General Discussion

Sympthsical

(11,102 posts)

75. MSNBC pundit lawyers are concerning

Sun Mar 10, 2024, 03:43 PM

Mar 2024

I understand their credentials, but whenever I get a whiff of their commentary about something, it is not uncommonly at odds with what I'm observing about a situation in real time with my own eyes.

Their job isn't to inform. The job is to get eyeballs. If that requires outrage, so be it. If it means editing objective events in such a way to accommodate viewers' worldview, they'll go with that one.

What they're not going to do is come out and tell anyone, "Yeah, that's fine. Nothing very unusual about it."

Because "That's fine" is the antithesis of drama. And without drama, there are no eyeballs.

People need to stop taking the fact they're lawyers as motivation to accept things as gospel. They may be credentialed lawyers, but they aren't being paid to be lawyers. They're being paid to keep you tuning in.

Those two things have very different priorities.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

4 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Ocelot II Midwestern Democrat WarGamer rictofen

117 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So Jen Pskaki has these two guys on - Neil Katyal and Andrew Weissman - and boy are they spewing some crazy shit [View all] FHRRK Mar 2024 OP

Can't tell if this is cilla4progress Mar 2024 #1

see post 2! FHRRK Mar 2024 #4

Time and again these legal heavyweights are proven correct in their analysis of court events. rubbersole Mar 2024 #14

Did they predict that the Colorado case would be decided 9-0 ? MichMan Mar 2024 #67

yes nearly everyone did. jcgoldie Mar 2024 #94

Some seem to feel the need to find a conspiracy behind every corner. brooklynite Mar 2024 #20

Fail! FHRRK Mar 2024 #24

Trump is known to do business with Russia TexasBushwhacker Mar 2024 #40

We have every right to know who put up that money dsc Mar 2024 #44

I believe you missed Illegal! FHRRK Mar 2024 #53

perhaps you could try Google. Maybe I was a bit harsh so updated. Demsrule86 Mar 2024 #95

OK let me try to explain FHRRK Mar 2024 #98

Yes, indeed! colorado_ufo Mar 2024 #56

No, I don't think we do, the $ providers do. elleng Mar 2024 #61

You again with this crappola? What are you trying to prove? You posted this yesterday... brush Mar 2024 #103

OKAY! FHRRK Mar 2024 #105

Yup, sarcasm... nt mitch96 Mar 2024 #16

Maybe it IS sarcasm, the "Pskaki" spelling might be a clue. Towlie Mar 2024 #19

Or ignorance. Or an insult. Who can say? dchill Mar 2024 #49

Is ii sarcasm or not? Katinfl Mar 2024 #66

Me either YoshidaYui Mar 2024 #35

it better be because it's bullshit... agingdem Mar 2024 #45

I wouldn't loan Trump Mr.Bill Mar 2024 #59

Yes, you are right. I have great respect for both. Blue Dawn Mar 2024 #76

LOL! mobeau69 Mar 2024 #54

Just a reminder... both of these guys are "Content Creators" WarGamer Mar 2024 #2

Yeah yeah yeah. Go on triron Mar 2024 #5

Yep. Tv shows are simply vehicles for advertisers. Marcus IM Mar 2024 #6

This is "both of these guys" sarcasm, right? ancianita Mar 2024 #47

Yeah obviously these guys are lightweights senseandsensibility Mar 2024 #77

Doesn't that apply homegirl Mar 2024 #58

every damn one of them. WarGamer Mar 2024 #73

Both have solid, legal credentials and experience to back up what they say and question. brush Mar 2024 #69

Are you okay? Think. Again. Mar 2024 #3

It's sarcasm senseandsensibility Mar 2024 #43

Did you possibly mean the 91.6 million bond? PatSeg Mar 2024 #7

Agree totally Frances Mar 2024 #8

President Biden needs to know who is financially helping TFG. Delmette2.0 Mar 2024 #55

Okay, there's this PatSeg Mar 2024 #9

For the love of all things Holy! FHRRK Mar 2024 #12

A sarcasm thingie is needed. Why would you call out those 2 and not think you would get severe pushback? Srkdqltr Mar 2024 #17

Yeah in this case, PatSeg Mar 2024 #25

A sarcasm gif is definitely needed. Your post sounds like it's from a trolll. This "crazy shit" is no joking matter. brush Mar 2024 #72

Duly noted FHRRK Mar 2024 #81

Probably best to post an argument clearly without it seeming to be from a troll. brush Mar 2024 #92

FWIW, I thought your op and its sarcasm were clear. But spooky3 Mar 2024 #101

I trust these two experts implicitly Bayard Mar 2024 #31

Me too, more than most PatSeg Mar 2024 #34

My only concern with the two is they may have too much face in the legal system Bobstandard Mar 2024 #117

The fact that someone like Trump Mr.Bill Mar 2024 #64

Totally with you. triron Mar 2024 #83

I know PatSeg Mar 2024 #87

Lately I've been watching independent media more - cilla4progress Mar 2024 #10

My question has always been whether it really matters how TFG is funding the bond. Ocelot II Mar 2024 #11

