Tag Archives: ABC News

International news, national news, political news

Trump plan = Operation Wetback

operation-wetback

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump wants to round up all illegal immigrants hiding in the United States and ship ’em all back to their home countries.

He’ll do it humanely.

Sure, Donald.

We tried that once in this country. President Dwight Eisenhower — one of the better presidents this country ever elected — launched Operation Wetback in the 1950s.

The program didn’t work too well.

It carried a disparaging name attached to Mexican immigrants. Agents fanned out across the country and rounded up the immigrants, sent them to detention centers and then shipped them off. Many of those individuals died while being held or while they fended for themselves under terrible conditions.

Trump has used the program as a benchmark for the kind of initiative he said he would launch if — perish the thought — he were to be elected president of the United States next year. At least he doesn’t identify it by the name it was given when Ike decided on the immigrant roundup.

President Obama, interviewed tonight on ABC News, talked about the images that would be flashed around the world as “deportation agents” took parents away from their children and prepared to send them back to their native country.

“That’s not who we are,” the president said.

No, it is not.

But yet, Trump continues to gain traction with his party’s primary voter base by declaring his intention to hire 25,000 officers and deploy them to hunt down every single one of the estimated 11 million individuals who are here illegally.

Is the leading GOP candidate seeking to redefine this country?

 

International news, military news, national news, political news

‘Take the oil,’ Trump says; how, sir?

large_article_im2557_Middleeastoilproduction

Donald Trump said the following over the weekend …

“You know, if you stop transportation, I mean, you’re talking about the blood – the blood of the world and we’re going to have to be very, very strong … We’re going to have to take away the energy, the fuel, the money from ISIS.”

It’s a position he’s stated several times while running for the Republican presidential nomination. I do not yet know the answer to this question: How does a President Trump (perish the thought) plan to “take away the energy”?

The Islamic State is getting it from sources in the Middle East. It’s likely some form of black market transaction process. Or it could be done up front and in the open.

Either way, Trump’s assertion that we must take the oil, seize control of it connotes a serious military involvement that the candidate — so far — has said would be a mistake. In the same conversation he had Sunday morning with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, Trump described the Middle East as a “quagmire.”

I don’t know about you, but I haven’t heard a politician ever suggest it is in the country’s best interests to thrust our cherished young American men and women into a quagmire.

So … how would Trump propose to take that oil?

Talk to us, Donald.

 

media news

Of course the question was intended to offend

Major Garrett, CBS News’s chief White House correspondent, and I have something in common.

We both worked for the same person, although at different times.

How’s that for name-dropping?

Garrett went to work for the Amarillo Globe-News back in the old days. The then-editor of the paper, Garet von Netzer, hired him; von Netzer later would become publisher of the paper and then he hired yours truly, although long after Garrett had moved on.

Having laid down that useless predicate, let me now say that Major Garrett asked a patently offensive question of President Obama, to which the president responded appropriately.

The question involved four Americans held captive in Iran and Garrett wondered how the president could be “content” that they’re still being held on trumped-up charges while he is “celebrating” the nuclear deal worked out with the Islamic Republic.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/obama-major-garrett-shuts-down-press-conference-120156.html?hp=b2_r1

Obama took offense at the tone of the question. He scolded Garrett, saying he “should know better” than to ask a question that contained “nonsense.”

The president said he isn’t “content” over the Americans’ continued captivity and said he and his team are “working diligently” to secure freedom for the individuals.

What irks me about the question and its aftermath is how Major Garrett insisted it wasn’t intended to ruffle the president. He didn’t apologize and he said it was not asked to call attention to himself.

May I be blunt? That’s pure baloney.

That’s how it goes among the White House press corps. It’s always about getting in a question intended to call attention to the inquiry and to the person making it. Such gamesmanship has been going on for, oh, since the beginning of these televised events dating back to the days when President Kennedy introduced them to the public and turned them into some form of entertainment.

