The Breitbart front page, and relevant comment pages, are absolutely fascinating right now, if you can filter out the screeching of chimps flinging poo at each other.
Yeah I've been pawing around that since the morning.
The stories are all getting a ton of comments. The main one about the book release is over 16k comments, with thousands more on similar stories.
The way the comments are structured, its hard to get an overall feel, but from the selection I've skimmed over (so you don't have to!):
1) Lots are adopting a sort of "wait and see" posture, clearly not sure what to make of this dispute and the various claims.
2) Lots are supporting Trump right away, and throwing Bannon under the bus.
3) Some are trying the "liberal fake news" angle, but with this being all over Breitbart itself, that line isn't going very far.
4) Some are saying "we need to stick together" without explicitly backing a person or group. Related to 3.
5) I haven't seen anyone favoring Bannon over Trump. Some people are holding up Breitbart as important to their movement and Bannon as loyal, but still subservient to, Trump.
Most of the stuff though is tangents of every sort though, petty flame wars and the like.
The Breitbart front page, and relevant comment pages, are absolutely fascinating right now, if you can filter out the screeching of chimps flinging poo at each other.
Yeah I've been pawing around that since the morning.
The stories are all getting a ton of comments. The main one about the book release is over 16k comments, with thousands more on similar stories.
The way the comments are structured, its hard to get an overall feel, but from the selection I've skimmed over (so you don't have to!):
1) Lots are adopting a sort of "wait and see" posture, clearly not sure what to make of this dispute and the various claims.
2) Lots are supporting Trump right away, and throwing Bannon under the bus.
3) Some are trying the "liberal fake news" angle, but with this being all over Breitbart itself, that line isn't going very far.
4) Some are saying "we need to stick together" without explicitly backing a person or group. Related to 3.
5) I haven't seen anyone favoring Bannon over Trump. Some people are holding up Breitbart as important to their movement and Bannon as loyal, but still subservient to, Trump.
Most of the stuff though is tangents of every sort though, petty flame wars and the like.
Read the full thread before posting. Brietbart comments or analysis thereof aren't needed in this thread.
The Breitbart front page, and relevant comment pages, are absolutely fascinating right now, if you can filter out the screeching of chimps flinging poo at each other.
Yeah I've been pawing around that since the morning.
The stories are all getting a ton of comments. The main one about the book release is over 16k comments, with thousands more on similar stories.
The way the comments are structured, its hard to get an overall feel, but from the selection I've skimmed over (so you don't have to!):
1) Lots are adopting a sort of "wait and see" posture, clearly not sure what to make of this dispute and the various claims.
2) Lots are supporting Trump right away, and throwing Bannon under the bus.
3) Some are trying the "liberal fake news" angle, but with this being all over Breitbart itself, that line isn't going very far.
4) Some are saying "we need to stick together" without explicitly backing a person or group. Related to 3.
5) I haven't seen anyone favoring Bannon over Trump. Some people are holding up Breitbart as important to their movement and Bannon as loyal, but still subservient to, Trump.
Most of the stuff though is tangents of every sort though, petty flame wars and the like.
Read the full thread before posting. Brietbart comments or analysis thereof aren't needed in this thread.
Ok, I'll refrain, but I think its on topic and relevant.
This thread is talking about the relationship between Bannon and Trump. What followers of both those people are opining matters a lot, since its those followers that gave both these men their power.
Are we allowed to discuss what republicans/alt-right are saying on the matter? Meaning, is it Breitbart specifically that is barred or the general discussion?
I mean, it seems that to a certain extent, the influence of the alt right in our government these days means that their response to what is going on here IS the story. And that the story is important. We all already were disgusted by Bannon and Trump, but this story is real and is to do with them falling out. Them falling out has real importance in terms of how it relates to the relationship between...
1) Trump and the alt right
2) Bannon and the alt right
3) The alt right and Breitbart
We might wish that these people didn't have a major influence in the day to day activities of the president of the United States, but they do. We might wish that the President didn't make major policy decisions in response to petty personal feuds and insults, but he does. We might wish that we didn't have to think about things like, "I wonder what Breitbart and their network is making of the beef between Trump and Bannon", in terms of what Trumps decisions might be over the next few weeks but we do.
How can we have a reasonable discussion using the standard rules of what is and is not good stuff to include in a politics thread, when the President and his cabinet does not make his decisions based on those factors? And instead is probably far more likely to be informed by logging on to Breitbart and doing just what Tycho? described above. Checking out the comments, stewing over a few fake articles.
Honestly, I think I'd argue that in terms of major US policy decisions, the state of the Breitbart comments is more important than say, a major report from a federal government agency.
I agree that what is x group thinking is relevant but "here's 20 comments from breitbart mouth breathers" is just a mess and doesn't really add anything. We're all free to venture there if we want to read the crazy.
