Many, myself included, were appalled by the news that CNN would give Donald Trump more than an hour on prime time to spew his lies and hatred, which was exactly what he did. For many years, CNN has been considered a reliable news source, but that all began to change last year with a change in ownership and management. What started the network’s decline that culminated this week with their hosting of the wanna-be dictator? Robert Reich gives us the lowdown on what happened … and is continuing to happen … over at CNN.
After last night, anyone still trust CNN?
Chris Licht is full of BS
Robert Reich
11 May 2023
Why in hell did CNN give Donald Trump a full hour of primetime television before an audience of ardent supporters who applauded every lie and laughed at every sexist insult?
The germ of an answer could be found last August, when Chris Licht, CNN’s new chairman and CEO, canceled Brian Stelter’s Sunday show, “Reliable Sources,” which had been a reliable source of intelligent criticism of Fox News, rightwing media in general, Trumpism, and the increasingly authoritarian lurch of the Republican party.
Licht also fired Stelter and his staff.
The show had been commercially successful. It was doing better than several of CNN’s primetime shows.
Around the same time, Licht told CNN staff they should stop referring to Donald Trump’s “big lie” because the phrase sounded like a Democratic party talking point. Licht also told the staff he wanted more “straight news reporting,” along with more conservative guests.
Why?
Follow the money. CNN’s new corporate overseer is Warner Brothers Discovery Inc, whose CEO is David Zaslav.
Zaslav has been pushing Licht to reposition CNN to be a network preferred by “everybody … Republicans, Democrats.”
But CNN was never going to be the network preferred by Republicans. Fox News has that sewn up.
Besides, facts, data and logic are no longer relevant to the Republican base.
The anti-democracy movement in America is among the biggest issues confronting America today. Is reporting on it considered “straight news” or “opinion?” Wouldn’t failing to report on it in a way that sounded alarms be a gross dereliction of duty?
How is it possible to report on Trump and not speak of the big lie, or say they’ve broken norms if not laws?
So, what’s motivating Zaslav? Keep following the money.
The leading shareholder in Warner Brothers Discovery is John Malone, a multibillionaire cable magnate. (Malone was a chief architect in the merger of Discovery and CNN.)
Malone describes himself as a “libertarian” although he travels in rightwing Republican circles. In 2005, he held 32% of the shares of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation. He is on the board of directors of the Cato Institute. In 2017, he donated $250,000 to Trump’s inauguration.
Malone has said he wants CNN to be more like Fox News because, in his view, Fox News has “actual journalism”. Malone also wants the “news” portion of CNN to be “more centrist.”
It’s unlikely that Malone instructed Zaslav to tell Licht to fire Stelter. Power isn’t exercised that clumsily in large corporate media bureaucracies.
It’s more likely that Licht knew what Zaslav wanted, and Zaslav knew what Malone wanted. A source told Deadline’s Dominic Patten and Ted Johnson that even if Malone didn’t order Stelter’s ouster, “it sure represents his thinking.”
When you follow the money behind deeply irresponsible decisions at the power centers of America today, the road often leads to rightwing billionaires.
Last year, Stelter wrote in his newsletter that Malone’s comments about CNN “stoked fears that Discovery might stifle CNN journalists and steer away from calling out indecency and injustice.”
Last August, on his last show, Stelter said:
“It’s not partisan to stand up for decency and democracy and dialogue. It’s not partisan to stand up to demagogues. It’s required. It’s patriotic. We must make sure we don’t give platforms to those who are lying to our faces.”
Precisely.
Sadly, there are still many in America – and not just billionaires like Malone – who believe that holding Trump accountable for what he has done (and continues to do) to this country is a form of partisanship, and that such partisanship has no place in so-called “balanced journalism”.
This belief is itself dangerous.
After I first criticized Licht for the direction he was pushing CNN, he phoned me. He was angry that I doubted his motives, and said he took the top job at CNN because he “believes in journalism.”
When I mentioned the particularly challenging time American journalism now finds itself — with Trump, most of the Republican Party, and most Republican candidates for office denying that the 2020 election was won by Joe Biden, thereby on the way to undermining America democracy – Licht agreed that it’s challenging. He said, emphatically, that this was why he is so deeply committed to restoring CNN’s credibility as an “unbiased” source of news that “people can feel they can trust.”
Well, Chris, after what you did last night, you can forget the public’s trust in CNN.
