HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Rachel (Maddow) just repo...

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:13 PM

Rachel (Maddow) just reported on a breaking bombshell NYT report on Jan 6 insurrection

saying that the march on the capitol was orchestrated by the WH.
I am unable to find the NYT's report. Anyone?
This seems to dovetail with the news reported here on DU about the meeting on Jan.5.

51 replies, 4531 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 51 replies Author Time Post
Reply Rachel (Maddow) just reported on a breaking bombshell NYT report on Jan 6 insurrection (Original post)
triron Feb 1 OP
elleng Feb 1 #1
mucifer Feb 1 #2
elleng Feb 1 #3
triron Feb 1 #5
triron Feb 1 #6
elleng Feb 1 #11
My Pet Orangutan Feb 1 #14
maxsolomon Feb 1 #25
emmaverybo Feb 1 #24
Laura PourMeADrink Feb 2 #28
radius777 Feb 2 #31
emmaverybo Feb 9 #51
trueblue2007 Feb 1 #17
Ferrets are Cool Feb 1 #19
fierywoman Feb 1 #22
Hekate Feb 1 #26
Johnny2X2X Feb 1 #4
babylonsister Feb 1 #7
Johnny2X2X Feb 1 #12
triron Feb 1 #15
Johnny2X2X Feb 1 #21
Vivienne235729 Feb 2 #33
Johnny2X2X Feb 2 #37
Vivienne235729 Feb 2 #39
Johnny2X2X Feb 2 #40
Vivienne235729 Feb 2 #44
triron Feb 2 #45
Johnny2X2X Feb 2 #46
Vivienne235729 Feb 2 #48
Johnny2X2X Feb 2 #49
Vivienne235729 Feb 2 #50
pnwmom Feb 2 #29
uponit7771 Feb 2 #34
pnwmom Feb 2 #35
brettdale Feb 1 #8
pnwmom Feb 2 #30
triron Feb 2 #38
pnwmom Feb 2 #42
triron Feb 2 #43
brooklynite Feb 1 #9
triron Feb 1 #13
brooklynite Feb 1 #10
SheltieLover Feb 1 #16
niyad Feb 1 #18
kentuck Feb 1 #20
triron Feb 2 #41
ecstatic Feb 1 #23
Laura PourMeADrink Feb 2 #27
pnwmom Feb 2 #47
Corgigal Feb 2 #32
moonscape Feb 2 #36

Response to triron (Original post)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:15 PM

1. Haven't looked, check for Ruttenberg by-line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:19 PM

2. Go to Nytimes.com it's the main story:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to elleng (Reply #3)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:23 PM

5. Great. Thanks a bunch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #3)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:26 PM

6. Unfortunately I am blocked unless I subscribe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Reply #6)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:32 PM

11. Sorry. Key Takeaways From Trump's Effort to Overturn the Election

A Times examination of the 77 days between election and inauguration shows how a lie the former president had been grooming for years overwhelmed the Republican Party and stoked the assault on the Capitol.

As some lawyers on Trumpís team pulled back, others were ready to press ahead with suits skating the lines of legal ethics and reason.

As some lawyers on Trumpís team pulled back, others were ready to press ahead with suits skating the lines of legal ethics and reason.

Trump was enabled by influential Republicans motivated by ambition, fear or a misplaced belief that he would not go too far.

Texasí lawsuit challenging election results in 4 battleground states was ghostwritten.

The lie was propelled forward by new and more radical lawyers and financiers.

Women for America First, a little known but highly organized group, helped build a coalition.

The Jan. 6 rally effectively became a White House production
Women for America First was the original organizer of the Jan. 6 rally in Washington. But at the turn of the year, Mr. Trump decided to join the rally himself, and the event effectively became a White House production, with several people close to the administration and the Trump campaign joining the team.

The former Trump campaign adviser Katrina Pierson was the liaison to the White House, a former administration official said. And the president discussed the speaking lineup, as well as the music to be played, according to a person with direct knowledge of the conversations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #11)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:36 PM

14. DOH?

So weíre going to, weíre going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And weíre going to the Capitol, and weíre going to try and give.

The Democrats are hopeless, they never vote for anything. Not even one vote. But weíre going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones donít need any of our help. Weíre going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.

So letís walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

I want to thank you all. God bless you and God Bless America.


https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-01-13/transcript-of-trumps-speech-at-rally-before-us-capitol-riot
This is the DU member formerly known as My Pet Orangutan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to My Pet Orangutan (Reply #14)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 11:39 PM

25. What a jumbled mess of innuendo and slander and addled thinking.

I read all 6 pages; I'm beyond furious again.