CBS’s Dan Rather famously sought to get under President Nixon’s skin during the Watergate scandal; ABC’s Sam Donaldson did the same thing to President Reagan over the course of many years; Fox’s Ed Henry does the same thing today with President Obama.

Well, now Henry and others have company in the “gotcha” hall of fame.

Major Garrett asked an appropriate question. He just inserted a certain word — “content” — that framed it in a way that got Barack Obama’s dander up.

I would bet that was his intent all along.

 

media news, national news, political news

Now it's Stephanopoulos on the block

What gives with media superstars who keep making serious professional “mistakes”?

Brian Williams fibs about being shot down during the Iraq War and he gets suspended by NBC News.

Bill O’Reilly fibs about “covering” the Falklands War while reporting from a safe distance … but he’s still on the job at Fox.

Now it’s George Stephanopoulos giving 75 grand to the Clinton Foundation and then failing to report it to his employers or to his ABC News viewers.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/05/the-great-stephanopoulos-mess-117971.html?ml=po&cmpid=sf#.VVjyylLbKt9

ABC calls it an honest mistake. It’s standing by the “Good Morning America” co-host and moderator of “This Week.”

It’s been known for 20 years that Stephanopoulos was an avid supporter of Bill and Hillary Clinton. He worked in the Clinton White House as a senior political adviser. Then he made the switch to broadcast journalism and by most accounts — yes, some conservatives haven’t been so charitable — he’s done a credible job.

Why did he give to the Clinton Foundation — with one of its principals, Hillary Clinton, running for president? He said he’s deeply interested in two issues the foundation supports: the fight against deforestation and HIV/AIDS.

OK, fine. Has he not heard of, say, Greenpeace and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation who fund efforts to fight those very causes? If he was interested more in the causes and less in the people who champion them, then he could have given to any number of reputable foundations to carry on those battles.

He didn’t. Now his reputation as a journalist has been called into serious — and legitimate — question.

Stephanopoulos isn’t the first political hired hand to make the transition to TV news. Diane Sawyer once wrote speeches for President Nixon and the late Tim Russert once was a key aide to New York Gov. Mario Cuomo. They made the switch. Others have gone into political commentary after working for partisan pols — or themselves been politicians — on both sides of the aisle.

None of them, though, gave large sums of money to overtly political foundations while working as journalists or pundits or commentators.

George Stephanopoulos has created a huge mess for himself — and for his colleagues.

national news, political news, Uncategorized

Step aside, George Stephanopoulos

I hope it doesn’t come to this, that the Republican National Committee forces George Stephanopoulos to do the right thing.

My hope is that he does it himself.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/05/14/the-rnc-should-ban-george-stephanopoulos-from-participating-in-2016-debates/

Stephanopoulos, host of the ABC-TV weekend news-talk show “This Week,” has revealed that he gave $50,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Hillary Rodham Clinton, of course, is running for president of the United States. Stephanopoulos’s credibility as an impartial journalist has been compromised beyond repair and he must not cover any aspect of the political campaign that’s beginning to unfold.

He didn’t reveal the donation until he was forced to do so by conservative media organizations.

This doesn’t look good for someone I’ve always trusted to be impartial — and bipartisan — in his questioning of political figures.

His contribution to the Clinton Foundation ties him directly — and monetarily — to the Democrats’ leading presidential candidate. He cannot possibly be seen as a neutral participant in any debate involving Hillary Clinton.

Surely he knows that. Just as surely he knows what he has to do.

 

national news

Anchor's problems mounting

It’s beginning to look as though the reporting of a controversy — more than the actual controversy — well might doom the career of a once-trusted broadcast network journalist.

NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams has stepped away from the cameras for an unspecified period of time, while the chatter continues about the circumstances of his made-up story about getting shot down — allegedly — in Iraq in 2003. His helicopter wasn’t hit by rocket fire, as he has reported for a dozen years and the network is launching an investigation into the circumstances of Williams’ “misremembering” the events of that day.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/debate-brews-over-whether-williams-can-survive-controversy/ar-AA9bgGx

Other questions about other stories have emerged.

