New Yorker Editor Admits on CNN 'Frustration' of Press at Not Convincing People About Trump, It's About 'Future of Planet'

Screenshot from this video

Screenshot from this video

This is one of those times that the press reveals who they really are, without really understanding that’s what they’ve done.

CNN’s Brian Stelter had David Remnick, editor of the New Yorker, on “Reliable Sources” and Stelter asked him “Had anything changed this week,” clearly referencing the impeachment.

Remnick spoke about the “illusions” that Republicans had about Trump (apparently, the constant TDS of Democrats and media about Trump doesn’t include any “illusions” worth mentioning).

But he said this is about the “future of democracy” and the “democratic process.”

Indeed, it was about the “future of the earth,” Remnick intoned. And a “party disbelieving in climate change.”

So is he saying Trump should be impeached over climate change? And for not agreeing with Democrats and the media, the very thing that the Founders didn’t want impeachment to become – a partisan tool to settle political grievances?

“It’s a great frustration of people like me, and people like you,” Remnick explained, gesturing toward Stelter. “We don’t somehow understand, we don’t understand why, the, um, the evidence of the things, why facts don’t penetrate so many of our brothers and sisters in the United States of America and this is a source of great frustration for the press,” he said. “For the press?” Stelter repeats as if he can’t quite believe that Remnick has admitted this. “And for anybody who’s thinking about these issues that are so important,” Remnick continued.

Wow. There’s a lot to unpack there. Republicans and/or Trump supporters are ignorant, “facts don’t penetrate” them.

This is a source of frustration to “the press.” Because how dare we not accept what they are putting out there? How dare we not listen when our betters, who are the repositories of fact and truth, try to instruct us!

Funny how they don’t see their job as simply presenting the facts, the job of a journalist, but rather convincing people of particular political narratives, which just coincidentally are Democratic political narratives.

But if this is so about the future of the world, perhaps Remnick and Stelter should share their frustration with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) since she’s the one holding up impeachment and the possible removal of that threat to the earth, Trump. If he’s such a threat, why is she sitting on the Articles of Impeachment? One would almost be tempted to think that the threat “fact” wasn’t actually true.

Interestingly, Remnick tried to convince people of the connections between Trump and Putin/Russia in an August 2016 New Yorker piece. How’d that talking point work out?

People were not quite buying what Remnick was selling.

HT: Twitchy