Which, if true, sort of blows the whole Wolff-is-a-known-liar argument out of the water.
In some cases, the officials thought they were talking off the record. But what are they going to do now?
Those officials are either lying or don't know how off the record works. Talking off the record is something that has to be agreed to. Either you know it was off the record because they agreed to go off the record or it wasn't.
History suggests that no one in the Trump Admin understands what "on the record" and "off the record" mean.
I agree that what is x group thinking is relevant but "here's 20 comments from breitbart mouth breathers" is just a mess and doesn't really add anything. We're all free to venture there if we want to read the crazy.
But noone in the general media seems to be interested in reporting the things that actually influence the Trump administration, and why. I'd love to post links to detailed discussions of what the alt right is thinking, and exactly what fox and friends is reporting, and why they are doing that but people seem to be determined to pretend that this isn't what influences the president. Our President and his cabinet aren't a group of careful detailed thinkers studying reports, and detailed articles and summoning committees of experts. They literally ARE the angry people commenting on Breitbart that Breitbart is too leftist, and that Fox has been infiltrated by feminists.
I agree that what is x group thinking is relevant but "here's 20 comments from breitbart mouth breathers" is just a mess and doesn't really add anything. We're all free to venture there if we want to read the crazy.
"The President of the United States is a great man -- you know, I support him day in and day out. Whether going through the country giving the Trump miracle speech or on the show or on the website, so I don't think you have to worry about that," Bannon said.
Which Trump noticed:
"I don't know, he called me a great man last night, so he obviously changed his tune pretty quick," Trump said Thursday, referring to Bannon's comments Wednesday night on his Sirius XM radio show in the wake of the firestorm ignited by a new book on the White House.
Bannon is going to have to suck a lot of dick to get back on Trump's good graces, not to mention that he will probably going to have to apologize to Kushner and Don Jr.
*"Bannon fears Mueller Drumpf, and SO WILL YOU!" doesn't count.
Pretty much. It was a fun 8 hours but Bannon quickly realized he isn't winning this one.
Yep. And the damage to his brand and, more importantly, his access is probably permanent, Bannon is never getting close to the Trump admin again since he can't be trusted. I mean, in context, the guy that was leaking to Cernovich all the dirt on McMaster's "Syria Plans" with 150,000 troops (a complete fiction) was Bannon and that came a few days after McMaster kicked him out of the National Security Council.
Summaries of angry people’s views on the internet, produced by a news site or not, doesn’t strike me as very useful or helpful, especially if they’re from fucking Breitbart.
Polls and the like, sure, but just hey here’s what Phil from Bear Anus, Nebraska decided to vomit on to the comment pages of a website, probably not.
Pretty much. It was a fun 8 hours but Bannon quickly realized he isn't winning this one.
I'm not sure anyone's winning this one. It looks like burned bridges all round.
If he's actually seen the details of these stories then Trump must be feeling very, very lonely right now.
there is no way trump is reading this or any other book. he'll know what fox news reports along with whatever spin they offer and that'll be that. Everything else will be 'fake news' by dinner tomorrow.
Banon is either an idiot or has the memory of a gold fish, since Trump doesn't reward sycophancy (he expects it the same way you expect gravity to work). Like christ, Chris christie is an object lesson in why you don't suck up to the Dorito in chief.
Summaries of angry people’s views on the internet, produced by a news site or not, doesn’t strike me as very useful or helpful, especially if they’re from fucking Breitbart.
Polls and the like, sure, but just hey here’s what Phil from Bear Anus, Nebraska decided to vomit on to the comment pages of a website, probably not.
This.
Also, the place to discuss what you think should be allowed to be discussed in the thread is in a PM to mods, not in the thread.
Pretty much. It was a fun 8 hours but Bannon quickly realized he isn't winning this one.
Ain’t over yet. Bannon may be trying to suck someone else’s dick for a change, but he was only one part of this book and everything I’ve seen so far indicates that more is true in the book than not. At least, parts have either been confirmed or partly confirmed with little of the dissenters offering anything as *evidence.
*yeah yeah, I know about the proving a negative fallacy.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Pretty much. It was a fun 8 hours but Bannon quickly realized he isn't winning this one.
Ain’t over yet. Bannon may be trying to suck someone else’s dick for a change, but he was only one part of this book and everything I’ve seen so far indicates that more is true in the book than not. At least, parts have either been confirmed or partly confirmed with little of the dissenters offering anything as *evidence.
*yeah yeah, I know about the proving a negative fallacy.
You know what, I'm glad to see trump and co being forced to try and proove a negative for a change!
For what it's worth, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Breitbart's owners are discussing firing Bannon, and the White House has said they should consider it.
There aren't too many people jerking Bannon off for being a genius anymore, so he's probably just trying to save his job.
Not sure what he'd do without Breitbart. Shitpost on reddit or something I'd guess.