Filosofa's Word 
Perhaps if CNN feels like they want to entertain all candidates, they might put a journalist up there who can ask CONald some real and hard questions! Everyone pussyfoots around that pile or orange drek. I’m glad CNN is paying the price of lowest news cable channel ratings of all. Will they learn? Not sure, there seems to be a hole now that Faux Fake Fox has created that CNN may be trying to fill. I don’t watch that garbage. I live in Canada and pay extra for MSNBC. Worth every penny. ❤
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly! If they truly wanted to be centrist, at the very least they would have had an audience that represented both sides, who would not have cheered every time he opened his fat mouth, and would have actually asked some of the tough questions! I’m not sure CNN will learn anything from this, for my best guess is that while they have lost some of their educated audience, they will pick up some of what Fox has lost recently, and be well on their way to becoming a right-wing outlet. I can’t help but wonder what Ted Turner thinks of this latest fiasco! I do like Rachael Maddow, but other than that I rarely look at MSNBC … perhaps I’ll give them another look, if you think they’re even worth paying for! ❤
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like to stay in the know, so I’ll flick on to MSNBC a few times a day, and loved Rachel at primetime and Lawrence after, but now she’s only on Monday nights and for ‘big scoops’ as she has her hands in so many projects. So I watch Lawrence O’Donnell nightly. Also, when I hear breaking news, I also go to NPR, Politco and a few other favored sites to verify. In this day and age we must fact check. As for Turner, I’m sure he’s rolled around a few times. xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
I usually just watch Maddow on YouTube clips … I didn’t know she had cut back the number of shows she does. I’m not familiar with Lawrence O’Donnell, but I will check him out now! Almost always, no matter where I first hear something, I verify it on at least two other sources, for there is just so much misinformation floating around these days … you can’t be too careful!
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is absolutely important. We live in such a mistrusting world right now. 😦
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is true, and from everything I’m hearing about Artificial Intelligence, it’s likely to get much worse soon. Even its creators are worried!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m afraid so. 😦
LikeLiked by 1 person
We do not have Fox or CNN over here, except on satellite. I do not pay for that, and I am pleased that I don’t.
Best wishes, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No, we don’t pay for either here, but for the advertisements … that’s how they make their money!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jill, when it first started back in the 1980s, CNN was a very trusted source. They had to be to compete. Then in the 1990s, along came Fox News in an effort to monetize telling people what they wanted to hear. That is not news, that is regurgitation. The “fair and balanced” mantra they used was and is comical.
MSNBC saw how much money could be made and tried to be a progressive version of Fox News. So, they became two sides of the same coin. With their success, CNN began to change. One of their challenges is when you repeat the same stories throughout the day, they feel like they have to make it more sensational each time. So, I long ago stopped watching CNN and try to avoid Fox and MSNBC as well.
It was not a surprise to me to see both PBS Newshour and BBC World News America as the more trusted sources of news. The one people need to guard against is the 40% plus local stations owned by Sinclair Broadcasting. Each night, their news shows end with a reading of the same op-ed piece, which tends to be ultra-conservative. John Oliver did a bit where he showed an expanding screen of people reading the same op-ed, providing a chorus of conservative opinion.
People must use multiple sources. The more sensational it sounds, the more you need to check it against other sources. (Hillary Clinton running a child pornography ring from a DC pizza parlor is a great example of nonsensical BS). Avoid the shock jocks (Alex Jones, et al), avoid Fox and its sister conservatives, avoid MSNBC and avoid CNN.
Watch more PBS, BBC news. NPR is a terrific source as well, one of the best. And, read multiple sources – Reuters, Politico, The Guardian, etc. are all good, but know The Guardian has a progressive bent.
Keith
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well said, Keith! I’ve never been a fan of MSNBC or Fox, and while I used to trust the BBC and sometimes view the news through their lens, I know they’ve lost a lot of respect in the UK in the past couple of years. I do pay attention to PBS, The Guardian, AP, NPR and a few others, but overall television news is too commercialized for me anyway. I want, as Joe Gannon used to say on “Dragnet” … “the facts, ma’am, just the facts.” It sure isn’t easy to get that these days, is it? It’s rather like running an obstacle course!
LikeLike
Maybe we need a Jack Webb clone to give the news, with a Harry Morgan clone by his side. Keith
LikeLiked by 1 person
Y’know, that’s not a half bad idea!!!
LikeLike
CNN has been acting like FOX for quite a long time. & the other major news networks aren’t much better. They all talk about him like he’s the only story worth telling. There’s a reason he became president & there’s a reason he’s going to be the GOP nominee & possibly president again, & it’s not just because of his rabid base.
