals (or both), and the president himself plainly bristled over the early attention that Bannon got from the press (including a Time magazine cover, which is said to have particularly irked Trump).

Bannon says that his departure was voluntary, and that he’d planned it to coincide with the one-year anniversary of his joining the Trump campaign as chief executive, on August 14, 2016.

“On August 7th , I talked to [Chief of Staff John] Kelly and to the President, and I told them that my resignation would be effective the following Monday, on the 14th,” he said. “I’d always planned on spending one year. General Kelly has brought in a great new system, but I said it would be best. I want to get back to Breitbart.”

Bannon says that with the tumult in Charlottesville last weekend, and the political fallout since, Trump, Kelly, and he agreed to delay Bannon’s departure, but that he and Kelly agreed late this week that now was the time for Bannon to leave.

Bannon may have resigned, but it was clear from the time that Kelly became chief of staff that Bannon’s remaining time in the West Wing was going to be short. Kelly undertook a study of the West Wing’s operating system, and let it be known that he kept hearing about Bannon as a disruptive force and a source of leaks aimed at undermining his rivals. One of those, with whom Kelly is deeply in sympathy, is National Security Adviser H. R. McMaster, who clashed forcefully with Bannon over such policies as strategy for the war in Afghanistan.

It is plainly Bannon’s view that his departure is not a defeat for him personally, but for the ideology he’d urged upon the president, as reflected in Trump’s provocative inaugural address—in which he spoke of self-dealing Washington politicians, and their policies that led to the shuttered factories and broken lives of what he called “American carnage.” Bannon co-authored that speech (and privately complained that it had been toned down by West Wing moderates like Ivanka and Jared).

And, he says, Trump encouraged him to take on the Republican establishment. “I said, ‘look, I’ll focus on going after the establishment.’ He said, ‘good, I need that.’ I said, ‘look, I’ll always be here covering for you.’”

Being side-lined since April, it's a wonder he held on for this long.

Ignore the Hype: Bannon Was Already Working From the Outside

Spoiler

The departure of Steve Bannon from the White House won’t have a big impact on the day-to-day operations of the West Wing. An economic nationalist who served as Donald Trump’s political id (as well as his chief strategist), Bannon was effectively sidelined back in April, after he was removed from the National Security Council and was accused of insulting Donald Trump’s adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Bannon’s planned in-house think tank, the Strategic Initiatives Group, never quite got off the ground. His policy portfolio was slim, down to two areas: trade and foreign policy—specifically the war in Afghanistan. Much of the time, Bannon could be found on a couch in the office of his unlikely White House ally, Reince Priebus, scrolling through his phone.

What was Bannon doing on his phone? Reading the news. As a former (and future) media figure himself, Bannon is a voracious news consumer. He would often call up journalists, out of the blue, to offer praise for articles he liked or found useful. That was what Bannon did earlier this week, when he telephoned the liberal journalist Robert Kuttner of the American Prospect to laud Kuttner’s latest piece on how the rising nuclear tensions between the United States and North Korea were benefitting China. Kuttner published an article based on their conversation, in which Bannon criticized his colleagues and undercut President Trump’s public positioning on North Korea.

The interview likely hastened Bannon’s firing, but it was also a part of the former Breitbart chief’s strategy during his nearly eight months at the White House to try to influence President Trump from outside the West Wing as well as within it. Bannon, as a member of the senior staff, did advise Trump directly by attending as many meetings as possible and working to get the final word in with a president inclined to side with the last person he hears from. He populated the West Wing with acolyteslike Seb Gorka and Julia Hahn. Even in his final week at the White House, he encouraged Trump to stick to his instincts in his response to the Charlottesville violence, to attack the left-wing protesters and not categorically denounce the alt-righters whose rally begat the violence.

But Bannon also worked to weaponize the media to his advantage. Jonathan Swan of Axios, for instance, reported last month that Bannon was pushing for raising the marginal tax rate on top earners to above 40 percent. But an administration official told me at the time that Bannon’s tax hike idea had been heard and discarded months ago by those crafting the White House’s tax-reform proposal. “We’re beyond that,” the official said. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal a few weeks after Swan’s report, Trump teased that he might be okay with raising taxes on the rich before saying he didn’t support Bannon’s proposed rate.

