"Why are you yelling?” the reporter asked as Trump’s senior adviser refused to clarify the source of information he was spreading about Venezuela’s crime rate.

Trump senior adviser Stephen Miller had an on-camera meltdown after being asked by a journalist to back up questionable claims he was making about Venezuela’s crime rate, video of the episode posted to social media shows.

The four-minute video shows an emotional Miller yelling at NTN24 reporter José María del Pino on Tuesday after del Pino questioned Miller over his claims that Venezuela has become safer than the United States because its convicts are now all in the U.S.

Miller also repeated a since-debunked story that a Venezuelan gang has taken over Colorado apartment complexes.

252 points

Genuinely, that’s one of the most impressive examples of a serious journalist being an absolute fucking pitbull on a question, and as a result making the populist idiot spewing racist bile look like a complete imbecile, and laying bare the fact that he’s very obviously trying to push an agenda. Miller even fuckin pivots to MS-13 - an El Salvadoran gang (but all look same amirite /s) - because he realized he’s floundering, and reflexively reaches for more pathos of the “scary Latin people” conservative trope. Truly, this is an incredible interaction to watch. And the expressions of the people in the background are like “wow holy fuck lil’ fascist Stevie is getting OWNED”.

permalink
report
reply
57 points

The worst part is the racist cult Miller is performing for will see the interview and ask why the reporter wasn’t as angry as Miller.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Eh. The actual answer to that question is “he’s genuinely good at and cares about his job as a journalist”. Simple as that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

You’re trying to apply logic and values as a reply to a comment saying that those values and logic don’t exist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

That is an answer for reasonable people, and they already know.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

He is also making such a bs argument. Does anybody believe that Maduro lets out criminals in the hope that they will cross the Dorian gap to go to the US? That makes no sense. It’s much more likely that those criminals, once let out of prisons, remain in Venezuela.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Seeing his reaction to facts and logic is like watching a cartoon robot’s reaction to a logic bomb.

permalink
report
parent
reply
179 points

Whataboutism on display and a beautiful parry back to the question he asked everytime. That reporter should be commended for his tenacity.

permalink
report
reply
40 points

Wait? You mean Trump and his gaggle of kleptocrats could have been easily defeated all along if the mainstream media were populated by actual journalists instead of agreeable sycophants who just nod their heads and continue manufacturing consent?

permalink
report
parent
reply

Everyday we’re not talking about Jan 6th because it’s not great for ratings is another day the media failed us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
160 points
*

Hats off to how professionally calm José María kept his voice on the follow up questions, making it clear that Miller was pretending to be outraged. A calm question after an angry rant meant Miller would start quiet again and have to dial his pretend rage back up. You could see Miller catch himself not being angry enough!

Fantastic!

permalink
report
reply
10 points
*

Good catch… Then he started getting actually angry, except not about whatever he was whinging about.

permalink
report
parent
reply
137 points

Oh fuck, was that a journalist actually doing his job?

I almost forgot what that looks like.

permalink
report
reply
23 points

Amazing to see what happens when someone sticks to a line of questioning and doesn’t just move on

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

And you’ll probably never see that journalist have that kind of access (amongst conservatives) ever again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

If on,y they all did it. Then the conservatives would either get no coverage or have to face actual questions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

I…what? I’ve never seen this happen, and a lot of recent events have me questioning my ability to tell waking from dreaming…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

Hard to know if “journalism” exist at all anymore… this could be some random food blogger who got a media pass and accidentally asked a good question… you wouldn’t be able to know the difference.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

It exists, you just don’t see it much in the US where corporations run the show.

permalink
report
parent
reply
96 points

It also beautifully displayed how fragile they are. Just push them a tiny bit and they go apoplectic that you don’t just swallow their bullshit like their eager sycophants.

permalink
report
reply
35 points

Yeah, it’s very easy to set them off and make them lose it by just being consistent and not backing down or following their rambling.

This reporter showed exactly how every question put to them should be handled.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 6.9K

    Posts

  • 121K

    Comments