And now we have media experts speculating aloud about whether Williams should lose his job, whether he should stay, and whether he’s lost the trust of viewers who depend on their TV journalists to tell the truth all the time.

According to The Associated Press: “The real difficulty for a news organization, or a reporter, is that once you’ve made one misstep, it’s really hard to earn (trust) back,” said David Westin, former ABC News president. “You can. But it takes a lot of time. It takes a long period of time with proven performances. It takes a long time of getting it right.”

Here’s the issue, as I see it: All the intense publicity and scrutiny and all the questions that have risen from this matter have damaged Williams’ reputation, perhaps beyond repair. Suppose he emerges from the examination squeaky clean. How does he recover from the millions of snarky comments, the late-night comics’ jokes and not mention the photo-shopped videos that have gone viral showing him landing on the moon, storming ashore at Normandy or planting the flag atop the hill on Iwo Jima?

The nation has made him a laughingstock — and not necessarily because of what has been alleged in the beginning, but because of the reaction to it.

Williams may have become as much a victim of social media as he has of the wounds his ego have inflicted on his career.

 

national news, political news

NBC journalist faces conflicting interests

Chuck Todd wears an important hat for NBC News as moderator of “Meet the Press.”

He must remain impartial and he must be clear of any association with a partisan political campaign. And by “any association,” that means the woman in his life, his wife.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/12/chuck-todds-wife-aiding-jim-webb-199431.html?hp=l5_4

It turns out that Kristian Denny Todd is assisting former U.S. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., as he considers whether to run for president in 2016. Kristian Todd is one of those Democratic “strategists” who assists people in public life.

Meanwhile, her husband is going to be covering the still-growing 2016 campaign and all its players. That must include former Sen. Webb, for whom his wife is working in an unpaid basis.

Todd’s role as a major news network’s main political reporters must be free of any association with a partisan campaign.

Let’s be clear about a thing or two. First, Todd isn’t the first network personality to make that crossover. Others include: George Stephanopoulos of ABC, who once worked in the Clinton White House; Pete Williams of NBC, who was spokesman for the Pentagon in the George H.W. Bush administration; Diane Sawyer of ABC, who once wrote speeches for Richard Nixon; the late Tim Russert of NBC, who worked for New York Gov. Mario Cuomo and the late Sen. Pat Moynihan of New York.

This kind of political affiliation involves both parties.

If Mr. and Mrs. Todd are going to allow this kind of association with a potential presidential candidate to continue, it falls on Chuck Todd to ensure that he doesn’t pull his punches with his wife’s boss if and when he gets the chance.

Be very careful, Chuck.

 

national news, political news

Can poll numbers change Mitt's wife's mind?

Let it be understood that I heard what Ann Romney said about whether her husband, Mitt, should seek the presidency a third time.

She and her sons are “done, done, done” with national politics, Ann said.

Sure thing.

Now we hear that an ABC-News/Washington Post poll says Republicans want Mitt to run for president in 2016. The margin is significant over the other supposed would-be candidates.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/post-abc-news-poll-absent-mitt-romney-who-can-claim-the-2016-gop-banner/2014/10/18/5c029da8-5615-11e4-ba4b-f6333e2c0453_story.html?hpid=z4

The poll says that as of right now, 21 percent of Republicans want Mitt to run, which is close to what he got prior to the 2012 campaign. Hey, he ended up being nominated by the Republican Party in the previous election.

As for Mitt, he hasn’t yet slammed the door shut and thrown away the key. He’s said things like “I have no intention” of seeking the presidency; he proclaims his happiness at being a private citizen (more or less) once again; he says the party has plenty of good candidates willing to step into the arena.

Has there been anything approaching a “hell no, I’ll never run again” statement from Mitt? Not even close.

As for Ann Romney, her “done, done, done” declaration can be construed as potentially malleable if the poll numbers keep showing that GOP voters want Mitt to run again.