One of Bannon’s most useful tools in the media was, of course, Breitbart, which regularly pushed his side of internal White House debates, especially against National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster. Opposed to continuing the war in Afghanistan, Bannon began calling a proposal to increase troops levels there “McMaster’s War,” a term that (surprise!) was also used in a Breitbart headline. Bannon’s own war, against McMaster himself, has been conducted primarily at Breitbart. (See this, this, this, this, and this for starters.)

The administration debate over the Afghanistan war offers the best example of how Bannon worked from the outside. From the beginning of the Afghanistan policy review, Bannon was on an island—McMaster, James Mattis, Rex Tillerson, and most of his entire national security team (Jeff Sessions excepted) have been supportive of some version of continuing America’s involvement. Trump himself has and remains spiritually with Bannon on Afghanistan, but the sway of his other advisers has been strong and convincing. So Bannon turned to a plan concocted by Erik Prince, the Blackwater founder, to “privatize” the war, as Rosie Gray at the Atlantic put it. Internally, Gray reports, Bannon pressed for Trump to consider Prince’s plan, while the businessman helpfully appeared on cable news to tout the idea. Breitbart, too, played a role in promoting the Prince plan.

And yet, there are limits to Bannon’s tactics. Prince was reportedly blocked by McMaster from attending Friday’s South Asian policy meeting with the president. Trump still hasn’t decided on a plan for Afghanistan, although most signs point to his adopting some sort of troop increase. While Bannon promises to keep fighting the fight from the outside, it’s much harder to have the last word with the president when you aren’t working down the hall from him.

I am soooooo glad that Prince plan to privatize the war in Afghanistan is likely to fail now that Bannon is out.

[apple1]

From the article posted above: "Whatever the “alt-right” is or was, it no longer has a spokesman within 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue..."

Stephen Miller is still there - Is he on the way out, too? Probably not. :-(

[GreyhoundFan]

"Bannon, basically: Trump’s campaign was a fraud"

Spoiler

Stephen K. Bannon says he will be “covering” for President Trump on the outside, but the former White House chief strategist made a breathtakingly candid admission in the hours after his exit on Friday.

“The Trump presidency that we fought for, and won, is over,” Bannon told the Weekly Standard. “We still have a huge movement, and we will make something of this Trump presidency. But that presidency is over. It’ll be something else. And there’ll be all kinds of fights, and there’ll be good days and bad days, but that presidency is over.”

What, exactly, did Bannon mean? Well, he got specific:

“I just think his ability to get anything done — particularly the bigger things, like the wall, the bigger, broader things that we fought for, it’s just going to be that much harder,” Bannon said of Trump.

And what will be the effect of the remaining White House advisers on Trump?

“I think they’re going to try to moderate him,” Bannon said. “I think he’ll sign a clean debt ceiling; I think you’ll see all this stuff. His natural tendency — and I think you saw it this week on Charlottesville — his actual default position is the position of his base, the position that got him elected. I think you’re going to see a lot of constraints on that. I think it’ll be much more conventional.”

The line about Trump's “natural tendency” is exactly what Bannon meant about covering for the president. When Trump fails to deliver something he promised, as a candidate, Bannon will assure the faithful that their president's heart was in the right place but that the swamp got in his way.

But the bigger takeaway here is that Bannon believes Trump will fail. The wall? Probably not going to happen. Sweeping tax cuts? Bannon predicted “they’ll do a very standard Republican version of taxes.” Repealing Obamacare? Please. Bannon called the GOP plan that Trump backed “a half-hearted attempt at Obamacare reform.”

That's right — “reform.” Bannon wouldn't even call it a repeal effort.

The short translation is that Trump's campaign was a fraud. The ideas that Trump sold and his supporters bought are unlikely to turn into actions, according to Bannon.

It sounds like Bannon, who will return to Breitbart News, will pin the blame on everyone around the president, rather than the man himself. The question is whether the voters who put Trump in the Oval Office will be so charitable.

Par for the course.

[GreyhoundFan]

"Steve Bannon Reportedly Calls Jared Kushner And Ivanka Trump ‘Javanka’ Behind Their Backs"

Spoiler

Steve Bannon’s exit from the Trump administration was reportedly carefully orchestrated for weeks, but The New York Times reports that he was ousted from his post as White House chief strategist following his bizarre, surprising interview with The American Prospect, a progressive publication. 

The Times report, which includes new details about Bannon’s removal, also sheds light on his relationship with President Donald Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner.  

“Mr. Bannon openly complained to White House colleagues that he resented how Ms. Trump would try to undo some of the major policy initiatives that he and Mr. Trump agreed were important to the president’s economic nationalist agenda, like withdrawing from the Paris climate accords,” the Times’ Jeremy W. Peters and Maggie Haberman reported. 

Bannon referred to the couple by their so-called celebrity nickname behind their backs, they reported.

“Mr. Bannon made little secret of the fact that he believed ‘Javanka,’ as he referred to the couple behind their backs, had naïve political instincts and were going to alienate Mr. Trump’s core coalition of white working-class voters,” according to Peters and Haberman. 

Bannon, who returned to Breitbart News on Friday, has said he can more easily push the president’s nationalist agenda from outside the White House. Reports have also surfaced suggesting that the former chief strategist plans to seek revenge on Kushner ― he, along with Ivanka Trump, reportedly had a hand in Bannon’s removal. 

Vanity Fair’s Gabriel Sherman wrote Sunday:

Bannon’s main targets are the West Wing’s coterie of New York Democrat ‘globalists’—Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner and former Goldman Sachs president Gary Cohn—as well as the ‘hawks,’ comprised of National Security Adviser H.R McMaster and his deputy, Dina Powell. ‘He wants to beat their ideas into submission,’ Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow told me. ‘Steve has a lot of things up his sleeve.’

Sherman also noted that two of the stories that led Breitbart News on Sunday focused on Ivanka Trump and Kushner.

...

LOL

[candygirl200413]

I hate how I laughed really hard at that @GreyhoundFan

[GreyhoundFan]

8 hours ago, candygirl200413 said:

I hate how I laughed really hard at that @GreyhoundFan

I know, me too! Frankly, I'm surprised he didn't do it to their faces.

[GreyhoundFan]

So, Bannon seems a trifle unhappy with the orange menace: "With Bannon back in charge, Breitbart is crushing Trump for his Afghanistan speech"

Spoiler

It's officially on.

Breitbart News, with former White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon back in charge, is ripping mad at President Trump after Monday's Afghanistan speech foreshadowed an increase in ground troops.

Just look at this homepage:

...

That's five incredibly critical headlines from a website that cheered Trump to victory. The accompanying articles might be even tougher. Here are key excerpts from the stories, numbered clockwise, from left:

Article 1: The speech was a disappointment to many who had supported his calls during the campaign to end expensive foreign intervention and nation-building.

Article 2: Using many of the same vague promises that previous presidents had used, including a repeat of Obama’s promise not to give a “blank check” to Afghanistan and a pledge to finally get tough on Pakistan, it was a far cry from the “America First” foreign policy he laid out in the months before Election Day.

Article 3: This isn’t about changing his perspective on the war. POTUS is a remarkably astute and stubborn individual. This was about the swamp getting to him.

Article 4: I voted for Donald Trump because he promised change. I may have made a mistake.

Article 5: In Donald Trump’s old gambling houses, no player doubled down on a six. In Donald Trump’s White House, the president looks to double down on his soft hand in Afghanistan. That’s a bad bet.

In the hours before the president delivered his prime-time address, I wrote that the speech would be a test for the next phase of his relationship with Bannon, who left Breitbart a year ago to become chief executive of Trump's campaign and then served as his top strategist in the White House until Friday. I figured that Bannon wouldn't like what Trump had to say and that his displeasure would show up in Breitbart's coverage.

But wow. I was not prepared for this level of fury.

What's striking about Breitbart's coverage is the way its writers took direct aim at Trump, instead of his advisers.

The best example is the headline that refers to “President H.R. McMaster,” Trump's national security adviser. It's a play on a memorable New York Times editorial headline from January: “President Bannon?” (A Times editorial published on the day of Bannon's ouster read, “Farewell, President Bannon.")

Bannon knows better than anyone how deeply the perception that someone else is calling the shots wounds Trump's pride. By suggesting that McMaster is the “president,” Bannon is trolling Trump. Hard.

...

The other thing that stands out in Breitbart's coverage is zero tolerance for Trump's spin, which the site typically amplifies. Trump did his best on Monday to paint his reversal on sending more troops to Afghanistan as a result of gaining a better understanding of the situation than he had before his election.