There is no smoking gun - no Repuke will pay beyond the rabble.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #11)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 11:38 PM

24. Trump invited the mob to a rally and told them to march to the Capitol building to "cheer on"

congress. In the legal sense, planning a rally and riling attendees up to ďfightĒ to get country back,
resist election results is not evidence of incitement. Trump cleverly also instructed followers to do so ďpeacefully,Ē avoided any language that would suggest not complying with LE, breaking into building, confronting congress, committing any crime.

Sub-text, ambiguity, tone of voice are not considered in determining if speech is inciting. Trumpís ethical responsibility does not bear on the legal issue. Need a smoking gun. I am weary of media stirring. Only serves to raise expectations. If Trumpís planning a rally at which he gave that particular speech were evidence of a crime, implications for our liberal movements would be a real worry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emmaverybo (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 12:31 AM

28. You are exactly right. Very difficult to prove incitement when

you are referring to a political rally and the nature of rallies and associated verbiage.

Read transcript back then and noticed that trump threw in the word peacefully. What an evil brainiac.

Give me evidence that trump literally told hate groups to break into the Capitol and hurt people and he would send his loony adorers to provide cover. Whole other story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emmaverybo (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 01:00 AM

31. It's about the entire context, not just that one speech.

The insurrection was the culmination of the Big Lie, a process whereby Trump steadily radicalized his followers and pushed them over the edge to do exactly what they did.

As Michael Cohen said 'Mr. Trump speaks in code' like a mobster, but those guys also usually get busted at some point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to radius777 (Reply #31)

Tue Feb 9, 2021, 08:02 AM

51. Since impeachment is not a legal action, right. Legally, immediacy is a major element in

the crime of incitement, so conduct and speech going before rally day would not be considered. T
But exactly what you saidóall that is the excellent argument for senate to convict.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Reply #6)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:41 PM

17. me too. AND I DON'T HAVE THE DAM MONEY TO SUBSCRIBE TO ALL THESE PAPERS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





THIS IS PURE CRAP. I AM ON SS AND I DON'T HAVE 55 FOR ALL THESE SUBSCRIPTIONS. I CAN'T EVEN PAY FOR MY NERVE PAIN MEDICATION
This is the DU member formerly known as trueblue2007.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trueblue2007 (Reply #17)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:51 PM

19. Thank goodness for DU

where we can get all the news that is fit to read.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferrets are Cool (Reply #19)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 11:11 PM

22. PS The Guardian (British) is free.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trueblue2007 (Reply #17)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 11:44 PM

26. The UK Guardian, already mentioned, is free & has excellent US coverage...

Newspapers, magazines, and all journalistic enterprises have to pay the bills, which includes salaries for writers. Thatís life. Meanwhile, DU brings us lots of news access. If & when public libraries re-open, ask about accessing the e-subscriptions they have, which you might be able to do from your home computer.

I hope your access to medical care improves, as pain is a bitch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:22 PM

4. Why is this a blockbuster?

We already knew they were planning a march to the Capitol.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Johnny2X2X (Reply #4)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:27 PM

7. I think the news is 'orchestrated by the wh'. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Reply #7)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:33 PM

12. Yeah, they planned a March

Thatís no secret.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Johnny2X2X (Reply #12)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:36 PM

15. According to Rachel's reporting it was not planned by the march organizers

but at a late stage by the WH.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Reply #15)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 11:03 PM

21. That's the main point she took from that article?

My word, read the article. Thatís not a blockbuster. Rachel and that network are in the outrage business. So sick of it. I no longer can stand watching. Itís FOX News like in outrage, but they donít lie as much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Johnny2X2X (Reply #21)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 02:30 AM

33. How about instead of being pissed off at Rachel for being ourtraged,

You be pissed off at the bloated orange piece of shit who worked everyone to death in the news w his never ending gaslighting? And his inhumane treatment of POC and kids? Hell, we ALL had never ending outrage. It was exhausting AF. But youíre gonna blame the messenger?
This is the DU member formerly known as Vivienne235729.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vivienne235729 (Reply #33)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 08:11 AM

37. I can multitask

Trump is a monster and harmed this country try. MSNBC is damaging this country too. I can be kissed off at both.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Johnny2X2X (Reply #37)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 11:52 AM

39. So you're going to be pissed off at the messenger?

This is the DU member formerly known as Vivienne235729.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vivienne235729 (Reply #39)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 11:57 AM

40. Pissed off at their misrepresentation of the story

Last edited Tue Feb 2, 2021, 12:38 PM - Edit history (1)

This is not a bombshell, it's not even the main part or point of the story she's reporting on, because it's not a big deal. It's buried several paragraphs down. So instead of talking about what the story is really about, she uses the NY Times to give credence to her "bombshell" take on a tiny part of their story. She's counting on her listeners to not read the story, that is so FOX like.

