Political Mayhem Thursday: The Reality Show



Yesterday, President Trump had a meeting at the White House with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. The topic was to be a new infrastructure initiative. It appears that the following things happened:

1) Pelosi and Schumer showed up, along with some other congressional leaders.
2) President Trump said that he wasn't going to deal with them until they concluded investigations into his administration.
3) Then President Trump left the room.
4) In the Rose Garden, Trump gave a press conference at a podium bearing the words "NO COLLUSION. NO OBSTRUCTION."
5) The press went nuts. Headlines blared things like "Dems react to Trump-Pelosi feud!"

So, really, nothing of substance happened here. They had a non-meeting.

The thing is, Donald Trump has learned how to control the narrative. And he controls it the way a reality show contestant does: by creating drama, and then letting others talk about it.

At some point, the press bears some responsibility for covering the show in exactly the way Trump intends.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Barr Report on the Mueller Report

Megan Willome wrote a nice little haiku about the Mueller report yesterday: Dear Mr. Mueller, You could've summarized the whole in a haiku. She's right, too. I've got some thoughts on the Mueller Report (in addition to what I have said here  and here ): 1)  Regarding a conspiracy with Russians to influence the election, it seems clear that Mueller found insufficient evidence to recommend charges or impeachment. That's not totally surprising. From what we already knew, it seems that events like the Trump Tower meeting the Russians approached people in the Trump organization, talked about some stuff, but the Trump people never agreed to participate in the activity in any active way-- and that agreement is the essence of conspiracy. Sure, it turns out that the Russians went and did stuff to help Trump on their own, but that does not make it a conspiracy. 2) On obstruction, there is the legitimate question of "obstructing what?" I may disagree with the Barr analy
Read more