“My original instinct was to pull out — and, historically, I like following my instincts,” he said. “But all my life I've heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office; in other words, when you're president of the United States.”

Breitbart isn't buying it. As Raheem Kassam put it, “this isn’t about changing his perspective on the war. … This was about the swamp getting to him.”

Contrast that take with what Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) wrote on Twitter Monday night.

...

Everything is backward. Rubio — Trump's primary rival, whom Breitbart attacked mercilessly — is defending the president's evolution, using the same argument as the president himself. Meanwhile, the “commentators” Rubio is calling out include the writers at Breitbart, who are now slamming Trump.

None of this means that Breitbart is jumping off the Trump Train permanently. But it sure looks like the feud between Bannon and his former boss is real — and ready to flare up whenever he thinks the president is betraying a campaign promise.

I hope Bannon keeps trolling the orange menace. It will drive him crazy (crazier).

[onekidanddone]

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

So, Bannon seems a trifle unhappy with the orange menace: "With Bannon back in charge, Breitbart is crushing Trump for his Afghanistan speech"

  Reveal hidden contents

It's officially on.

Breitbart News, with former White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon back in charge, is ripping mad at President Trump after Monday's Afghanistan speech foreshadowed an increase in ground troops.

Just look at this homepage:

...

That's five incredibly critical headlines from a website that cheered Trump to victory. The accompanying articles might be even tougher. Here are key excerpts from the stories, numbered clockwise, from left:

Article 1: The speech was a disappointment to many who had supported his calls during the campaign to end expensive foreign intervention and nation-building.

Article 2: Using many of the same vague promises that previous presidents had used, including a repeat of Obama’s promise not to give a “blank check” to Afghanistan and a pledge to finally get tough on Pakistan, it was a far cry from the “America First” foreign policy he laid out in the months before Election Day.

Article 3: This isn’t about changing his perspective on the war. POTUS is a remarkably astute and stubborn individual. This was about the swamp getting to him.

Article 4: I voted for Donald Trump because he promised change. I may have made a mistake.

Article 5: In Donald Trump’s old gambling houses, no player doubled down on a six. In Donald Trump’s White House, the president looks to double down on his soft hand in Afghanistan. That’s a bad bet.

In the hours before the president delivered his prime-time address, I wrote that the speech would be a test for the next phase of his relationship with Bannon, who left Breitbart a year ago to become chief executive of Trump's campaign and then served as his top strategist in the White House until Friday. I figured that Bannon wouldn't like what Trump had to say and that his displeasure would show up in Breitbart's coverage.

But wow. I was not prepared for this level of fury.

What's striking about Breitbart's coverage is the way its writers took direct aim at Trump, instead of his advisers.

The best example is the headline that refers to “President H.R. McMaster,” Trump's national security adviser. It's a play on a memorable New York Times editorial headline from January: “President Bannon?” (A Times editorial published on the day of Bannon's ouster read, “Farewell, President Bannon.")

Bannon knows better than anyone how deeply the perception that someone else is calling the shots wounds Trump's pride. By suggesting that McMaster is the “president,” Bannon is trolling Trump. Hard.

...

The other thing that stands out in Breitbart's coverage is zero tolerance for Trump's spin, which the site typically amplifies. Trump did his best on Monday to paint his reversal on sending more troops to Afghanistan as a result of gaining a better understanding of the situation than he had before his election.

“My original instinct was to pull out — and, historically, I like following my instincts,” he said. “But all my life I've heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office; in other words, when you're president of the United States.”

Breitbart isn't buying it. As Raheem Kassam put it, “this isn’t about changing his perspective on the war. … This was about the swamp getting to him.”

Contrast that take with what Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) wrote on Twitter Monday night.

...

Everything is backward. Rubio — Trump's primary rival, whom Breitbart attacked mercilessly — is defending the president's evolution, using the same argument as the president himself. Meanwhile, the “commentators” Rubio is calling out include the writers at Breitbart, who are now slamming Trump.

None of this means that Breitbart is jumping off the Trump Train permanently. But it sure looks like the feud between Bannon and his former boss is real — and ready to flare up whenever he thinks the president is betraying a campaign promise.

I hope Bannon keeps trolling the orange menace. It will drive him crazy (crazier).

I look forward to TT calling Breibart fake news.

