Sunday, September 27, 2026

We Need A Constitutional Catch-22

Wow -- a haggard-sounded Blanche crashes and burns on ABC while trying to defend Trump's ban on the free press

RADDATZ: The president said nothing about national security when he announced this ban, and clearly you're very interested in what the press says and how they say it

BLANCHE: What they say is exactly the issue when it comes to national security

RADDATZ: Give us an example

BLANCHE: You cannot be asking me that!

RADDATZ: But the judge decided this was not based on national security

BLANCHE: It is a privilege not a right to be in the White House
Ever so much more so:
“What [the media outlets] say is exactly the issue when it comes to national security,” Blanche told Raddatz.

Raddatz then bluntly asked Blanche to provide an example of how the media outlets’ reporting had jeopardized or threatened national security — a question Blanche sidestepped by interpreting it to be referencing general inaccurate reporting.

“I’m sorry, give you an example of when CNN doesn’t report accurately? You cannot be asking me that!” Blanche said.

“At some point, the complete misinformation and the inaccuracy and the one-sided news out of certain organizations does become a national security issue, and it’s not right for the people of the United States to have to put up with it!”

In an apparent attempt to gain insight on how the Trump administration may address the supposed national security threats from media outlets’ reporting, Raddatz asked how the matter might be handled.

“So are you saying you’re going to screen people before they get on a flight coming to the White House?” Raddatz asked.

Blanche was not pleased with Raddatz’s question.

“I did not say that!” Blanche snapped. “You don’t get to put words in my mouth, that’s not the way it works! I didn’t say that. You said I said something that I didn’t say!”
When the press accurately reports on what the administration says, it threatens national security, and that overrides the First and Fifth Amendments.* 🀷‍♂️ Blanche knows that’s not how it works, but he’s compelled to say it anyway. He likes his job too much.

Which alone is a reason for him not to hold it.



*No, Blanche’s “argument” is not even vaguely sound. Except in a “L’etat, c’est moi” system of government. And we don’t have that. 

2 comments:

  1. Just call him Nathan Thurm...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “I know that! Why wouldn’t I know that?” [fidgets with cigarette]

      Delete