No More Daily Press Briefings with Trump as President

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Well things don't work that way and your hopes and wishes don't run the world. In the real world, currently, press conferences are the best exposure we have to the White House. YOU are saying eff that and let Trump just send Twitter messages and when called on it you are appealing to how you wish things were instead of calling Trump out on not being transparent. Nothing is wrong with suggesting improvements to the system, but we shouldn't be accepting lax standards while we demand changes.

Yeah, I know they don't work that way. Unfortunately they also don't work the other way for you either. Those pressers, the tax releases, etc.....are all just things that former President's have done because the ones before them did it too. Nothing says any President has to follow or even keep the same "rules" if you can even call them rules....they are simply suggestions or tradition.

But yeah....let's continue to scream and cry about a vague statement made about a POTUS-elect changing things up with the way these pressers are done. Just more of the MSM whining about the possibility of their "saved seats" no longer being saved in the briefing room....tired of the kindergarten journalists.

Just curious, but in your lifetime how many of these pressers have you watched? I know I have watched some but they are so obviously "prehistoric" in their process and dodge hard questions consistently. Do you really think even close to the majority of US citizens give 2 craps about these pressers? I would question how many US citizens even know they occur....my bet would be the majority had no idea the WH even does them.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Well things don't work that way and your hopes and wishes don't run the world. In the real world, currently, press conferences are the best exposure we have to the White House. YOU are saying eff that and let Trump just send Twitter messages and when called on it you are appealing to how you wish things were instead of calling Trump out on not being transparent. Nothing is wrong with suggesting improvements to the system, but we shouldn't be accepting lax standards while we demand changes.

Yeah, I know they don't work that way. Unfortunately they also don't work the other way for you either. Those pressers, the tax releases, etc.....are all just things that former President's have done because the ones before them did it too. Nothing says any President has to follow or even keep the same "rules" if you can even call them rules....they are simply suggestions or tradition.

AND now the, "it's not a law so # precedent" cop out that many Trumpers resort to when out of excuses. Saying stuff like this is a slap in the face of our fore fathers who considered government precedents ways to run the country. Precedents were SO important in the past that the last time one was broken (a President sat for 4 terms), we amended the Constitution so it wouldn't happen again. So don't dismiss precedent like it isn't any big deal JUST because they aren't laws. That is a sorry excuse.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Well things don't work that way and your hopes and wishes don't run the world. In the real world, currently, press conferences are the best exposure we have to the White House. YOU are saying eff that and let Trump just send Twitter messages and when called on it you are appealing to how you wish things were instead of calling Trump out on not being transparent. Nothing is wrong with suggesting improvements to the system, but we shouldn't be accepting lax standards while we demand changes.

Yeah, I know they don't work that way. Unfortunately they also don't work the other way for you either. Those pressers, the tax releases, etc.....are all just things that former President's have done because the ones before them did it too. Nothing says any President has to follow or even keep the same "rules" if you can even call them rules....they are simply suggestions or tradition.

AND now the, "it's not a law so # precedent" cop out that many Trumpers resort to when out of excuses. Saying stuff like this is a slap in the face of our fore fathers who considered government precedents ways to run the country. Precedents were SO important in the past that the last time one was broken (a President sat for 4 terms), we amended the Constitution so it wouldn't happen again. So don't dismiss precedent like it isn't any big deal JUST because they aren't laws. That is a sorry excuse.

Actually it isn't a sorry excuse. The left continually screams for change....well here it is and things are changing.....they can't cry about it not changing their way, or I guess they can but just don't have a leg to stand on.

Anywho, like I also said, I would bet the majority of US citizens don't even know these WH pressers happen at all. Hell even MSM reported in October that 40% couldn't tell you who the VP's were that were running with Clinton and Trump and that was headline news almost DAILY at that point...MUCH better covered than WH pressers.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

So now you are appealing to the public's mass ignorance and laziness in order to accept less transparency from the government. I'm sorry, but your excuses aren't getting better. Whether anyone is listening or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the information should be put out there.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So now you are appealing to the public's mass ignorance and laziness in order to accept less transparency from the government. I'm sorry, but your excuses aren't getting better. Whether anyone is listening or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the information should be put out there.