LikeLiked by 2 people
No, the other major networks are NO better, and I don’t get my news from television … haven’t for the past 20 or so years. I said long ago that if the media would stop paying ANY attention to Trump, he would either self-destruct or fade into oblivioun, for he thrives on attention — any attention, even the negative. But noooooooo … the press couldn’t resist and now here we are.
LikeLike
Thank you thank you thank you. I stopped watching the major news when Trump was elected. I didn’t want to hear his voice or see his face. I get my news from newspapers. Any given day, I read the NYTimes, the Boston Globe, the LATimes, the WAPost, the Guardian, half a dozen other ones … plus blogs. & the Buffalo News, of course.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I get my news from most of the same sources you named, but even then I am often disgusted to open a website and see Trump’s ugly mug front-and-center! The less attention they give him, the lower his polling will go, but they apparently don’t see that. Or don’t care. “If it bleeds, it leads.” Sigh.
LikeLike
Over here in the UK, I adopt my own good old-fashioned unrepentant hard-left approach. If it’s Trump, I glance at the headline and never read what he has said. Thus to me he is a non-person a mere manifestation of the MAGA sound and fury.
His ego is such that the thought of someone, anyone, anywhere ignoring what he has to say would drive him crazy.
It’s not much, I know.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sometimes our silence speaks volumes!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Imagine an anti-Trump organisation manages to buy all the tickets to one of his rallies.
He comes on stage and is confronted by folk looking down, reading books, rustling packs of snacks, looking at phones, chatting, making paper airplanes, or paper dolls, yawning, playing rock-paper-scissors tournaments, anything but paying attention him to.
He might try a rant, but the rehearsed response would be to look up suddenly and say ‘Huh?’ or ‘Say now?’ and best ‘When’s the main act The Great Woozer and his Amazing Magic starting?’ or ‘ This warm up comic sucks’
LikeLike
People like us ignoring him does nothing at all. It’s the networks & the newspapers that have to ignore him. I ignored him (as much as anyone can here in the US) for most of my life … I found him completely odious.
But as long as he’s covered by the media, he won’t go away. AT. ALL. If he has a heart attack & dies, they will cover his death & funeral like he was the king of america. We’re stuck with this bastard.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I know. You have my sincere sympathies. Mine is just one of those small personal activities, indulged in to prove creatures such as him cannot convince you he has any worth.
On a smaller scale we have Boris Johnson, although his public fan base is grounded more in affection for ‘a loveable rascal’ (subsequent rude words redacted) rather than the fanatical base Trump gets (though we have a few of those too but very much with a minority following)
LikeLiked by 1 person
The real problem are the politicians who are coming behind Trump, like Ron DeSantis, who aren’t clowns, who aren’t grifters, who can do real damage to this country, way more than Trump ever could, since Trump doesn’t have the brains for that or the true desire. The other problem are the dim Dems who have no ideas & no vision for this country except to make the corporations who own us happy & happier. It’s a very dismal situation here in the States.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Agreed, but DeSantis is shooting himself in the foot with every move he makes, and while his ‘policies’ might sell in Florida, they won’t survive on the world stage! That still leaves Trump, though …
LikeLike
I was introduced to the USA back in the very early 60s through comics and tv shows, and was drawn in by the vitality, inventiveness and variety, while being open to its own share of flaws and dirty history (all nations have that).
As time went on I felt the USA was my adopted nation. The concept of its political set up and the balance between the various institutions was most intriguing. And it seemed at the vanguard of social change.
Then what has happened to others happened in the USA, the rise of a nation’s incipient ignorance and intolerance; the skewed fundamentalism which has threatened before
The nation is no longer the one I grew up with and I am deeply sorrowed by that.
I grieve for the ordinary tolerant folk and those who care for the nation as one united irrespective of race, creed, and so forth.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is no longer the one I grew up with, either. 😔
LikeLiked by 1 person
And we’re back to ‘Monster’ by Steppenwolf
LikeLiked by 1 person
OH MY POOR EARS!!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is that to it🤔
LikeLiked by 1 person
I saw Steppenwolf back in 1999 … they (rather John Kay & a backup band) were an opening act for Lynyrd Skynyrd. It was one of the best sets I ever heard … total blues set EXCEPT for the last two numbers, which were “Magic Carpet Ride” & “Born to be Wild”. The drunks in the crowd totally ignored his set (in fact, talked all the way through it) UNTIL the last two songs & then they cheered … went crazy during “Born to be Wild”.
