Charles Pierce has a great piece on Maddow's tax show I suggest everyone read

[Fast Walker 52]

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a53869/maddow-trump-taxes/

Those of us who are fans of Kindly Doc Maddow and her electric teevee show occasionally are driven to distraction by what we can only term her opening monologue. This nightly trip all around Robin Hood's barn to get to the point of the A-block story is a rare exercise in genuine television eccentricity (Hooray!), and, like the old chief's magic in Little Big Man, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and it always feels like it should begin with, "Call me Ishmael," or, "In the beginning."

Such was the case last night, when she rolled us through all the smoke surrounding the Trump administration's purported ties with grifters and bagmen and plutocrats of many lands before getting to the big reveal: that somebody had mailed the president*'s 2005 Form 1040 to David Cay Johnston, and that he was now prepared to share it with the country. The electric Twitter machine went instantly aflame with anticipation. Trump! Taxes! And if there wasn't news to match the hype, and there wasn't, that doesn't mean the evening was completely lost.

There is a line of thought, beloved of the clergy of that which Jay Rosen calls The Church of the Savvy, that holds that this whole thing was a clever scam by the White House—and, indeed, that the administration may have been the source of the leak. But overrating the cleverness of this crowd has become reflexive. A lot of what they've done is just stupid, their efforts at spin control an insult to the memory of Michael Deaver, and their strategy roughly on the level of, as President Jed once put it, "Hey, your shoe's untied!" Chief among these explanations is the notion that this was meant to be a distraction from the other bad news engulfing the White House on the subjects of healthcare and whatever-the-hell James Comey is going to say next.

However, if the distraction argument is true, then it is a massive dereliction of duty on the part of the members of the media who make it true. In essence, coming from anyone in this business, the distraction argument denies that the media has any agency in what it covers. If you are an editor—or a reporter—and you decide that a story is a shiny object, then don't cover it. Or, at the very least, don't emphasize it. The decision by the elite political media to make Hillary Rodham Clinton's email server a central issue in the campaign was a deliberate choice. It wasn't forced on them by anyone or anything. If you can choose to emphasize something, you can choose not to do that. If you can choose to concentrate on HRC's email practices, you can choose not to concentrate on what you judge to be obvious diversions from the White House.

Do your freaking job.

The distraction argument denies that the media has any agency in what it covers.

As to the actual story itself, well, it was a bit oversold, but there was actual news to be found. If I read the substance of the information correctly, the president* made most of his income that year selling off properties he already owned. (And this is coming from a self-proclaimed real estate genius at the beginning of the fraud-financed real estate bubble.) It can be extrapolated from this information that the Trump operation already was taking on water. Not only does this blow a hole in his proclaimed net worth, it also raises questions of whether or not it was shortly after this that he went looking for more, ahem, exotic sources of financing. This is certainly worth further investigation.

Read the rest--
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a53869/maddow-trump-taxes/

[KT2000]

1. it was the hype - not the info

there was good info in the story but the countdown clock was unnecessary.
That tRump was likely selling off properties is an interesting take too.

[bettyellen]

6. CNN and MSNBC do countdown clocks on anything- Bernie in WV, a profile of Melania....

So not sure why this one was such a big deal.
I think just like the RT stories and Wiki bullshit last year, some people love being useful idiots and piling on.
Held the people complaining it took away from the Russia story when it was ALL ABOUT the Russian money connections. They didn't even watch it.

[Hyper_Eye]

8. MSNBC has been doing countdown clocks for their different primetime shows lately.

It doesn't have to be anything particularly exciting. It can be a fairly benign interview. They have just been on a countdown clock kick lately.

[Enoki33]

15. Seem to recall financial analysts saying he was selling of properties

while acquiring debts at that time. Interesting indeed!

[Dustlawyer]

17. I think she was hyping the importance of why

we need to see all of his taxes. The media had let the story go and hopefully this will get it back on track.

I believe that if we get Trump's returns he will be toast!

[gibraltar72]

2. Very well

put. I myself sometimes wonder where Rachels opening is going. However she is always trying to teach or sell. Last night she was trying to teach people why Trump wouldn't want full returns known. You and I understand but all these new watchers may have to be lead very gently. No one appreciates what an artist does to paint a masterpiece. It isn't done with a couple strokes of a brush. It takes time and effort to combine all the strokes into a work of art inside a frame. I'm confident Rachel was working on the frame last night.

[Eyeball_Kid]

3. Rachel's body language seemed to indicate that she wasn't completely sold on her own hype.

It was probably an editorial decision to up-sell the program. Nonetheless, Rachel did her job with the material presented. She is also cleverly identifying her show as THE PLACE to leak subsequent documents.

Go for it, Rachel.

[Thomas Hurt]

4. Focus misplaced

She should have been talking about why a leaker or a whistleblower would be leaking such a milquetoast document.

If this was anyone other than Trump admin, they suck at being a leaker/whistleblower.

[bettyellen]

7. Instead she focused on what desperately needs to be leaked and how

It would be legal for them to report on it despite DTs lies to the contrary. Now a lot of people understand that the issue is NOT what % of taxes he paid, and that those inevitable Tweets bragging were bullshit.

[JTFrog]

13. They did talk about it. In fact she specifically said that her guest suggests that Trump leaked it

himself.

And then Joe Scarborough ran with that this morning saying that Trump did this because it's the only tax return in over a decade that doesn't give away his end game. And the schedules with details were conveniently not included.

Rachel is playing 3D chess and there are too many checkers players trying to talk shit about her.

[FakeNoose]

5. Rachel used to be on radio

I think that shaped her opening comments delivery on her TV show.
It's a little repetitive (as radio often is) but it also sets the tone for the show.

I actually like her repetitiveness because her real problem is she talks too fast.
I often miss something the first time she says it, so it's good that she says it more than once.
All in all I have to say that I love Rachel's show and I think she's doing great stuff.

[DK504]

9. I so miss her radio show. She was cutting edge back then.

Charlie is right about the focus of the investigations on this administration and I use that term lightly, Russia, Russia, Russia.

We need to see a complete set of his taxes and in this decade. That is one of the things that would get cut the knees out from underneath them. All of them.

[mountain grammy]

10. K & R

[OxQQme]

11. It is up to the country to decide whether that ploy will work.

If you're "distracted" by this, it's not because the White House wants you to be, it's because you decided to be.

this

[SleeplessinSoCal]

12. gonna steal "president*" from Charlie.

[klook]

14. "...overrating the cleverness of this crowd has become reflexive."

Ain't that the truth?

Also, I think we sometimes get a little caught up in waiting for the big honkin' deus ex machina that will bring down the House of Bannon & Trump. And we're understandably disappointed when the latest revelation doesn't turn out to be the decisive death knell for these bastards.

Although we've seen many body blows landed against Trump that should have had more impact, I do think the cumulative effect of all the scandals, gradually emerging crimes, and sheer self-serving traitorous behavior is mounting.

If there is more to on the tax front, it will be very damaging to Trump. (Nagging paranoid thought: Please, David Cay Johnston, vet this thoroughly so you know you're not getting Rathered!)

Let us hope there is more smoke to come, and beneath it a fire that will eventually bring down this evil regime.

[CrispyQ]

16. Someone on her panel - was it Chris Hayes? - made the best point of the night:

"There is one year of tax returns that we know for certain aren't being audited - 2016."