Rachel Maddow declares that a Trump presidency could have radical effects on her chosen profession

madcow

From Entertainment Weekly: Every four years, around this time, you start to hear them: the dissatisfied voters who threaten to move to Canada if their candidate loses. With the presidential election looming, such discussions have reached a fever pitch, but what about our political experts? Surely they’re not thinking of fleeing north, too?

EW sat down with Rachel Maddow a few weeks ago to pick her brain about the election and her broadcasting career, from hosting The Rachel Maddow Show (weekdays at 9 p.m. on MSNBC) to co-anchoring MSNBC’s primetime political coverage with Brian Williams. We asked her the same question that’s on a lot of liberals’ minds: If Donald Trump wins the presidency, will she pack up and move to Canada? Not a chance.

“First of all, my mother would kill me,” Maddow says, laughing. “My mother escaped Newfoundland in order to come here. Seriously, there’s nothing to make you appreciate the United States more than having an immigrant parent.”

Canadian connections aside, Maddow says she’s definitely staying, even if a Trump presidency could have radical effects on her chosen profession.

“Trump says that once he’s president, ‘Media’s not going to get away with the stuff they get away with now. We’re going to change those libel laws!’” Maddow says. “He blacklisted the freaking Washington Post from covering him. So who knows what it’s going to be like with Trump as president? Who knows how he’ll use his power to try and destroy the press?

drama

Still, Maddow says she’s not going anywhere.

“If he does what he’s promising to do, I don’t know if any of our jobs will exist any more,” Maddow says. “But as long as someone will have me, I’ll do this job.”

h/t Newsbusters

DCG

Advertisements

24 responses to “Rachel Maddow declares that a Trump presidency could have radical effects on her chosen profession

  1. Just another one of the lame stream media, who no doubt knows all too well that they are not reporting the news in an unbiased manner. But she is all in favor for the lyin’, cheatin’ gravy train to go on forever. Taking into consideration the times I have had the misfortune to view this woman, I do not respect her, nor do I like her. I wish she would just go away.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. let’s hope it would have the “radical effect” of making networks want to actually tell the TRUTH!

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Pingback: Rachel Maddow declares that a Trump presidency could have radical effects on her chosen profession — Fellowship of the Minds | kommonsentsjane

  4. president Trump blacklisted the freaking Washington Post ! Maybe it was because they were always trying to make him into a bad guy. I don’t blame him. As far as He says when hes president the media won’t be getting away with the things they are doing now? I bet he means the lying and changing what a person says as to sell mews and make ratings go up. The news media should be PRESENTING the new as truthfully as possible, NOT interpreting the news to suit their rating needs. IF HELLory should get elected, any reporter that thinks she won’t ban them from the White House if they displease her is a FOOL!

    Liked by 3 people

  5. The 1st Ammendment to the Costitution
    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

    You know why it says “Congress shall make no law”? Because only Congress could if they were not prohibited by the 1st ammendment.
    The President is not mentioned here because he has no authority, no power to “abridge the freedom of the press”.

    You would think someone who works for the press would know this. But, I guess when you have abdicated your rights to the President and the courts because they could carry out your libtard desires, you don’t know when they might turn on you. That’s why the founders made sure it was in the hands of those who represent us. And not 9 + 1 who might not.

    Like

  6. Oh Pretty Obvious

    Maddow is an enemy soldier Rhodes Scholar (misnomer like Affordable Care Act) implanted by her masters to further their bidding. Her job is to lie and deceive you. As is Bill Clinton, George Stephanopolous, Naomi Wolfe, Susan Rice, General Wesley Clark, Tony Abbott (PM Australia), etc (you get the idea). All enemy soldiers in the clandestine overthrow. Art of War: “Never give your enemy a target, destroy from within.” If you dont know who Cecil Rhodes was or why he gave his massive wealth to the Rothschilds over 100 yrs ago to maintain the pursuit for a One World Gov, you should. Study the list of Rhodes enemies and you’ll understand the infiltration and their strategy.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Rhodes_Scholars

    Liked by 1 person

  7. RACHEL SHOULD BE TARGETING HILLARY WITH THAT PROPOSED AGENDA…………………..

    Like

  8. Terrible to be so blind she can’t see that the “press” has destroyed itself, among other things.

    Liked by 4 people

  9. Obama's boyfriensd

    Imagine the horror of an objective media!

    Like

  10. Kevin J Lankford

    The media respects the truth about as much as our current government respects our Constitution.

    Liked by 4 people

  11. With Trump, hopefully the media will be freed from control by monopolies and the authority of the CFR. Years ago, material from the media spilled forth from a cornucopia of generally truthful and important information. News today has to be seen and read and heard while wearing hazmat equipment for the soul.

    Liked by 3 people

    • The news is no longer the news. It is opinion disguised to look like news. It’s not necessarily not the truth and may have elements of the truth. Intentionally deleting part of the truth to make things sound like you want them to sound is lying through omission.

      Liked by 4 people

  12. Reblogged this on necltr and commented:

    Control of the media is a threat to our First Amendment, and those carrying out that attack know it.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Oh, come on, they’ll never leave. Where are they going to be able to talk all that rubbish so openly? They can vilify, insult and grotesquely refer to the character of an individual just because he/she does not agree with their views, where else are they going to stand behind a constitution and not be silenced? Please leave, I don’t think you’ll get too far.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Pick her brain? She has a brain?

    Liked by 1 person

  15. So WHAT, precisely, is Rachel Maddow’s “chosen profession”? Is it that of journalist-commentator, or is it that of lesbian? For Ms. Maddow would have us believe that her lesbianism is some sort of prerequisite for her journalistic prowess, while at the same time, that as she was born with this condition over which she supposedly had no choice, that it would enhance her “chosen profession.” If that is the case, then she can claim no credit for her abilities, as if Houdini could not help but figure out his famous daredevil escapes!

    But let us assume that Maddow is right and that she cannot help herself for her journalistic prowess. Yes, let us allow Maddow to have her cake and eat it. As Charity—CARITAS or AGAPE LOVE—is missing (it surely seems so to me), then it matters that her cunning nastiness is also mandatory, viz., not chosen. I see where this train of logic is headed, based on where it came from: Metaphysically, Maddow is saying that THE DEVIL IS GOD.

    Nothing unique about that: Both the Illuminati and their deputies in Freemasonry admit to the exact same.

    THIS is what we are dealing with in Maddow. (And Megan Kelly, for that matter).

    Liked by 2 people

  16. every President do things to influence the media.

    Like

  17. Like making them be honest and have journalistic integrity again? Horrors!

    Like

  18. As if the lame stream press didn’t already destroy themselves.

    Like

  19. Hi, I’m concerned because in the last 6 days I haven’t received any of your recent posts. Nothing has changed, as I subscribe to other. Posts and still receive them. I really enjoy your posts, but please why am I not receiving yours any more? Please advise. Thankyou,
    Linda Lysiak

    Like

    • Dear Linda:

      Thank you for notifying us. Alas, FOTM does not manage subscriptions; our host-server WordPress does that. Another reader had emailed me that his subscription too was dropped. That had also happened in the past.

      My suggestion is that you re-subscribe. THANK YOU for being such a faithful reader of our little blog. God bless you!

      Like

  20. We never had a free press. That is propaganda told to schoolchildren.
    We we HAVE HAD is a ‘professional’ press. Which means they are paid to COVER the news. Get it?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s