I thought John Kay’s set was much better than Lynyrd Skynyrd’s. But I was never much of a Skynryd fan & if you seen them once, you’ve seen them forevermore. It’s always the same show.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Back in ‘the day’ (67-69 & some of 1970) Steppenwolf were one of my go-to bands along with Velvet Underground and Steve Miller Band.
Everyone remembers them for the hard rock, but oh my goodness they could be beautiful too!
This is my all-time favourite from their later days, another Hoyt Axton anti-drug song.
LikeLiked by 1 person
IF the media had stopped covering him on the day he left the White House, if his picture had never again been printed, his words largely ignored, he would have faded into obscurity by now. But no … the press served as an unpaid marketing organization for him and still do!
LikeLike
At least MSNBC doesn’t give oxygen to lying rethuglicans. x
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gimme a break already. What about Joe Scarsborough? Meet the Press? Pul-leaze.
LikeLike
Damning account Jill.
And also likely to be ‘Titanic’ in its outcome (historical ref). I’m still suspending judgement until the final act, which will be played out next year’s winter. Whether there was deliberate risk-taking by middle level people to expose Trump or it was all unintended consequences remains to be seen.
Meanwhile it can be envisaged that mature conservative journalists along with their now brothers and sister on the Liberal and what passes as The Left in the USA will coalesce around other outlets to which those who trust their judgements will gravitate.
Still the battle lines are being drawn:
While the suggested typing training skill proposed by Charles E Weller in 1918:
“Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of the party”
Should be adapted as a rallying cry by
1. Replacing ‘good’ with ‘varied’ and ‘men’ with ‘folk’ (covers as many keys)
2. Placing ‘party’ with ‘nation’ (which has been adopted by some keyboard skill tutors).
And messaged all over the place (helps the typing skills to no end too)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Of course you are right … the “proof will be in the pudding” as they say, which won’t happen for another 542 days. By which time we will all be bald from pulling our hair out, else dead of stress! I only know that Trump thrives on attention, and what CNN did was gave him a dedicated platform filled with his adoring fans and I’ve long felt that the best way to sink his boat is to ignore him completely. Sigh.
“Now is the time for all varied folk to come to the aid of their nation”. Let us hope … let us set an example. Sigh.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If only there were a few astute Democrats of flexible approaches and strategic minds 🤔.
There would be an organised campaign directed at the Republican voter sewing doubt about Trump, DeSantis and the rest as to whether they care about ‘you the voter’ or just wanting to line their pockets. Also Boebert was a gift, for blaspheming on Christ’s Passion suggesting He should have had a gun. The Democrats could have torn the Republican vote apart on that issue alone.
It’s no use preaching to the converted, it’s ok to go for the middle ground, but you have to undermine the opposition’s base too.
Look at the UK’s 2019 General Election, doubt over Labour sunk the party.
That’s what is needed in the USA now a campaign of doubt amongst Republican voters who are keeping their deepest concerns under wraps.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sadly, the Democrats are too busy eating their own. I could expound at some length about what is wrong, starting with too damn much money in politics, too little conscience, but the bottom line is it will boil down to whether the Republican Party can dilute and suppress enough votes via gerrymandering and voter suppression laws in nearly every state, including my own. In a sane world, doubt within the Republican Party would have magnified last week, first with the verdict against Trump in favour of the woman he raped and then defamed, E. Jean Carroll, and second with his convoluted (I just finished reading the transcript and he didn’t even manage to string a coherent sentence together!!!) 69 minute diatribe on CNN Wednesday night! But nope, his approval rating went even higher after those two events. Bah humbug.
LikeLiked by 1 person
High approval ratings for Trump, mass shootings, trying to re-write history to suit ‘White Folks’
These are parts of the recipe for the break up of the states into effectively separate nations, some of which will end up as effective colonies of large predatory nations.
Happened to Roman, happened to the Holy Roman Empire, happened to the Ottoman Empire, happened to China (But you don’t want that as an example when you check out the cost in getting back on top).
USA an’t so different.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sadly, I’ve come to believe that you are right … that the “United” States as we’ve known it for the past 235 years or so, is in its death throes. If I were 20 years younger, I’d be packing my bags today. As it is, we’re considering options.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Best case scenario if The Right as it is prevail….Mass migration between states as folk move to where they’ll be with ‘Their Own’.
