Earlier today, Jake Tapper not only retweeted George Conway calling Trump ‘100% insane’, but he quote-tweeted him saying, ‘Noteworthy comment on folks in the administration from a Trump critic who would know.’ Gosh, we’re not fancy journalists like Jake but that kinda sorta sounds like he shared Conway’s statement because he thinks he’s some sort of expert and might even agree with him.
Jonathan Turley (who is far smarter than we are) tweeted this about Jake’s quote-tweet:
Tapper's retweeting that "Trump is 100% insane" only further undermines the media by reaffirming for many that the media is campaigning against Trump rather than covering him. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) April 7, 2020
Media is campaigning against Trump rather than covering him.
Damn, that is spot freakin’ on.
So much so that Jake responded.
I RTed Conway, a conservative attorney and Trump critic, because he wrote that no one in the administration has the courage to stand up to the president which seems newsworthy given how many people in the administration he knows.
RTs do not nec. = agreement. https://t.co/A4i1478urj
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) April 7, 2020
We see you, Jake.
We all do.
Margot Cleveland took him apart in a threadette:
THREADETTE: True that "RTs do not nec. = agreement." BUT @jaketapper didn't merely retweet Conway. Tapper added his own "reporting. Tapper called the comment "noteworthy," indicating the content was important. If it was just nutso (which it was), it wouldn't be "noteworthy." 1/ pic.twitter.com/x95HROmxIz
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) April 7, 2020
Added his own reporting
Yup.
Noteworthy makes Conway’s tweet sound even more important and even factual, right? It wasn’t just a retweet, it was a quote-tweet.
And we like her use of ‘nutso’.
2/ He called Conway a "Trump critic" that implies Conway is a reasonable critic as opposed to 100% insane. And that Conway calling Trump "insane" is reasonable criticism. Tapper told his audience Conway knew lots of the folks in administration, suggesting Conway had a basis for
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) April 7, 2020
Logic.
Whoda thunk it?
3/3 "criticism" and suggesting the "criticism" was accurate. Also, how many times has CNN or other Leftist folks condemned Trump for retweeting the wrong person or the wrong comment? Tapper's attempt to spin his own spin is 100% insane! END
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) April 7, 2020
In other words, Jake would be better off admitting he retweeted the troll aka Trump critic George Conway because he agrees with him.
The rest is just embarrassing noise.
***
Related:
