Speaking of Rachel Maddow... anyone remember this? Can anyone tell me where to find this Rachel?

[jillan]

How can Scott Walker possibly run for President while he is under investigation?? Investigated for criminal probe for misuse of political & fundraising money.

How can Rick Perry run for President while he is being indicted for coercion, abuse of power?? Remember he bullied a TX lawmaker by threatening to Veto a funding bill? - He was cleared on all charges.

If they decide to run for President the media will be all over them! says Rachel.
This would be a first to have candidates running for President while under investigation.

Where are you Rachel? We have a candidate that is under FBI investigation for possibly putting US intelligence info at risk.
Which is kinda a big deal. I would say a little bit bigger than misuse of campaign funds, or threatening a veto as political payback.
Yet, Rachel is her biggest cheerleader.
Rachel IS the media & yet she is not all over this story like she said the media would be all over Perry and Walker.
She is mute when it comes to discussing the FBI investigation.
Maybe Hillary will be cleared of all wrong doing. We don't know yet.
But that does not change the fact that we have a candidate running for President while under investigation....not only is she a candidate, at this moment she is the front runner of the Democratic Party Nomination, possibly hurting the Dems chances in November.

Back to my original question. Anyone know where I can find this Rachel? I miss her.

[kcjohn1]

1. Biggest Fraud Exposed In This Election

I have another for you. Remember a month ago when she was talking about how Ryan was positioning himself to steal the candidacy from Trump in contested GOP convention? She inferred this from ads he ran.

Has she run similar segment for Biden? The guy is out of the woodworks, and he is all of sudden all over tv talking about how he would make the best president. Has she speculated why this could be?

MSNBC has blackout on the possibility Clinton gets indicted. You never here that on that network despite being a real possibility and throwing everything into wack on Dem side.

[jillan]

3. Some of the things she's done to Bernie have been beyond the pale! But I wanted to this thread to be

about Rachel and Hillary. And how Rachel used to be an amazing journalist, digging deep into the facts, and now she is nothing but 45 minutes of Trump and 15 minutes of Hillary cheerleading.

[kcjohn1]

7. In hindsight she was not much of journalist

Only seemed that way when you thought she was fighting on your side (I'm guilty of this).

But things are much more clearer now. Easy to pick on GOP and how crazy they are. Has she ever taken on the Dem establishment and the neoliberals? There is so much things on the Obama administration that should have shun light on. Has she taken him to task on TPP? Or about how the Obama drone campaign as accelerated to levels that Bush couldn't conceive of? Or has income inequality has grown during Obama reign? Or how Obamacare outside of Medicaid is just insurance without actual healthcare?

She has role to play and she gets paid handsomely for it. But she is just an actor. Real journalist would expose and bring to light important issues. Fact she plays exclusively on one side tells you all you need to know about her "journalism".

[jillan]

11. Maybe you're right. I feel in love with her when she was on Air America with Lizz Winstead.

I had to start every morning listening to her.

But it always was about the goppers. Back then it was about Bush/Cheney and the IWR.

Still, I'd take that Rachel over this one any day.

[Hun Joro]

45. I mainly listened for Lizz.

[Locrian]

27. I agree

"Back in the day" when there was less progressive options she looked at least sane and competent. But she's very mainstream and 'knows her place'.

[bvar22]

62. I agree that Rachel is shamelessly in the box for Hillary,

but has taken on The Conservative Democratic Establishment in the past.
Admittedly, this was a while ago, and when MSNBC started another round of firing Liberal, Pro-UNION Spokesmen (like Ed Schultz and Cenk), she quickly move RIGHT to protect her job.
She knows on which side her bread is buttered.
Consequently, I have lost a lot of respect I once had for her.

[Jitter65]

18. What things...?? Like the FEC calling Bernie camp on the carpet 5 times?

Like stealing Bernie's donor list and making 24 searches print outs?

like screaming that Bernie is unqualified in front of thousands?

Like not rubbing his face in the fact that he voted for the crime bill he blames on Hillary?

[CorporatistNation]

30. Rachel Is A $7MILLION/Yr Corporatist "TOOL!"

A REAL POS!

[brooklynite]

2. Don't you agree that it's a waste of money having Courts and trials?

I mean, nobody would be investigated if they weren't guilty, would they?

[Bluenorthwest]

40. Did you go to bad schools? Read the OP again. The issue is one of double standards, the

pundit has very often suggested persons under investigation should not be running for high office, but in one specific case the pundit does not say this. This makes the pundit inconsistent. That pundit is the subject of the thread.

Do you think it is acceptable to say 'I am against this' when it is convenient to do so and 'I support this' when that is what suits one's agenda? All things are either bad or good, depending on who is doing them, my allies or my rivals?

[1StrongBlackMan]

54. Perhaps, Rachael doesn't care to attack fellow Democrats/folks on the Left.

Hypocrisy? Double standard? Absolutely. But she undoubtedly trusts that the right is doing a good enough job at attacking Democrats and the Left.

[whatchamacallit]

55. So you feel it's fine to have variable ethical standards?

I guess I'm not surprised.

[1StrongBlackMan]

61. Rachael is a partisan. No surprise there.

[morningfog]

50. I wouldn't bring up courts and trials when talking about Hillary if I were you.

[brooklynite]

56. as a Sanders fan, I wouldn't expect you to...

It seems to give meaning to life.

[morningfog]

60. You are mistaken.

BUt there are those on the left and right who want or expect Hillary to be indicted. I don't want that or expect it.

Referring to the courts and trials with respect to HIllary seemingly assumes an indictment, which is the preceding step to courts and trials.

[Jack Bone]

4. A few nights ago, I thought that maybe someone from back-in-the-day

could get through to her...Kent Jones?
Maybe....Marc Maron? Chuck D?

A intervention of sorts...someone that could give her a pause to look at how things are.

She's better than this...@ least she USED to be.

[sadoldgirl]

6. Yes, she used to be, but as soon as Comcast

took over, you could see all of them folding.

Money plays a big role in these pundits' life.

[me b zola]

31. You saw it too, eh?

I got the feeling that when Comcast took over at that same time there seemed to be a falling out with her and Keith. When he left I had no problem dumping msnbc because I thought that eventually we would see Rachel towing water for her corporate overlords. And wutayouknow.

[TheDormouse]

52. Kent Jones -- lol -- the OLD days-- far cry from where TRMS is now

[840high]

5. I gave up on her

months ago.

[jillan]

8. Me too. It was too depressing watching a brilliant journalist turn into a talking head.

[PoiBoy]

10. +10,000

[Vote2016]

9. Rachel is unwatchable now. MSNBC sucks beyond all measure these days. I miss Keith Olbermann

[amborin]

12. that was 7 Million Dollars ago; as they say, money corrupts

[JumpinJehosaphat]

14. Rachel's show program has "evolved" over the last few years. I used to really enjoy her program

and would listen to the podcasts on my long commute to work every morning. But what for me was telling about Rachel was the near absence of any discussion on her program in 2014 concerning the Israel military assault on Gaza that left so many dead and wounded and the vast destruction evident throughout.
Chris Hayes had done several segments at the time but Rachael was amazingly ( to use a word she likes to use often) quiet. If she had fancied herself a journalist, then she was missing the biggest story unfolding at the time. I guess the topic is a little too risky for her.

[rhett o rick]

15. I loved her on the radio. But she sold her soul for pieces of gold. nm

[MrMickeysMom]

25. Ditto, r O r...

on steroids...

She's lost all credibility on these things, but money buys happiness. Unfortunately, when you're a Rhodes Scholar, evolving in these profound ways should make her look pretty bad in the mirror.

Keith probably is disgusted for ever having her fill in for him back in the day.

[rhett o rick]

43. Makes one wonder if the wealth makes one lose their souls or do they always have

the penchant for accumulating wealth.

[dgauss]

16. Media pundits that cross the line are gotten rid of.

Phil Donahue, Keith Olbermann, Ed Schultz come to mind with MSNBC

Others understand how to make a career last. So there's a trade off I suspect Maddow is grappling with. I hope she is.

[Ghost of Tom Joad]

33. Don't forget

Melissa Harris-Perry.

[dreamnightwind]

64. And Cenk

[BillZBubb]

17. You didn't expect intellectual integrity and consistency from Maddow did you?

She's a total HillShill. The real Rachel is the one you see. Hillary's opponents get the third degree. Hillary gets a free pass.

She's been a phony all along.

[dchill]

19. Answer: She's at the bank.

Cashing a check.

[cui bono]

22. Nicely put. n/r

[2banon]

20. I use to think she had a certain edge, a sharpness that I enjoyed just before she got her show

on MSNBC... during Bush/Cheney's reign of terror.

I never thought she was brilliant. Intelligent and edgy for a bit.

After she clinched a contract and had her own show, she developed this stupid schtick I thought was beneath her, and I had the impression she actually seemed to think she was funny and cute and I'm not sure what else, entertaining I guess.

It wasn't funny or entertaining to me. You know the thing with the cocktails, and other things like she was killing air time with just bullshit.

I thought it was demeaning and wondered why she did that. Was that a directive from up high, or her idea?

So I sort of stopped watching her even when I still paid for cable or satellite. Caught her show on a few occasions, but soon the ick factor would prevail and made it impossible for me to continue.

Then I cut the cord altogether.

[MrMickeysMom]

26. That's a pretty apt description, 2banon...

[glinda]

21. Just watched her on Seth Myers and he was trying

to stay on talking about Republicans but wouldn't ya know it, she threw in at the end that HRC was most likely going to be the nominee and depending upon how you vote the country will look very different. Shill shill shill.
IF she fancies herself a "journalist" then she should stop showing so adamantly who she is "promoting". Or working for. Seth really did not try to go there but in her skinny and hyper state she showed that she is under some sort of influence.

[One Black Sheep]

23. She has just become another corporate shill

covering up deep corruption in the system, and being a cheerleader for the status quo.

[Sky Masterson]

24. I miss her too.

I don't recognize this Shill we have now which pisses me off considering I've paid to see her on her book tour and loved her for years.
Not unlike the Wizard in the Wizard of Oz though her curtain fell open and we see that she is not a person of much integrity.
She is usually polite in face to face interviews and then cowardly attacks once the interviewee isn't around to reply.

[wendylaroux]

28. Rachael has no views of her own,she is told what

views she will have,by whomever pays her many many dollars.

She is a pretty good actress, as she can play a liberal,cool cat with a hipster wardrobe to a tee.

OR ------ she has always been a right leaning corp tool.

In either case,she is sooo forgettable.

[baldguy]

29. Sanders fans can't tell the difference between a criminal investgation & a RW witch hunt.

[Sky Masterson]

34. You sure its us?

.

[JoePhilly]

35. + 1

[morningfog]

51. You call the FBI and DOH RW witch hunters?

[fasttense]

32. She started out covering Trump all the time

Admittedly some of the coverage she gave him was to make fun of him. But it was unrelenting and constant. Always the Trump.

Then, about the 3rd Dem debate, she became a Hillary booster. She still talks Trump but more and more she lets us know Hillary is who she is voting for. She had Jane Sandes on her show and failed to ask her one interesting question.

Its the corporate money. She really wants it and she does whatever to get it.

[silvershadow]

36. Self-preservation has kicked in. She saw what Comcast did to

Big Ed. And Keith. And Phil. And...

[Fast Walker 52]

37. Rachel is dead to me now

I can't take her schtick anymore

[TheDormouse]

48. Her unadulterated partisanship in this primary was the final straw

But I'd already been cooling on her show for the past couple of years, and had largely stopped watching during the past year.

Haven't watched a full episode in months, and no intention to going forward.

[Skwmom]

38. That is one of the reasons I've called her Ms. Selective Outrage.

She raged about Flint, MI and was silent on the execution of the teenager in Chicago. I find her selective outrage

It makes her rage against Flint, MI appear to be nothing more than a political game and that IS disgusting.

[pdsimdars]

39. Email this to her and ask

rachel at msnbc dot com

But to answer your question, where to find her, under a big pile of money.

[Bluenorthwest]

41. Me and Rachel: I loved her on radio so much, became a total fan after hearing her talk about her

youthful reaction to the extreme bigotry and homophobia of the Republicans, in particular of Pat Buchanan at the 1992 Republican Convention. She said his words had made her cry and motivated her to go into politics.
Very shortly after getting her show, Rachel could be seen giving perky introductions to 'My Uncle Pat Buchanan' on her show, not just once to confront him but regularly, to promote him. He was a regular feature of her show, the very man she's said was such a bigot she'd cried from hearing him on TV, she was putting him on TV over and over again, purveying Buchanan under the Maddow label by her own choice.
That was when I stopped watching her.

[TheDormouse]

65. Wow. I missed that phase of hers.

[BootinUp]

42. The problem is you bought into the lies, that's why you don't understand. nt

[BernieforPres2016]

44. Rachel has been brought to heel by her corporate masters

She decided that massive paycheck was worth more than having any personal integrity. I have never understood why people think she's so brilliant, other than she speaks as if everything she has to say is a grand revelation and her audience is a bunch of 5 year olds.

[MadDAsHell]

46. Rachel is not the media. Like Jon Stewart, her purpose is to affirm already held beliefs.

People didn't watch The Daily Show to be challenged; they watched to hear something they agree with. Same for the Rachel Maddow Show.

That's not journalism. That's pay-per-view. That's Netflix. "I already know what I want to see. I already know what I want to hear. Just give it to me."

Her fans want her to speculate that an investigated Republican is not eligible for office.

They DO NOT want her to speculate that an investigated Democrat is ineligible for office.

This ain't rocket science...

[TheDormouse]

47. Whereever she is, it is far, far away from where Melissa Harris-Perry is

[TheDormouse]

49. I really wonder how she can sleep with a clear conscience

One of the reasons I used to like her was that I thought she was one of the few who seemed to be fighting the good fight.

[Faux pas]

53. A fond long

ago memory.

[puffy socks]

57. It was just a matter of time before Sanders supporters threw Ms Maddow under the bus!

It’s unknown whether Clinton is a "target" of the investigation. That term is reserved for people for whom there is substantial evidence linking them to a crime, according to the prosecutor’s judgment.

Clinton said in March that investigators have not told her that she or any of her staff members are targets of the investigation.

If people ask about their status in an investigation, it’s common practice for the Justice Department to tell them whether they’re targets or not, said Lauren Ouziel, a former federal prosecutor and a professor at Temple University Beasley School of Law.

[onecaliberal]

58. She sold her soul, she has been consumed by the evil establishment.

Even if she tried to come back, I would t support it.

[agracie]

59. Look to your right.

[emsimon33]

63. Can we say, "Sell out"? I have stopped watching MSNBC