For what it's worth, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Breitbart's owners are discussing firing Bannon, and the White House has said they should consider it.
There aren't too many people jerking Bannon off for being a genius anymore, so he's probably just trying to save his job.
Not sure what he'd do without Breitbart. Shitpost on reddit or something I'd guess.
Probably go back to running his chinese gold farm.
+16
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
For what it's worth, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Breitbart's owners are discussing firing Bannon, and the White House has said they should consider it.
There aren't too many people jerking Bannon off for being a genius anymore, so he's probably just trying to save his job.
Not sure what he'd do without Breitbart. Shitpost on reddit or something I'd guess.
Not that I like Breitbart or anything, but that's kinda scary/shady as fuck.
Also, while this isn't resulting in the full on schism that I would have liked, Banon being made to eat shit and grovel before trump (behavior that the alt right would attribute to a "cuck") with the possibility of him being turfed so that the noble name of Brietbart won't be tarnished by association with him isn't an entirely bad second prize.
For what it's worth, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Breitbart's owners are discussing firing Bannon, and the White House has said they should consider it.
There aren't too many people jerking Bannon off for being a genius anymore, so he's probably just trying to save his job.
Not sure what he'd do without Breitbart. Shitpost on reddit or something I'd guess.
Probably go back to running his chinese gold farm.
Is that even a thing now that Blizzard essentially lets you turn gold into gametime and viceversa; essentially letting using buy gold directly from Blizzard.
For what it's worth, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Breitbart's owners are discussing firing Bannon, and the White House has said they should consider it.
There aren't too many people jerking Bannon off for being a genius anymore, so he's probably just trying to save his job.
Not sure what he'd do without Breitbart. Shitpost on reddit or something I'd guess.
Probably go back to running his chinese gold farm.
Is that even a thing now that Blizzard essentially lets you turn gold into gametime and viceversa; essentially letting using buy gold directly from Blizzard.
It is if you can beat the price that blizzard sets on the exchange and can still pay the sweat shop.
Stephen K. Bannon's main financial backer is formally cutting ties with the former Trump adviser.
In a new statement Thursday, billionaire conservative donor Rebekah Mercer said that she has not spoken to Bannon, the former White House chief strategist, in many months and that she continues to support President Trump.
"I support President Trump and the platform upon which he was elected," Mercer said. "My family and I have not communicated with Steve Bannon in many months and have provided no financial support to his political agenda, nor do we support his recent actions and statements."
[...]
The article points out that Mercer holds a minority stake in Breitbart, so Bannon probably won't be chairman of Breitbart for long.
For what it's worth, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Breitbart's owners are discussing firing Bannon, and the White House has said they should consider it.
There aren't too many people jerking Bannon off for being a genius anymore, so he's probably just trying to save his job.
Not sure what he'd do without Breitbart. Shitpost on reddit or something I'd guess.
Honestly if all that comes from this is Bannon crashes and burns that still is pretty much a job well done by the author of this book and a service to our country.
Stephen K. Bannon's main financial backer is formally cutting ties with the former Trump adviser.
In a new statement Thursday, billionaire conservative donor Rebekah Mercer said that she has not spoken to Bannon, the former White House chief strategist, in many months and that she continues to support President Trump.
"I support President Trump and the platform upon which he was elected," Mercer said. "My family and I have not communicated with Steve Bannon in many months and have provided no financial support to his political agenda, nor do we support his recent actions and statements."
[...]
The article points out that Mercer holds a minority stake in Breitbart, so Bannon probably won't be chairman of Breitbart for long.
But she still intends to support Breitbart. The well-funded propaganda rag will live on with or without Bannon, unfortunately, and there is no shortage of white nationalist agitators to take his place. They may even manage to lure Ben Shapiro back to take up the mantle.
I'm not extraordinarily optimistic on the impact of this schism on the wider alt-right ecosystem, basically, as much as I am enjoying the humiliation of Steve Bannon by his prize racist president
Posts
Yeah I've been pawing around that since the morning.
The stories are all getting a ton of comments. The main one about the book release is over 16k comments, with thousands more on similar stories.
The way the comments are structured, its hard to get an overall feel, but from the selection I've skimmed over (so you don't have to!):
1) Lots are adopting a sort of "wait and see" posture, clearly not sure what to make of this dispute and the various claims.
2) Lots are supporting Trump right away, and throwing Bannon under the bus.
3) Some are trying the "liberal fake news" angle, but with this being all over Breitbart itself, that line isn't going very far.
4) Some are saying "we need to stick together" without explicitly backing a person or group. Related to 3.
5) I haven't seen anyone favoring Bannon over Trump. Some people are holding up Breitbart as important to their movement and Bannon as loyal, but still subservient to, Trump.
Most of the stuff though is tangents of every sort though, petty flame wars and the like.