This is wrong, it's unethical, it's the type of crap FOX News did for decades. MSNBC has devolved into this almost 24/7 now. We deserve better.

Realize that if someone didn't watch Rachel and read that NYT story they'd think someone who said there was this Bombshell was flat out making it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Johnny2X2X (Reply #40)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 12:41 PM

44. How did she misrepresent the story? I think she is clarifying.

Thereís a difference between holding a rally in one place and then turning it into a march. That requires a separate permit. And I think the point of distinction is important in prosecution, no?

Disclaimer: I canít read the NYT story so feel free to cut and paste for me what youíre seeing.
This is the DU member formerly known as Vivienne235729.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vivienne235729 (Reply #44)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 12:45 PM

45. Agree 110%

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vivienne235729 (Reply #44)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 01:09 PM

46. It was barely part of the story Rachel referenced

This is a long story, 150 paragraphs or so. Not until the 100th paragraph does it mention how the rally turned into a march and that some people were surprised by this. The article spends a few sentences mentioning that, almost in passing.

The isn't as Rachel characterized it a "Bombshell NY Times Report about how the White House planned the march to the Capitol!" This article was not about that at all, it was about the 77 days after the election and each step Trump took to undermine and subvert the election.

She used the NY Times to give credibility to her declaration and then completely misrepresented this article. From what she said, you'd think this article was titled 'Bombshell: White House planned march on Capitol", it was titled, "77 Days: Trumpís Campaign to Subvert the Election"

Am I reading the wrong article or something? Was there another NYTimes article not listed in this thread that she was referencing? because from what I heard from her and what is posted here, that's the article she was referencing. And I don't find any Bombshell article on the NYTimes webpage that's about how the White House planned the march.

This is completely unethical journalism from Rachel Maddow and her staff. It's exactly the type of shit FOXNews does day after day. And the reason I am taking so much issue with it is because this is Rachel's norm now, she's constantly doing this type of stuff along with the rest of MSNBC. That network is terrible now, I just wish people who watch it could see that it's the same type of thing that ruined so many people who watched FOX News. And it's no wonder that since they've gone full outrage all the time, that MSNBC's ratings have soared. Outrage sells.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Johnny2X2X (Reply #46)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 02:22 PM

48. First of all, the NYT is not a pillar of credibility. Especially after that Biden Rolex story.

Thereís another dumb story they did recently that was right up there w the Rolex nonsense. Rachel does just fine on her own. So, in the 77 days: trump campaign to subvert the election, they find that the WH actually PLANNED the march to the capitol. Again, I donít see the misrepresentation here. Is she lying? Is ANYTHING she said false? She didnít say anything about the rest of the article. She even gave credit to where she got her information bc, let me tell you, if she hadnít mention them, someone will be bitching about how she is trying to take credit for it. It seems she is damned no matter what she does. But s he chose that bc it is something that opens the door to prosecution. In my eyes, thatís what matters, anyways. I may find the nuances to what led up to the events interesting, but at the end of the day, I want this fucker locked up.

She zeroed in on something she thought was extremely important that was buried in an article. Isnít this what she is supposed to be doing? Isnít this what she has been doing all along? To bring to surface all the information that is buried either in a story (like this one) or to put all the pieces together like she did w the Russian connections early on? This is what she does. She finds interesting information and expounds on it. If anything, I have loved how she takes complicated situations and breaks it down for the lay person to understand. She definitely has a knack for that.

But I donít see where she is selling outrage. The insinuation here is that it is manufactured. And sheís not making up the story. Sheís not lying. The outrage is a natural result to the events happening. Gaslighting sells. Sheís just reporting on it. And quite honestly, I would have to question you if you can see kids in cages and not be outraged. Or the implementation of racist immigration laws. Or the blatant support of white supremacy from the Trump administration. Or the million other things that they have been doing to normalize the extremist actions of their gaslighting. It stands to reason that there will be outrage. It is a normal human reaction. It is NOT normal to be ok w everything that is going on. As if it is status quo.

But to equate her w the likes of FOX is irresponsible and inaccurate on your part. They fucking outright lie and make excuses for every vile action that the RWNJ have done. They are the cause of why we are where we are. Rachel is one of the few that is actually calling them out. So it bothers me that you would spew so much venom her way when there is so much BLATANT RW propaganda out there with the sheer intent of disinformation to establish fascism as acceptable. Why arenít you more upset about that? Rachel may not be perfect, but she sure as hell is not Fox News.
This is the DU member formerly known as Vivienne235729.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vivienne235729 (Reply #48)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 02:54 PM

49. Disagree

She misrepresented the story, made it seem like there's a Bombshell story in the NYT about the issue she picked out, there isn't. She didn't say how the issue she picked out was barely mentioned by the NYTimes. The NY Times didn't think it was a bombshell, or they would have elaborated on it, or even wrote a whole article about it. She clearly misrepresented to her viewers what the NY Times was reporting. And it's a pattern with her and that network.