Could you please point me to the quote that actually says there will no longer be daily pressers? I can't seem to find it.

originally posted by: Khaleesi

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So now you are appealing to the public's mass ignorance and laziness in order to accept less transparency from the government. I'm sorry, but your excuses aren't getting better. Whether anyone is listening or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the information should be put out there.

Could you please point me to the quote that actually says there will no longer be daily pressers? I can't seem to find it.

That's because it isn't there and is just speculative that any change at all will occur at this point.

originally posted by: Khaleesi

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So now you are appealing to the public's mass ignorance and laziness in order to accept less transparency from the government. I'm sorry, but your excuses aren't getting better. Whether anyone is listening or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the information should be put out there.

Could you please point me to the quote that actually says there will no longer be daily pressers? I can't seem to find it.

I wouldn't think there is one yet, and if they actually continue then that is fine. Then my worries were for nothing, but I don't trust Trump and I've seen his attitude towards the media. I doubt 100% every one of his words and I look at his actions (or rather inactions in this case) as more telling of what is to come.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So now you are appealing to the public's mass ignorance and laziness in order to accept less transparency from the government. I'm sorry, but your excuses aren't getting better. Whether anyone is listening or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the information should be put out there.

Well...since this entire thread is based on a speculative argument about a topic that is just a suggested action passed down from prior administrations, I am not too worried about it.

And public mass ignorance and laziness is what politicians hope for. I have seen more transparency from Trump prior to becoming POTUS than I ever saw from Obama. The reason for that...he loves the public eye on him and with that occurring transparency follows.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Khaleesi

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So now you are appealing to the public's mass ignorance and laziness in order to accept less transparency from the government. I'm sorry, but your excuses aren't getting better. Whether anyone is listening or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the information should be put out there.

Could you please point me to the quote that actually says there will no longer be daily pressers? I can't seem to find it.

I wouldn't think there is one yet, and if they actually continue then that is fine. Then my worries were for nothing, but I don't trust Trump and I've seen his attitude towards the media. I doubt 100% every one of his words and I look at his actions (or rather inactions in this case) as more telling of what is to come.

So this thread, which is posted in the Breaking News forum is not actually factual news. It is actually speculation. Which means this should not be in the Breaking News forum. It should be moved to either the Mudpit or my personal preference would be the Hoax bin.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So now you are appealing to the public's mass ignorance and laziness in order to accept less transparency from the government. I'm sorry, but your excuses aren't getting better. Whether anyone is listening or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the information should be put out there.

Well...since this entire thread is based on a speculative argument about a topic that is just a suggested action passed down from prior administrations, I am not too worried about it.

And public mass ignorance and laziness is what politicians hope for. I have seen more transparency from Trump prior to becoming POTUS than I ever saw from Obama. The reason for that...he loves the public eye on him and with that occurring transparency follows.

Then you weren't paying attention. Obama's Presidency, while he wasn't as truthful as the "most transparent administration in history" claim was actually pretty transparent. In fact, it was the not fully delivering on that promise and doing a bunch of secretive stuff right upon being elected that soured people's opinions on his transparency. I wonder how many daily press briefings YOU'VE listened to while we are the subject of Presidential transparency and how transparent Obama was or wasn't.

a reply to: Khaleesi

I didn't post the thread or choose its forum. So don't blame me for that. Take it up with the OP, or did you think we liberals are all a hive mind or something?

PS: You not wanting to discuss a topic, speculative or otherwise, is not a reason to put a thread in the Hoax bin. That is straight up censorship.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Khaleesi

I didn't post the thread or choose its forum. So don't blame me for that. Take it up with the OP, or did you think we liberals are all a hive mind or something?

Not blaming you. You just happened to be the last post I saw that seemed to be arguing this as if it were factual. So I responded to you.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Khaleesi

I didn't post the thread or choose its forum. So don't blame me for that. Take it up with the OP, or did you think we liberals are all a hive mind or something?

PS: You not wanting to discuss a topic, speculative or otherwise, is not a reason to put a thread in the Hoax bin. That is straight up censorship.

Actually, since the title is not truthful, it is a hoax. It's not even speculation. It's a straight up lie.

a reply to: Khaleesi

I'm happy to correct any misunderstandings you may have about my points, but I can't help where a thread that I find interesting to speak in is posted.

Edit: It isn't a hoax. It's just sensationalism. There is a difference.

originally posted by: Khaleesi

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Khaleesi

I didn't post the thread or choose its forum. So don't blame me for that. Take it up with the OP, or did you think we liberals are all a hive mind or something?

PS: You not wanting to discuss a topic, speculative or otherwise, is not a reason to put a thread in the Hoax bin. That is straight up censorship.

Actually, since the title is not truthful, it is a hoax. It's not even speculation. It's a straight up lie.

Similar to Fake News....but wait isn't that just a alt-right thing?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Khaleesi

I'm happy to correct any misunderstandings you may have about my points, but I can't help where a thread that I find interesting to speak in is posted.

Edit: It isn't a hoax. It's just sensationalism. There is a difference.

The title makes a claim. That claim is that there will be no more press conferences. Since there is no supporting evidence to that claim, it is a lie. The title is a LIE.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So now you are appealing to the public's mass ignorance and laziness in order to accept less transparency from the government. I'm sorry, but your excuses aren't getting better. Whether anyone is listening or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the information should be put out there.

Well...since this entire thread is based on a speculative argument about a topic that is just a suggested action passed down from prior administrations, I am not too worried about it.

And public mass ignorance and laziness is what politicians hope for. I have seen more transparency from Trump prior to becoming POTUS than I ever saw from Obama. The reason for that...he loves the public eye on him and with that occurring transparency follows.

Then you weren't paying attention. Obama's Presidency, while he wasn't as truthful as the "most transparent administration in history" claim was actually pretty transparent. In fact, it was the not fully delivering on that promise and doing a bunch of secretive stuff right upon being elected that soured people's opinions on his transparency. I wonder how many daily press briefings YOU'VE listened to while we are the subject of Presidential transparency and how transparent Obama was or wasn't.

Well...as I stated earlier...I've watched some. They consistently dance around answers and avoid questions altogether. When they dont do that, they only take questions from those they know will lob softballs in and likely, as we've seen with Brazile, were given the question in advance so they could doctor the answer.....but I guess that would be speculative as well....except for Brazile actually did that.

And here is what our very own Josh Earnest had to say about what the POTUS and he personally thought of her:

The President believes that she has done a fine job stepping in in a very difficult situation to lead the Democratic party. Those of us who’ve known Donna a long time know that she is a person of integrity and a person of high character. She is a true professional who is a tenacious and effective advocate for Democrats. She uses that skill regularly on television, she has been using that skill regularly as a party official, and I for one am pretty excited about the fact that we’ve got her on our team.

So yeah....transparency is a bit questionable if their opinion of Brazile is that she is a true professional and is a person of integrity and high character....

originally posted by: Khaleesi

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Khaleesi

I'm happy to correct any misunderstandings you may have about my points, but I can't help where a thread that I find interesting to speak in is posted.

Edit: It isn't a hoax. It's just sensationalism. There is a difference.

The title makes a claim. That claim is that there will be no more press conferences. Since there is no supporting evidence to that claim, it is a lie. The title is a LIE.

Look. I agree it shouldn't have been posted in a news forum but you are stretching the idea of a hoax. Speculation can't be a hoax. At the most it is someone's imagination running away from them. But it can't be an untrue news story, because it is a non-event that exists in someone's imagination.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

So here is what I'm getting from you. "It's ok for the government to be less transparent because I don't like the way government dodges answers when they are currently being transparent." Why is less information better than some information?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vasa Croe

So here is what I'm getting from you. "It's ok for the government to be less transparent because I don't like the way government dodges answers when they are currently being transparent." Why is less information better than some information?

I never said less information is better. What I said was who cares if he does these pressers? Nobody watches them, I'm sure I could find some ratings somewhere for those specifically but feel pretty confident they are on par with a late night rerun of Top Gun.

The quote from Preibus was that they were going to change things up. Why is that so scary to people? The pressers are boring and archaic and not watched. These guys actually seem to want to get people involved and watching and talking...can't see anything bad about this at all.