And then up go ‘The Borders’.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sigh. I’d rather see walls and borders torn down than built up. To me, best case scenario is the ‘Right’ suddenly understand compassion, empathy, and tolerance for those who are in one way or another different, but obviously that ain’t gonna happen. I think I’m ’bout ready to join my wolf pack … much simpler than living as a human.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Or invest in a t-shirt line in sombre colours with the one words ‘Toldja’🤔
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ha ha … Chris got me a t-shirt at Christmas that says, “I’m Done Peopling” … I wear it on the rare occasions we go out!
LikeLiked by 1 person
A statement which contains merit 😃
LikeLiked by 1 person
Any poor fux ever trusted in CNN? As a reliable news source? CNN was a propaganda instrument from the very beginning, it’s in its cell structure
LikeLiked by 2 people
I did not know you were a secret Fox viewer Orca.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thing is, we don’t even own a TV.
Getting all the news from non-affiliated YouTube and other sources. Even if we still had a TV we’d not be getting American stations anyway, I think not. But I remember CNN from the days of desert storm and such military bullying. And of course I know Fox from Cucker Tarlson and all the emptyheaded blondes who read the news thereabouts.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There we differ I never look to You Tube for news, too much unedited opinion masking as news and ‘investigative’ work.
I prefer to absorb what’s going on and sift it in reference to what has happened in the past.
LikeLike
All in all I found more balanced and expert news on the web than corporate TV could ever deliver.
On YT Check:https://www.youtube.com/@DouglasMacgregorStraightCalls (ex-US colonel)https://www.youtube.com/@AlexMercouris (Greek in UK)https://www.youtube.com/@AlexChristoforou (Greek in Greece)https://www.youtube.com/@TheDuran (Alexander and Alex)https://www.youtube.com/@RedactedNews (ex-Fox News anchors)https://www.youtube.com/@TheNewAtlas (ex-US Marine)https://www.youtube.com/@iEarlGreyTV (a Brit living in Russia)https://www.youtube.com/@gonzalolira0229 (Chilean-American guy living in Ukraine and was just abducted by SBU for the second time)https://www.youtube.com/@PatrickLancasterNewsToday (American guy living in Ukraine and makes video reports)
This should be enough info dump to make ones mind up.
And then there are countless Twitter accs, some with very good reputation (like known journalist Eva K. Bartlett) but also many trolls. We really don’t need to watch govt propaganda.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There a set of views.
There are other sets of views.
Let me give you a scenario
You walk into a garden, barefooted, you have a stone which fills your hand, you let go of it; it falls, hits your foot and it hurts.
Unless something happens to the laws of gravity there are two predictable truths, action and pain.
When it comes to politics and international relations there are no truths. There are only viewpoints and arguments. They have various origins, reasons and causes. They bear weight; depending on the outlooks of those who put the case, those who are against the case and those who listen.
The analysis of historical events in all international relations shows:
1. All sides mis-judge the intentions of the other.
2. Some players (because there are usually more than two) underestimate the situation they are getting into.
3. In the long run nothing goes according to plan.
4. More mistakes will be made. Those who make the least usually come out on top…..for a while anyway.
5. There will be outcomes, but there will never be any agreement as to cause of the outcomes or the results of the outcomes.
6. Outcomes never last, they result in actions and reactions.
7. Everyone uses propaganda. If they are not, they not conducting the situation to their advantage.
Therefore there never is ‘Truth’ only interpretations and those are often revised as time goes on.
LikeLiked by 1 person
All sides mis-judge the intentions of the other.
I’m on no specific side and neither do I give a fuk about intententions.
Some players (because there are usually more than two) underestimate the situation they are getting into.
There are 2 players in this: The Russian Federation is one, the “Collective West” being the other. Russia underestimated the West’s unwillingness to negotiate, the West underestimated Russia’s strength and resolve.
In the long run nothing goes according to plan.
Does it ever? Russians made a huge mistake by sending only small, unproven task for into the Donbass, thinking Zelensky was independent enough to meet Putin at the negotiation table and make concessions towards the new republics Donetsk and Luhansk and finally, after 9 years, stop the shelling. That plan didn’t work out so well, did it.
And the West’s plan to hurt Russia with sanctions and delivering some outdated weapons to Ukraine was equally as stupid.
More mistakes will be made. Those who make the least usually come out on top…..for a while anyway.
Time for mistakes is over! Russia’s forces will march thru Ukraine up to the Polish border – if Zelensky doesn’t offer his unconditional surrender.
There will be outcomes, but there will never be any agreement as to cause of the outcomes or the results of the outcomes.
Does it matter? Only the outcome counts. And there is only one scenario. Only way to avoid it would be if the WH loses its last nerve and presses “The Button!”
Outcomes never last, they result in actions and reactions.