They are not mutually exclusive concerns FHRRK Mar 2024 #22

I thought the Judge was ordering a reply from Carroll EndlessWire Mar 2024 #32

I have always thought that it was Musk who is putting up the collateral or cash for the bond. Bev54 Mar 2024 #111

Here we are running against the most vile candidate in history, and we are worried about a bond that will make Silent Type Mar 2024 #13

Yup. Maybe he got a sack of money to pay for it when Orban visited Mierda-Lardo. Ocelot II Mar 2024 #27

Popok said EndlessWire Mar 2024 #37

The judge has to approve the bond. If he thinks there was something untoward about it, Ocelot II Mar 2024 #78

Thank you. EndlessWire Mar 2024 #80

I am wondering whether TFG tried to submit inaccurate or incomplete financials Ocelot II Mar 2024 #86

I think Trump is conniving EndlessWire Mar 2024 #89

I doubt that the CEO of the Chubb Group, Evan Greenberg, has anything to do Ocelot II Mar 2024 #90

You could be right. EndlessWire Mar 2024 #93

Sounds like someone just fell off the turnip truck Prof. P.E. Name Mar 2024 #15

+1 mitch96 Mar 2024 #18

No, some people just don't warn they are using sarcasm Maeve Mar 2024 #21

Well done Doc Sportello Mar 2024 #23

There you go! FHRRK Mar 2024 #29

When trump is involved Turbineguy Mar 2024 #26

I guess we are all stupid, uneducated conspiracy nuts. Irish_Dem Mar 2024 #28

WWG1WGA? Fiendish Thingy Mar 2024 #30

Glenn Kirschner is also asking the same questions. Irish_Dem Mar 2024 #33

I believe I used the "elitist" meme FHRRK Mar 2024 #38

I agree completely. Why insult and demean people who are just asking questions? Irish_Dem Mar 2024 #41

Let's see, Donald didn't have the money, met with dictators, now he has the money.He shouldn't get benefit of the doubt Walleye Mar 2024 #36

They talked about the weather and high school friends dalton99a Mar 2024 #82

I wonder what the intersection of those edhopper Mar 2024 #39

lol, hadn't considered that! FHRRK Mar 2024 #68

Well we'd better give TSF full immunity dweller Mar 2024 #42

There is a point that both Neal and Andrew brought up that matters. bluesbassman Mar 2024 #46

That would be a job for investigative journalism. Mr.Bill Mar 2024 #79

A rare breed to be sure. bluesbassman Mar 2024 #85

Orban Hikerchick57 Mar 2024 #99

That's possible, sure. bluesbassman Mar 2024 #100

As Nancy so eloquently said mountain grammy Mar 2024 #48

Regardless of who put up the actual money, Trump HAS TO file it as "income" on his taxes. world wide wally Mar 2024 #50

Elon Musk also visited Mar-el- Loco. gab13by13 Mar 2024 #51

He is my guess of who guaranteed the bond, as I said in an earlier comment, that does not Bev54 Mar 2024 #112

Lol...these two guys! Hope22 Mar 2024 #52

musk is a putin et tu Mar 2024 #57

Glad I missed the 2, I'd have thought it's Collateral, and wonder why they think there's more to it than that. elleng Mar 2024 #60

Thanks, I needed a laugh! 58Sunliner Mar 2024 #62

What the fu_k? Enjoy your stay. brush Mar 2024 #63

They are being sarcastic to make a point about a perceived spooky3 Mar 2024 #102

You're responding to a post I made yesterday. He/she just posted the same thing today. brush Mar 2024 #104

I didn't post jack shit today FHRRK Mar 2024 #106

Why is it up again? brush Mar 2024 #107

Becuase you responded! ?????? FHRRK Mar 2024 #109

Same thread from yesterday that has been bumped up because there are new responses. PufPuf23 Mar 2024 #110

Sarcasm, ok, not particularly clever sarcasm though. brush Mar 2024 #113

omg! ARE YOU IMPLYING THAT THEY WERE IMPLYING THAT WE SHOULDN'T TRUST TRUMP TO BE ABOVE BOARD? orleans Mar 2024 #65

If Trump becomes President his bond is a national security risk and we should know who he's beholden to. LetMyPeopleVote Mar 2024 #70

Thanks for the videos FHRRK Mar 2024 #84

The fact that TFG is or may be beholden to third parties or foreign govts will be an issue LetMyPeopleVote Mar 2024 #88

Sarcasm? Pachamama Mar 2024 #71

Yes, please! ShazzieB Mar 2024 #96

Seth Abramson sub Reddit documents it Pokeemahn Mar 2024 #74

MSNBC pundit lawyers are concerning Sympthsical Mar 2024 #75

+1000 nt WarGamer Mar 2024 #114

Seriously! Hope22 Mar 2024 #91

Why sarcasm emojis serve a useful purpose, and why no one should disdain their use. ShazzieB Mar 2024 #97

Someone posted about "Chubb Russia" and the conspiracy folks went nuts. Carroll's team approved the bond Silent Type Mar 2024 #108

Neil Katyal and Andrew Weissman chillfactor Mar 2024 #115

I was listening to Lawrence for moniss Mar 2024 #116