[onekidanddone]

Trump keeps bring up "our heritage' when he talks about Confederate monuments and the South.  I wish Bannon would bring up that Trump is the son of a foreigner and so he has no southern heritage. I don't know how to drop that little thought into Bannon's ear or on his website and do covertly.  

Ideas anyone?

[GrumpyGran]

16 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

Trump keeps bring up "our heritage' when he talks about Confederate monuments and the South.  I wish Bannon would bring up that Trump is the son of a foreigner and so he has no southern heritage. I don't know how to drop that little thought into Bannon's ear or on his website and do covertly.  

Ideas anyone?

It's just how he fools people into believing he cares about them. If you told him he could buy the land at Gettysburg for hotel development, the place would be bulldozed by tomorrow morning.

[candygirl200413]

Not only is he not a southern, he's technically a damn yankee. Obviously we know that this idea of "southern heritage" can travel because even living in PA I've seen confederate flags/kkk/etc. But I don't think his rapid cult supporters would know this.

[onekidanddone]

5 minutes ago, candygirl200413 said:

Not only is he not a southern, he's technically a damn yankee. Obviously we know that this idea of "southern heritage" can travel because even living in PA I've seen confederate flags/kkk/etc. But I don't think his rapid cult supporters would know this.

He is the New York elite the TDs hate so much. 

[GreyhoundFan]

Wow, just wow: "Bannon: Catholic Church needs ‘illegal aliens to fill the churches’"

Spoiler

Stephen K. Bannon, President Trump's former chief strategist, lashed out at leaders of the Catholic Church in the United States who condemned the president's recent decision to phase out an Obama-era program that has allowed nearly 800,000 undocumented immigrants who were brought to the country as children to gain temporary legal status.

Bannon, who is Catholic, accused the church of wanting a steady flow of illegal immigrants coming into the country to fill its church pews and make money.

“Unable to really to come to grips with the problems in the Church, they need illegal aliens, they need illegal aliens to fill the churches,” Bannon said in an interview with Charlie Rose that will air on "60 Minutes” on CBS on Sunday. “It's obvious on the face of it.”

Bannon added: “They have an economic interest. They have an economic interest in unlimited immigration, unlimited illegal immigration.”

Rose cut Bannon off and said: “That's a tough thing to say about your church.”

“As much as I respect Cardinal [Timothy] Dolan and the bishops on doctrine, this is not doctrine,” Bannon responded. “This is not doctrine at all. I totally respect the pope and I totally respect the Catholic bishops and cardinals on doctrine. This is not about doctrine. This is about the sovereignty of a nation. And in that regard, they're just another guy with an opinion.”

Following the announcement that the Trump administration would phase out the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops called the decision “reprehensible” in a strongly worded statement. About one in four U.S. Catholics are foreign born, and 34 percent of all Catholics are Hispanic, according to Pew Research Center.

“Now, after months of anxiety and fear about their futures, these brave young people face deportation,” they wrote. “This decision is unacceptable and does not reflect who we are as Americans.”

Several of Trump's top aides, along with his wife, are Catholic. The president, who identifies as Presbyterian, met with Pope Francis at the Vatican in May. The two have not had an easy relationship. In February 2016, the pope condemned Trump’s hard-line immigration agenda and suggested that such stances did not match the values of Christianity. Trump immediately fired back from the campaign trail, saying that it was “disgraceful” for the pope to question his faith and accusing the Mexican government of “using the pope as a pawn” and providing him with inaccurate information. In October 2016, Trump attended a charity roast in New York City that benefits Catholic charities and said in a speech that his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton was “pretending not to hate Catholics.”

The overall Catholic vote in 2016 was split between Trump and Clinton. Hispanic Catholics overwhelmingly supported Clinton, while Trump won over Catholics who are opposed to abortion above all else and wanted to see a conservative justice named to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

[Cartmann99]

1 hour ago, GreyhoundFan said:

 In October 2016, Trump attended a charity roast in New York City that benefits Catholic charities and said in a speech that his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton was “pretending not to hate Catholics.”

So many things have happened since October. I had completely forgotten about Trump's behavior at the Al Smith Dinner. 

[GreyhoundFan]

7 minutes ago, Cartmann99 said:

So many things have happened since October. I had completely forgotten about Trump's behavior at the Al Smith Dinner. 

I'm having trouble remembering the crap he did last weekend.