I’m not one of those Republicans. However, I’d love to see Mitt run one more time. Why? My curiosity is goading me into wanting him to atone for the hideous mistakes he made during the 2012 campaign. The 47-percent remark comes to mind; his statement that “corporations are people, too, my friend” also sticks in my head; his efforts at keeping his distance from Romneycare by suggesting it bears no resemblance to Obamacare also was a doozy.

Can this man be redeemed and remade into a credible national candidate once again?

I’d like to see his handlers try.

I hope he’s up to it. More importantly, I am hoping he can persuade Ann to take part in one more run for the White House.

national news, political news

Strongest 'non-incumbent in history'? I don't think so

Question for David Plouffe, the former campaign guru for President Obama: What in the world did they teach you in political science classes at the University of Delaware?

Plouffe was a panelist this past Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” news-talk show.

He declared that Hillary Rodham Clinton’s is virtually assured to be the next president of the United States.

Plouffe said Clinton is the “strongest non-incumbent candidate in U.S. political history.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/08/25/plouffe_hillary_the_strongest_non-incumbent_candidate_in_history_of_american_politics.html

When I heard him say it, two words came immediately to mind: Dwight Eisenhower.

Let’s flash back to 1952.

General of the Army Eisenhower was just seven years removed from his key role in defeating Nazi Germany and bringing an end to World War II’s fighting in Europe. He came home to huge parades.

Ike then went on to become president of Columbia University and later took over as supreme commander of NATO forces in Europe.

President Truman did not run for re-election in 1952, leaving the field wide open.

Gen. Eisenhower stepped up.

The Republican from Denison, Texas was virtually pre-ordained to become president that year. He defeated Adlai Stevenson in a massive Electoral College landslide, winning 442 electoral votes to Stevenson’s 89. Ike would repeat the drubbing four years later when he ran for re-election.

It’s fair to ask whether Plouffe is fully aware of Dwight Eisenhower’s standing among Americans those 62 years ago.

Hillary Clinton figures to be a strong candidate for president if she decides to run.

Is she the strongest non-incumbent in American political history?

I do not believe that’s the case.

 

Uncategorized

Recalling Sawyer hatchet job

Diane Sawyer is leaving the ABC News anchor chair. Her colleague David Muir is replacing her.

That’s fine. Sawyer did a good job as anchor since taking the job in 2009. She was thorough and fair and presented the news accordingly.

However, my strongest memory of the body of Sawyer’s work involves a very high-profile trial that occurred right here in Amarillo. The defendant in this civil case was a fairly well-known personality in her own right: Oprah Winfrey. You’ve heard of her, yes?

Well, Winfrey got sued by some cattlemen over a comment she blurted out in 1997 during her TV talk show. She was interviewing this expert on “mad cow disease.” The expert made a comment about how ill-prepared beef can spread the disease, to which Winfrey exclaimed, “No more burgers!”

The cattlemen sued. The case was tried at the federal courthouse in downtown Amarillo. U.S. District Judge Mary Lou Robinson tossed part of the case out. The rest of it was settled in Winfrey’s favor.

Shortly after that, Winfrey appeared on ABC News and was interviewed by Diane Sawyer, who tried for all she was worth to get Winfrey to paint Amarillo as a city full of gun-slinging rednecks who were bound and determined to convict her of defamation.

Amarillo is a “tough town,” Sawyer said. Winfrey didn’t take the bait. She spoke well of the hospitality shown to her here while she was in court every day.

Winfrey taped her show at the Amarillo Little Theater at night after she spent a day in court. She sold the place out every night. She brought guests in and bantered with them about the day she had spent in a federal courtroom.

I found Sawyer’s treatment of Amarillo and the Texas Panhandle offensive when I heard it. Oprah, though, was thoroughly gracious and grateful for (a) the decision that went in her favor and (b) for the treatment she got from the community that found itself in the national spotlight.

Whatever. I wish Diane Sawyer well as she goes on with the rest of her life.

I’ll wonder, though, if she’s ever watched that interview she did with Oprah and thought: You know, I kind of wish I could do that one all over.