CNN anchor admits to the same immigrant policies under Obama. Her democrat guest wasnt outraged then

In the early seconds of this video, you'll see a CNN anchor do something almost unheard of at CNN and elsewhere. She acts like a journalist! Instead of pushing the usual narrative of Obama's purity and incorruptibility, she actually admits that these issues regarding illegal immigrant capture and detainment were carried out during the Obama admin. Then she asks her Democratic party guest(Senator Baldwin[?]), if she stood up against these issues during the Obama era, but she struggles to come up with an answer. At first, she completely avoids answering at all. So, the CNN anchor does something even more rare. She actually follows up the non-answer, by repeating the question again.

She nervously 'claims' that she had spoken up about a few incidents involving individual illegal immigrants. But she makes it clear that she did NOT stand up against the policies, nor did she speak up loudly in support of the immigrants who suffered it as a whole. In other words, she didn't do squat when Obama was in office, but now that a Republican is in office, she is selectively outraged! Lol

BTW: This is how real journalists are supposed to do their jobs, regardless of their guests' political affiliation. Unfortunately it's almost unheard of when democrats or progressive elites are questioned.
https://youtu.be/iXlxU9xeKDs

Yep, that is good journalism.

There are a couple things going on. Partisans are almost always selective in their outrage. When their guy does something bad they look the other way or excuse it. When the other guy does something bad they raise holy hell. That doesn’t mean there isn’t a reason to be outraged, just that partisans are hypocritical in their outrage.

Second, the media scrutinizes the Trump administration’s actions far more than previous presidents. The general public likely wasn’t aware of these things happening under previous administrations. You can’t be outraged over something you aren’t aware of.

I don’t have a problem with the scrutiny the media applies to the Trump administration. That is the way it should be. I wish the media was as critical of ALL administrations. My biggest concern for when Trump leaves office is the media is going to relax their standards again.

Skeptic Bob said:

Yep, that is good journalism.

There are a couple things going on. Partisans are almost always selective in their outrage. When their guy does something bad they look the other way or excuse it. When the other guy does something bad they raise holy hell. That doesn’t mean there isn’t a reason to be outraged, just that partisans are hypocritical in their outrage.

Second, the media scrutinizes the Trump administration’s actions far more than previous presidents. The general public likely wasn’t aware of these things happening under previous administrations. You can’t be outraged over something you aren’t aware of.

I don’t have a problem with the scrutiny the media applies to the Trump administration. That is the way it should be. I wish the media was as critical of ALL administrations. My biggest concern for when Trump leaves office is the media is going to relax their standards again.

Click to expand...

I agree, except that their scrutiny of Trump often goes WAY over the line into personal insults and hyper partisan hypocrisy. Now more than ever before, it's literally becoming common for journalists and/or their partisan panels and guests to make Hitler and Nazi comparisons. This 'temporary' separation of illegal immigrant parent/kids is now commonly being compared with the holocaust and Japanese internment in ww2. Those idiotic comparisons should offend every Jew and Japanese American! Immigrant children WOULD have been reunited with their parents within a matter of days, even if Trump wouldn't have signed the new policy into law. Millions of Jews died, after being tortured, and never saw their families again! The Japanese were forcibly TAKEN from their homes and interned for years.

These illegal immigrants put themselves into this position in 2 ways. 1. They tried sneaking over another country's border. 2. They failed to simply go to a border station and apply for refuge. If they did that, they would NOT have been arrested OR separated!

But to the activist progressives, there can be no expectation Of personal accountability or common sense decision making for members of any of their cultural Marxist "victim classes". Since they are non-white, they are treated by the radical left as if they are too stupid and incompetent to make the right decisions on their own. That's why an "activist socialist government" is needed! But if you were white, and you were caught trudging across the southwestern desert with your 3 year old, you'd probably have your kid taken and put into protective custody for risking his/her life! In other words, your family would be separated. But if that were to happen, don't hold your breath waiting for leftist outrage or sympathy. After all, as a non-minority, you should have known better than to put your kids at risk!