Read the full thread before posting. Brietbart comments or analysis thereof aren't needed in this thread.
Ok, I'll refrain, but I think its on topic and relevant.
This thread is talking about the relationship between Bannon and Trump. What followers of both those people are opining matters a lot, since its those followers that gave both these men their power.
Are we allowed to discuss what republicans/alt-right are saying on the matter? Meaning, is it Breitbart specifically that is barred or the general discussion?
1) Trump and the alt right
2) Bannon and the alt right
3) The alt right and Breitbart
We might wish that these people didn't have a major influence in the day to day activities of the president of the United States, but they do. We might wish that the President didn't make major policy decisions in response to petty personal feuds and insults, but he does. We might wish that we didn't have to think about things like, "I wonder what Breitbart and their network is making of the beef between Trump and Bannon", in terms of what Trumps decisions might be over the next few weeks but we do.
How can we have a reasonable discussion using the standard rules of what is and is not good stuff to include in a politics thread, when the President and his cabinet does not make his decisions based on those factors? And instead is probably far more likely to be informed by logging on to Breitbart and doing just what Tycho? described above. Checking out the comments, stewing over a few fake articles.
Honestly, I think I'd argue that in terms of major US policy decisions, the state of the Breitbart comments is more important than say, a major report from a federal government agency.
*things which one would wish to be amazing
History suggests that no one in the Trump Admin understands what "on the record" and "off the record" mean.
Turns out my skepticism might have been misplaced.
Janice Min is a Well Connected Person.
But noone in the general media seems to be interested in reporting the things that actually influence the Trump administration, and why. I'd love to post links to detailed discussions of what the alt right is thinking, and exactly what fox and friends is reporting, and why they are doing that but people seem to be determined to pretend that this isn't what influences the president. Our President and his cabinet aren't a group of careful detailed thinkers studying reports, and detailed articles and summoning committees of experts. They literally ARE the angry people commenting on Breitbart that Breitbart is too leftist, and that Fox has been infiltrated by feminists.
Yeah, I think we can agree on this.
Yeah that was what I attempted to do, but a professional version would be better. Would such a thing be allowed, mods?
Bannon is going to have to suck a lot of dick to get back on Trump's good graces, not to mention that he will probably going to have to apologize to Kushner and Don Jr.
*"Bannon fears Mueller Drumpf, and SO WILL YOU!" doesn't count.
That's been a whole problem with staffing for them since before the inauguration.
Polls and the like, sure, but just hey here’s what Phil from Bear Anus, Nebraska decided to vomit on to the comment pages of a website, probably not.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
I'm not sure anyone's winning this one. It looks like burned bridges all round.
If he's actually seen the details of these stories then Trump must be feeling very, very lonely right now.
there is no way trump is reading this or any other book. he'll know what fox news reports along with whatever spin they offer and that'll be that. Everything else will be 'fake news' by dinner tomorrow.
This.
Also, the place to discuss what you think should be allowed to be discussed in the thread is in a PM to mods, not in the thread.
Ain’t over yet. Bannon may be trying to suck someone else’s dick for a change, but he was only one part of this book and everything I’ve seen so far indicates that more is true in the book than not. At least, parts have either been confirmed or partly confirmed with little of the dissenters offering anything as *evidence.
*yeah yeah, I know about the proving a negative fallacy.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
You know what, I'm glad to see trump and co being forced to try and proove a negative for a change!
There aren't too many people jerking Bannon off for being a genius anymore, so he's probably just trying to save his job.
Not sure what he'd do without Breitbart. Shitpost on reddit or something I'd guess.
Probably go back to running his chinese gold farm.
Not that I like Breitbart or anything, but that's kinda scary/shady as fuck.
Is that even a thing now that Blizzard essentially lets you turn gold into gametime and viceversa; essentially letting using buy gold directly from Blizzard.
Move the release date up to Friday.
I bet they are just mad they can put stickers on all of them saying, "THE BOOK THE PRESIDENT TRIED TO CENSOR!"
It is if you can beat the price that blizzard sets on the exchange and can still pay the sweat shop.
Honestly if all that comes from this is Bannon crashes and burns that still is pretty much a job well done by the author of this book and a service to our country.
Maybe we need to start labelling these somehow
Can we just take a minute to appreciate that it's specifically on a Friday now. It's like some kind of divine piss on Trump day.
Why is it always on Friday that interesting things happen with this President?
But she still intends to support Breitbart. The well-funded propaganda rag will live on with or without Bannon, unfortunately, and there is no shortage of white nationalist agitators to take his place. They may even manage to lure Ben Shapiro back to take up the mantle.
I'm not extraordinarily optimistic on the impact of this schism on the wider alt-right ecosystem, basically, as much as I am enjoying the humiliation of Steve Bannon by his prize racist president
NNID: Hakkekage
Trump really hires the best people.