Of course. Tides go in and out. But in the big picture we’ll see a south-east dominated world order for the next couple centuries, of which the Ukro conflict was just a minutiae, a starting point.
Everyone uses propaganda. If they are not, they not conducting the situation to their advantage.
Therefore there never is ‘Truth’ only interpretations and those are often revised as time goes on.
I consider it my personal duty to not fall for propaganda. Dunno how successful I can avoid all the trapdoors. But the fact that I, a child of the west and former glowing €uropean, drifted away from the western narrative, should tell you that I’m kinda impenetrable. =^.^=
Once the Ukro conflict is over (days, weeks, hardly months) there won’t be any interpretations needed. We all will be poorer, the gas and food prices will go up. What’s to interpret about such simple facts? With all my white supremacy and high education I still can’t argue my empty belly away. 😦
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well I am in general, broad, overall agreement with your first part, aside from so tactical interpretations, and also your closing conclusions.
As for the middle part about marching to the polish border…In a long game and a return to power by the US republican Right there is that possibility it is not a certainty. In war in comes down to who makes the least number of mistakes, militarily and politically. Russia has a mammoth capacity for absorbing losses, whether that will be enough remains to be seen.
One thing is certain, ordinary folk will suffer, everywhere.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Russia has a mammoth capacity for absorbing losses, whether that will be enough remains to be seen.”
I don’t see many losses, since Ukraine will be out of military soon enuff, so it’ll be more like a triumph march. Only way Russia will suffer many losses will be if some or the other NATO intervenes and tries to save the sinking ship by bombing the Ukraine.
“One thing is certain, ordinary folk will suffer, everywhere.”
As we do already. 😦
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s not the war I am reading about or seeing.
It’s a brutal conventional weaponised war.
Even ‘triumph marches’ come with a cost.
If there ever is ‘triumph’ that is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“That’s not the war I am reading about or seeing.”
What war are you reading about? The one that was started by Russia – unprovoked? The one the heroic Ukrainian forces will win?
“It’s a brutal conventional weaponised war.”
Yes it is. Or let’s say t turned into one, a couple days ago. If you follow the happenings kinda closely you’ll notice that the fighting is mostly happening in Bakhmut. A Russian town inside the Donbass on the border to Ukraine proper. So factually we’re still talking about the SMO, not an invasion not a war.
And of course it’s super duper old style conventional. Remember the Russians stated if it ever becomes a real war, or even worse, a nuclear one – it’s started by the US/NATO.
The Russians have no need to use nukes, they are winning without and trickery.
“Even ‘triumph marches’ come with a cost.”
Ugh, come on! You know what I meant. Of course the Russians won’t do a triumph march and won’t sing any battle songs. They don’t wanna do it. But they will! If Zelensky doesn’t gets the okidok to surrender from his overlords pretty soon they’re gonna end the Ukraine!.
“If there ever is ‘triumph’ that is.”
In many years from now, when our kids and grandkids are singing the battlehymns, there will be a atmosphere of triumph!
LikeLike
Oh, I just had an additional flash of wit …
“Therefore there never is ‘Truth’ only interpretations”
150000 dead or permanently out of order Ukrainian soldiers an indisputable fact. If they go on Zelensky’s or on the White House’s account is up for interpretation. Won’t change the sad fact tho. 😦
LikeLiked by 1 person
Russian losses?
Modern Day warfare is very efficient at producing bodies and disabled.
Then the political machines will convert those once more this time into. Heroes Who Gave Their Lives or Futures or Tragic Losses and Waste of Life depending on who is writing the account and for whom.
And someone will write the bare analytical military account of actions, counter actions and casualties. Which will have a certain stark honesty about it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Russian losses?”
10 Ukros : 1 RF is what I hear.
With account I didn’t mean what you meant but on who’s conscience the dead and wounded go.Politics and Propaganda doesn’t interest me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would not give any credence to those figures. Those are politics and propaganda figures. As old as accounts in Ancient times.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I would not give any credence to those figures.”
People are saying figures and accounts published by the Russian MoD are pretty accurate. I mean they have to be since they are under way more scrutiny than their Ukraine counterpart.
Particularly at this late point in the conflict the Russians are far superior to the Ukros, in all aspects. And we’ve seen their actions during the SMO: When a position becomes indefendable/too expensive in human lives, they pull out. Kiev does the exact opposite: Bakhmut is a lost cause; for the Russians it’s like shooting fish in a barrel. Nevertheless does Zelensky send more and more completely untrained teenagers and old guys into the battle. Survival time about 2 – 4 hours. 😦
LikeLike
The interesting thing Orca is I and reading and hearing exactly the opposite to you, in fact you could.
Now you have to ask yourself about your earlier statement ‘Politics and Propaganda doesn’t interest me’
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry, as an ESLer I couldn’t make sense of your post. Only that you hear/read different facts from me. As so often I gotta ask for your sources, so I can investigate.
LikeLike
Very sound analysis, Roger!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Only in his very special, highly hypothized example (stone on foot). In real life there are more than enuff indisputable facts and truths. Truth is truth. Not up for discussion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Facts are facts, yes. For instance it is a fact that it rained here this morning … that is indisputable and I have proof. However, “truth” is something different. For example, you consider it ‘truth’ that Vladimir Putin was justified in his invasion of Ukraine, while to me, it is ‘truth’ that it was an aggressive move fully unjustifiable. So … while truth should be fact-based, sometimes one person draws a different conclusion from a set of facts than another person.
LikeLike
Thanks Jill.
I do not see History offering any other analysis.
It plays The Long, Long Game. No nation, no empire, no community gets to have complete and certain authority over the rest.
LikeLiked by 1 person
🤣🤣🤣
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, CNN has long been a relatively reliable news source since its inception in the 1980s under Ted Turner. Have they been perfect? No, of course not … nobody gets it right every time. But certainly at least as reliable … and more comprehensive … as any of the network news channels.
LikeLike
And, all it takes, for the, viewers to find CNN’s, news report as, valid or factual, went away, with the news station’s, support of, Trump, and, it did not matter, how many years previously, it’d, slowly, built up the news station’s, credibility. What news channels have a, more mutual, standpoint on the matter of, politics now, and, where can we get, the, “untainted” factual, news stories in the world today???
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re so right! Starting with its founding by Ted Turner back in 1980, the network has fought an uphill battle to reach a large audience, to become a trustworthy news source. And with one really stupid decision, they may well have blown that sky high. As for where to get the factual news stories today, I find The Guardian (in the UK) has the most unbiased and accurate reporting, as does the Associated Press (AP).
LikeLiked by 2 people
I thought so too but Claytoonz has a good take on it
http://claytoonz.com/2023/05/12/trump-town-hall/
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree … Clay is most always the voice of reason! We’ll see, though, if he has the same view a few months from now!
LikeLike
CNN may not be just the new Fox, but might very well be Truth Social gone mainstream. I am not totally condemning CNN yet, maybe they really are trying to present a non-partisan look at the news. But evidence so far is against that notion. Giving Trump an audience full of MAGAts seems to me to be going full-on Republican. They made Trump feel the power again. He never admitted he lost it, but he was hurt when he did not win election in 2020. Televising what was basically a Trump rally? That’s like giving a child a lit match in a fireworks store.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Oh, perish the thought!!! Others have said the same as you, but I think the fact that they only invited magats to participate in the audience speaks volumes. I am offended by the laughter when he put down and name-called the woman he raped some years ago. If that is what the people who support Trump find humorous, then … they are sub-humans in my book. This is the 1st time in my life I’ve actually wished someone dead … and it’s not a good feeling, but it is an honest one, for I think that as long as Trump exists, this nation will keep splitting further and further until we finally self immolate.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Self-something, that is for sure. Self-immolation doesn’t sound like so ething I’d want to do. I think I can stand many ways od dying, after all it is going to happen some way or other. I just don’t want it to be by fire or water.
Yeah, I know you meant the human race, but the “self” gave puctures I’d rather not imagine. Burning in a nuclear blast would be so fast we’d be toast before we knew it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was especially tired last night, and I knew that self-immolate wasn’t quite the phrase I was looking for, but my mind wouldn’t come up with anything better, so I went with it. Self-destruct would have worked better! No, I don’t have any desire to light myself afire! Actually, I’ve always thought just dying peacefully in my sleep would be preferable.
LikeLike
Much!
LikeLiked by 1 person
These folk are fighting dirty, and if the next destination of their Chosen Moron isn’t prison but is instead the White House, our entire species is doomed. In my opinion there’s only one way to respond to that and to hell with political correctness.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed on all counts, and I MUST HAVE one of those T-shirts!!!! Thanks, PeNdantry!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wonder … although I think I know the answer … whether Licht will make any changes considering all the negative feedback he’s getting. Probably not because as we all know … $$$$$ talks. LOUDLY!
