Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump

[Dill]

(10-01-2019, 11:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: OK, here we go:

6's point was to illustrate that Hannity is a media figure and comparing his rhetoric to elected public officials is absurd. 6 was not partisan in his response as he included Trump; however, your reply made the issue partisan by only mentioning the Dems.

Hope that explained "my" mark.

Yes, you explained your mark.

"We can't turn off Schiff, Trump or Pelosi like we can Hannity "--that's what 6 said.  Sounds like he is comparing Hannity's rhetoric to that of public officials, as if Trump, Pelosi and Schiff are rhetorically equivalent, and anyone watching the news cannot escape from them.

I do see an equivalence between Hannity and Trump, as Trump propogates Hannity's conspiracy theories and generally elevates division and hysteria in his rage tweets as does Hannity on his news hour.

But since I do not accept a rhetorical equivalence between Pelosi and Schiff on the one hand, and Hannity on the other, I asked why we would WANT to turn off public figures doing the people's business, as we might Hannity.

Since Pelosi and Schiff do not behave that way, I thought it inaccurate and distortive to lump Trump/Hannity in with them. 

But for you, "non-partisan" trumps accuracy and good judgement--only fair to treat Dems and Repubs alike as equivalent, erasing any distinction between responsible and irresponsible rhetoric.

And that is one reason why Trump has been able to degrade the office of president with such impunity. It is impossible to criticize Trumpism WITHOUT being partisan, without separating what "both sides" do from what Trump, and the party which embraces him, are doing. And that is why defending Trump is all about equivalence, achieved by partisan non-partisanship..

While I've got your attention, you might take your "mark" a step further and explain either why you think Schiff and Pelosi are the equivalent of Hannity and Trump, or if you think they are not, explain what is gained by "non partisan" framing of good and bad behavior as equivalent.