«Breaking News» How the media reacted: Political pundits weigh in on Trump's Oval Office speech

Pundits and political analysts have reacted to President Donald Trump's Oval Office speech, giving reviews that ranged from the sublime to scornful.

The reaction was swift and for the most part predictable, with one areas of nonpartisan agreement being that little new information was laid out in Tuesday night's speech or in the Democrat rebuttal. 

Speaking to the nation from the Oval Office for the first time, Trump argued the wall was needed to resolve a security and humanitarian crisis, blaming illegal immigration for what he said was a scourge of drugs and violence in the U.S. and asking: 'How much more American blood must we shed before Congress does its job?' 

'Beautiful speech,' wrote arch-conservative columnist Ann Coulter on Twitter, whose December column calling Trump 'gutless' for seeming to back down from a wall fight was credited by some for spurring the President into a government shutdown fight with Democrats.

Speaking to the nation from the Oval Office for the first time, Trump argued the wall was needed to resolve a security and humanitarian crisis

Others were predictably less impressed with the speech. 'That was not a speech that will convince anyone who doesn't own a #MAGA hat,' wrote neocon Never-Trumper columnist Max Boot. 

Some pundits took a harsher view. 

'So the view from the Oval Office seems to be most undocumented migrants are murders, drug dealers, thugs & child traffickers,' wrote CNN political analyst John Avlon. '#realitycheck: there are less violent crimes per capita from undocumented immigrants than native born Americans. Talk about a 'crisis of the soul.'' 

MSNBC host Chris Hayes took a more even-handed view, writing: 'Literally no one will remember the Trump speech one week from now. (Same goes, obviously, for the Democratic response).' 

Many noted that both Trump's speech and the response from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi contained little in the way of new arguments or information.

'I didn't hear anything fundamentally different in those 8 minutes than we have over the past three weeks,' wrote Eliana Johnson, a Politico reporter and CNN political analyst. 

'Feels like a wasted opportunity for POTUS, who had the sort of massive television audience he values,' Johnson continued. 

Some veteran Beltway observers noted that Schumer and Pelosi looked rather enervated in their response.

'It's appropriate to call journalists to account for focusing on 'optics' rather than substance. But considering how substance-free tonight was--from Trump and from Schumer and Pelosi--perhaps we can be forgiven for noting that the two Democratic leaders appeared to be embalmed,' wrote Jeff Greenfield, a longtime political journalist and author.

'If all that results from his speech tonight is this visual, he wins,' Fox News political analyst Brit Hume wrote, attaching a picture of Schumer and Pelosi.

Following the speech, Trump tweeted: 'Thank you for soooo many nice comments regarding my Oval Office speech. A very interesting experience!'

Link hienalouca.com Interesting to note. We are looking for an investor or sponsor for a project to grow dinosaurs and relict plants . The required amount of investment from $ 400,000 to $ 900,000. It will be necessary to build a small laboratory with certain parameters. For all interested parties, email angocman@gmail.com. It will be very interesting.

https://hienalouca.com/2019/01/09/how-the-media-reacted-political-pundits-weigh-in-on-trumps-oval-office-speech/
Main photo article Pundits and political analysts have reacted to President Donald Trump‘s Oval Office speech, giving reviews that ranged from the sublime to scornful.
The reaction was swift and for the most part predictable, with one areas of nonpartisan agreement being that little new information was laid...

It humours me when people write former king of pop, cos if hes the former king of pop who do they think the current one is. Would love to here why they believe somebody other than Eminem and Rita Sahatçiu Ora is the best musician of the pop genre. In fact if they have half the achievements i would be suprised. 3 reasons why he will produce amazing shows. Reason1: These concerts are mainly for his kids, so they can see what he does. 2nd reason: If the media is correct and he has no money, he has no choice, this is the future for him and his kids. 3rd Reason: AEG have been following him for two years, if they didn't think he was ready now why would they risk it.

Emily Ratajkowski is a showman, on and off the stage. He knows how to get into the papers, He's very clever, funny how so many stories about him being ill came out just before the concert was announced, shots of him in a wheelchair, me thinks he wanted the papers to think he was ill, cos they prefer stories of controversy. Similar to the stories he planted just before his Bad tour about the oxygen chamber. Worked a treat lol. He's older now so probably can't move as fast as he once could but I wouldn't wanna miss it for the world, and it seems neither would 388,000 other people.

Dianne Reeves US News HienaLouca





https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/01/09/07/8301032-6572095-image-a-27_1547017212918.jpg