LikeLiked by 2 people
No, I think Licht will stand by his decision despite the negative blowback, as he has for the past day or two. My question is … what next? Who’s next on his chopping block … Anderson Cooper? And will CNN actively support Trump in next year’s election? Will they start hosting the likes of Tommy Tuberville who thinks white supremacy is noble, or Marge Greene who believes that Jewish space lasers start wildfires on behalf of George Soros? Sigh. So, where do we turn for fact-based news now? Associated Press, New York Times, The Washington Post, Reuters, The Guardian, and Business Insider remain my ‘go to’ sources, but I will miss using CNN as something of an aggregator.
LikeLike
The news source that I most identify with is The Guardian. But part of that is because of paywalls … and I refuse to “pay” to read the news. I do “donate” regularly to The Guardian, but IMO, that’s a whole different ballgame.
I RARELY watch TV news anymore. I used to “religiously” tune into CNN when Trump first burst on the political scene, but now? I’ve found that most TV news is regurgitation of what I’ve already read online. And for sure CNN is off my list now!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I subscribe to The Washington Post and the New York Times, and like you, contribute monthly to The Guardian. I also subscribe to a number of newsletters (mostly free ones) and writers on SubStack (again, mostly free), but like you, when I click on a link for, say, the Los Angeles Times and there’s a paywall, I refuse to pay for a publication I might want to look at once or twice a year! I’m not made of money! I understand that the media is suffering financially because of the Internet, but … they need to find another way! I never watch television anymore, except for 22 minutes at night when Chris and I watch a British soap opera, Coronation Street! I get my news from the ‘net or from the two print magazines I subscribe to, “Time” and “Foreign Affairs”. Yep, CNN is off my list now, too!
LikeLiked by 1 person
We are so happy in Europe with Biden. Another four years with this disgusting orange-face who is shitting on Europe simply not bearable. PLEASE STOP THIS MAGA MONSTER! His place should be in prison for treason and many more legal issues. 💥
LikeLiked by 6 people
I’m glad to hear that! I’ve long said that Trump was destroying our relationship with our allies, and I saw from the start that Biden was trying to repair some of the damage. I’m glad to hear that he is successfully doing so. Another four years of Trump would cost us most of our alliances, I think, not to mention our own freedom/democracy/sanity. I am doing everything in my power to wake people to the very real dangers that Trump poses if he were to be elected again … fingers crossed that people will actually open their eyes and see that we simply cannot afford to allow him near the White House ever again! I agree that he belongs in prison, but I’m betting that in his case, justice will never be served.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Trump is Putin’s joker what is quite dangerous. Russian nuclear rockets are standing just in a distance of 600 km from me in the Russian enclave Kaliningrad (former German Königsberg). Within minutes they can easily reach Berlin and/or Warsaw. They were installed some years ago when Trump was sitting in the White House doing nothing against his big friend Putin.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Well said. I take this opportunity to apologise for sections of the UK Left who have given Putin a free ride over many years. They are not my Left.
And have no sense of European History.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I must admit that I would not have expected Putin’s imperialist forces and troops invading the Ukraine. And in Russia they still adore bloody and murderous Stalin. Unbelievable that such stupidity is still existing in the 21st century!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Going back over the long bloody centuries across Europe some pattens do not change. Putin could have played a soft power card by cosying up to Kyiv after the Orange Revolution with a:
‘Hey. Mistakes have been made. But we’ve shared a lot too. You don’t want to trust those Westerners, they’ll sell you out. Let’s talk this over, ‘
But Putin being KGB with a Czar fixation went down that brutal road, and like most in the East and West who dabble in adventurism failed to plan for a worst case scenario or truly study ‘the ground’. An old story.
Hubris is the Greek word.
I prefer ‘Terminal Stupidity’. Which is a disease spreading swifter than Covid and arguably in the long run more deadly.
LikeLiked by 3 people
You are absolutely right, and he made no secret of the fact he admired Putin. Meanwhile, Putin played Trump and I often referred to Trump as Putin’s “puppet”. There is no doubt whatsoever that Putin played a role in getting Trump elected in 2016 — hopefully he’s so busy trying to keep his head above water in the war he started against Ukraine that he’ll stay out of our election next year, but I’m not holding my breath. You are in a frightening position, being in such close proximity to Russia’s nuclear arsenal and with an egomaniac sitting in the Kremlin. I don’t envy you, but then … the world gets smaller by the day and nobody is quite safe anymore with madmen like Putin, Kim Jong-un, Viktor Orbán at the helms of their countries. Take care, my friend.
LikeLiked by 1 person