FOX is garbage, they do the same thing often, and they take it further by literally making stuff up. MSNBC should be held to a higher standard, they are failing to live up to journalistic integrity. Rachel should be ashamed.

If you have half the country listening to FOX News getting outraged by pure lies, and the other half getting outraged by selective reporting of the truth, the country is fucked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Johnny2X2X (Reply #49)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 03:12 PM

50. I would agree w that but the half watching fox don't watch anything else but fox

The half watching msnbc watch everything else. I certainly donít get all my news from there. And I donít know anyone who watches msnbc watches only them. Also I have never seen them as comprehensive news. They pick what they want to talk about and they do it well. They give you something to think about beyond the abc, cbs, and NBC nightly news editions.

NYT reported what they wanted to report. Again, she EXPOUNDED on it. Thatís what journalism is about. You find a lead and you dig further into it. For crying out loud, if they didnít do that, nothing would ever be uncovered or be reported. The NYT is not the be all end all. She isnít misrepresenting the NYT article. Sheís not summarizing it or even even giving her opinions on it.

Rachel has nothing to be ashamed about. She is a reputable journalist who does incredible work. She has educated millions of people and has inspired millions to think which is a helluva lot more than I can say for all from fox and most from cnn.
This is the DU member formerly known as Vivienne235729.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Johnny2X2X (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 12:37 AM

29. For one thing, the reporter says the permit for the rally specifically says

that they were NOT permitted to march to the Capitol.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #29)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 02:35 AM

34. WOW !! So it looks like the law that was broken was inciting criminal trespassing by Red Don

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #34)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 03:46 AM

35. Well, it looks like the Women for America First could be held financially responsible

for all the damage at the Capitol. Someone should sue them and find out.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215040944

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:28 PM

8. How is this breaking news?

trumpy was on TV saying "March to the capitol" it was all over the web/tv/radio that
the march was planned in support of Trump????

It didnt just happened???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Reply #8)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 12:39 AM

30. A march hadn't been planned. A rally had been planned, and a permit obtained

that specifically did not permit a march to the Capitol.

And yet, DT told everyone to march there anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #30)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 09:56 AM

38. Thank you for saying it better than I did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Reply #38)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 12:04 PM

42. You're welcome! This seems pretty significant. And the wording of the permit

makes me wonder if anyone will end up suing the Women of America First for violating the terms of their permit. According to the permit, they're liable for damage to the Capitol property if they violate it. What about loss of life?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #42)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 12:12 PM

43. Extremely significant. I think that was the main point Rachel was trying to make last night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:29 PM

9. I'm guessing it's somewhere in the four page exposethey published this morning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #9)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:34 PM

13. Yes that's accurate. The Times reporter talked on that.

Unfortunately Rachel didn't elaborate on it a great deal. Maybe more will come out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:29 PM

10. I'm guessing it's somewhere in the four page exposethey published this morning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:39 PM

16. K&R!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 10:47 PM

18. Colour me soooooo not surprised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 11:01 PM

20. I read the full artlcle earlier...

...and one point that I gleaned that I had not read before, it was planned for the rally crowd to remain at the Ellipsis Park until the certification was over....But Trump told them to march down to the Capitol, that he would be with them....but he didn't go with them. He went back to the White House to watch it on TV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #20)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 11:57 AM

41. Plus he told them they needed to fight to 'save their country'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Mon Feb 1, 2021, 11:34 PM

23. Not a bombshell for me. It was so obvious

but I'm glad news organizations are exposing the details of how it was orchestrated.

Everyone would have been DEAD if pence had not broken the chain of command and authorized the National Guard to come. That pretty much says it all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 12:20 AM

27. Huh? This story was from yesterday's NYT. Posted earlier

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #27)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 02:21 PM

47. Did the NY Post report that the National Park Service permit

specifically DISALLOWED a march to the Capitol? That it said it was NOT permitted? And that the permit-holders would be responsible for the costs of any damage to government property if they violated the terms of the permit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Original post)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 01:13 AM

32. I liked how it was mentioned

Trump picked the music his speakers used.

He does think reality is a TV show. Gen Mattie was correct on that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Corgigal (Reply #32)

Tue Feb 2, 2021, 03:57 AM

36. It's all he does, the fluff stuff. Someone once

said he would pour over paint chips and details in his business more than any actual work. I believe it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread