The Onion Alone Stands Tall Among Media Lapdogs for Trump
As Matt Yglesias says, the media thought Trump was a dangerous sociopath until he launched those cruise missiles. Now they are reassured. And they’re really impressed with the man’s heart.
That those pictures of victims of the attack got to him, shows he’s a moral giant.
“Cable News Praises Trump On Syria, Because Bombing Stuff Is ‘Presidential’
“Do you want war? Because this is how you get war.”
“The strike was largely symbolic, and some critics of the move saw it as little more than a slap on the wrist for Syrian President Bashar Assad, whom the U.S. has accused of orchestrating the chemical attack. And while it raised a number of questions about a possible retaliation, civilian casualties, legality, and just how comprehensive the military strategy was, there was one constituency that, by and large, approved.”
“On cable news, Trump’s decision to take action was nothing short of heroic.”
“CNN’s Fareed Zakaria said Friday morning that “Donald Trump became President of the United States” the moment the bombs started dropping.”
What Trump has to come away with, is this is one of the very few things he’s gotten wide media praise for.
Spicer repeats that Trump strike on Syria has been "widely praised throughout the globe"
— John Harwood (@JohnJHarwood) April 7, 2017
Ok. So if you’re Trump what is your takeaway? Obviously do more strikes on Syria.
So the media has again embarrassed itself. Except the Onion.
“After ordering the first U.S. military attack against the regime of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, President Donald Trump held a press conference Friday to express his full confidence that the airstrike had completely wiped out the lingering Russian scandal. “Based on intelligence we have received over the past several hours, the attack on the al-Shayrat air base in Homs has successfully eliminated all discussions and allegations about my administration’s ties to the Russian government,” said Trump, adding that at approximately 4:40 a.m. local time, 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from U.S. naval ships obliterated all traces of the widespread controversy in news outlets across the media. “Ordering this strike was not a decision I took lightly, but given that it was the only way to decisively eradicate any attention being paid to congressional investigations into possible collusion between key members of my staff and high-ranking Kremlin officials, I decided it was a necessary course of action. If we learn that any remnants of this scandal remain after this attack, I will not hesitate to order further strikes.” Trump went on to say that he is leaving the option open for a potential ground invasion of Syria if any troubling evidence emerges that the Russian government manipulated the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.”
Oh look: The Onion outsmarted all our media today! https://t.co/4bcarUSU05
— Amy Siskind (@Amy_Siskind) April 7, 2017
And lo and behold, check out this Politico piece:
“Syria strike gives Trump anti-Kremlin credential.”
The strikes could burnish Trump’s defense against claims he is too close to Russia.”
Because he did this thing that Putin didn’t want. Assuming Putin didn’t want it. Of course, this is not really proof of anything.
1. It could be that Putin was in on a false flag to take the heat off of Trump and make it look as if there were distance between the two. Now when Tillerson-his old selfie partner-meets him on Tuesday the media will no longer be looking for clues they are too buddy buddy.
After all, Trump shot those Tomahawk missiles in an empty airport that Assad cleared out as he knew they were coming.
JUST IN: Syrian warplanes take off from air base hit by U.S., carry out strikes in Homs countryside – Syrian observatory for human rights
— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) April 7, 2017
Unless the plan is regime change, there’s no purely military action that would stop Assad.
2, On the other hand, it could be that Putin was wrong. Just like many voters were wrong about Trump, maybe Putin badly assessed him.
And based on literally everything Trump had ever said or did for at least five years, Putin could be forgiven for assuming Trump was down with Assad.
What I do believe is that this was wag the dog by the Trump team. This was done to change the subject and the media fell for the bait. But as Trump’s very legitimacy is in question, he shouldn’t be taken actions like this-especially without Congressional approval.
The trouble is-how does a POTUS that we don’t even know whether he conspired with Russia have the right to take these sorts of actions?
Whether or not shooting those missiles was the right policy or not, Trump is not the one I want doing them.
And we do have, whether or not Trump really stopped on Putin’s toes here, or just pretended to, a history of the Trump team and Russia discussing getting rid of the sanctions. Carter Page, Michael Flynn, Michael Cohen, Erik Prince.
Trump’s problem is he has no credibility. So no one should be giving him the benefit of the doubt here. And his sudden whiplash from everything he’s ever said about Syria is a real source of concern. It goes to his motivation.
I’d also like to know much more about what really happened in Syria. Did Assad really do a gas attack? If so, was this cleared with Russia first? If not, then shouldn’t Russia be miffed at them too? But Russia dismissed the attack as the work of the rebels.
So lots of questions. This is something Congress must discuss. If Trump has any plans for further actions in Syria Congress must authorize it.
P.S. As we saw in my poll out last week, the long awaited poll results are in, and right now I’m just 11 points down vs. Peter King (GOP-NY-District 2). And the voters don’t even know who I am yet.
There is nothing more important in getting answers to Trump-Russia collusion than a Democratic House in 2019. Please donate to help me in my part of the effort to fight for a Dem House.
Thank you. We must have a Dem House. And so, we will