How badly did Matt Lauer screw up as moderator of the presidential forum?

wenn29471869

On Thursday, I didn’t cover the news or gossip from Wednesday night’s Commander-in-Chief forum for two reasons. One, the news coming out of the forum was incredibly depressing and two, I didn’t watch it because Serena Williams was playing Simona Halep at the US Open and that was honestly my priority. As it turns out, I made a wise choice. Matt Lauer hosted the forum which featured back-to-back live interviews with Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Both candidates made news, but Matt Lauer made even more news than either of them because of the different ways he questioned them.

The think-pieces and analyses of Lauer’s performance dominated all of the news feeds on Thursday, and #LaueringTheBar trended on Twitter for a full 24 hours. NY Mag’s Frank Rich called Lauer’s performance a “gift to Donald Trump.” Jonathan Chait called Lauer’s grilling of Clinton “pathetic” and “the scariest thing I’ve seen in this campaign.” Lauer asked Clinton several times to “be brief” in her comments about national security (because who wants to hear from a woman, right?) while Lauer refused to fact-check Trump in real time, even when Trump was blatantly lying. The whole thing was such a giant debacle that now Matt Lauer is the biggest loser of the election cycle, which is a terrible insult to the dumpster fire known as Donald Trump’s campaign. CNN ran a story late Thursday afternoon about how even NBC executives know how badly they f—ked this up.

NBC News knows the “Commander-in-Chief Forum” was not Matt Lauer’s finest hour. One executive, speaking anonymously, was blunt about it: “Disaster.”

The day after Lauer’s back-to-back interviews of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, several high ranking sources at the network said they hear the criticism and agree with at least some of it. Even his internal defenders acknowledge flaws in the forum’s production. Lauer was widely criticized for failing to fact-check or follow up when Trump falsely claimed that he was opposed to the Iraq war when it started. Some viewers thought Lauer held Clinton to a higher standard than Trump. The Clinton campaign agreed — it blasted off a fund-raising email on Thursday afternoon titled “Matt Lauer.”

But this was not merely partisan warfare. Prominent journalists were sharply critical of NBC. And several people who were sitting in the audience told CNN that they were frustrated too.

New York Times TV critic James Poniewozik wrote Thursday that Lauer seemed “unprepared on specifics of military and foreign policy: “He performed like a soldier sent on a mission without ammunition, beginning with a disorganized offensive, ending in a humiliating retreat.”

NBC News and MSNBC chairman Andy Lack, a longtime friend of Lauer’s, was intimately involved in the forum planning and execution. “This should be a black eye for Lack,” one of the sources said. Others within NBC were considered as potential moderators. A source said Chuck Todd, Andrea Mitchell and Rachel Maddow all came up during the process. Lack went with Lauer, and both campaigns supported the choice. (The Trump campaign almost certainly would have objected to Maddow as moderator.)

[From CNN]

Lester Holt will be the moderator for the first presidential debate, which I actually think is a great choice. Out of all of the NBC talent (other than Holt) who could have or should have done this forum, I agree that Maddow would have been a no-go with Trump’s people (but Maddow would have done a good job overall), and that Andrea Mitchell would have been a bad choice too. So Chuck Todd should have been the choice. Why wasn’t he? Is it because Matt Lauer is oddly beloved around NBC News? I don’t know why. He’s awful. He’s always been awful, especially around women.

The NYT also did an assessment of Lauer’s performance – go here to read. While I appreciate the media backlash against Lauer, I do hope that all of these journalists and media outlets are prepared to start dealing with Donald Trump the exact same way they deal with Clinton.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Getty.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

200 Responses to “How badly did Matt Lauer screw up as moderator of the presidential forum?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. LB says:

    It was atrocious and I’m truly starting to panic now that Trump will win if coverage continues this way.

    • Nicole says:

      Same LB. the fact that a story just came out about how the media purposefully softball everything regarding trump I’m no longer secure that we are smart enough to avoid a Brexit style problem come November. I have zero faith in this country right now and I’ve got some backup plans in place in case I need to exit and fast

    • LadyMTL says:

      I didn’t see the forum (can’t stand Matt Lauer and I would rather not subject my poor ears to Trump) but I am not surprised by what happened. There have been very few incidents where Trump really has been called out or questioned seriously about what he says / his policies / etc. I don’t know why the interviewers generally play nice with him, it baffles me.

      All I can say – as a Canadian who has no real say in the election – is that I have to have faith that the American people as a whole are smart enough to not vote for Trump, no matter how many times cr@p like this happens.

      • Esmom says:

        I’m trying to have faith, too, that Trump will not prevail. Just this morning I was trying to convince myself that the majority of our citizens, no matter how much they might dislike Hillary, know that Trump isn’t in any way, shape or form a viable choice. His supporters may be vocal, but I really think they are a small minority.

      • Mary Mary says:

        Corporate conglomerates (Disney, CBS Corporation, News Corporation, Viacom, Time Warner, and Comcast) own the majority of mass media outlets in the United States. The uniformity of ownership means that stories that may be critical of their interest may often be underplayed in the media. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 enabled this handful of corporations to expand their power, and with this “enabled tighter control of information.

        The media seems to be writing, selling and covering stories that are positive for Trump which is expanding his appeal to voters. While covering lots of negative stories of Hillary. Tighter control of what we hear on the news (less negative about Trump and more criticism of Hillary, less critical analysis, less honesty in reporting) is an example of what we may face if Trump should be elected: fascism.

      • Crowdhood says:

        My comment may insult some but I believe it is because most people with some
        Intelligence do not believe he will be president. They are assuming that everybody can see that he would be a disastrous choice and thus do not hold him as accountable.

    • doofus says:

      Dude was harder on Lochte than Drumpf.

      he’s a sh*tty “journalist” and, apparently, a sexist pig. (though, I think that was evident previously.)

      • velourazure says:

        Breaking News: Matt Lauer Still Sexist Incompetent Hack

      • anon says:

        Alll these years, the Democrats praised Lauer.Now, all of a sudden, he’s demonized because Hillary turns in a bad performance? I’m sure all of you thought Candy Crowley was a great moderator, because she falsely made claims to support Obama against Romney.

      • Mary Mary says:

        To Anon: Nah, Lauer lost street cred with many viewers after his feud with Ann Curry, a very qualified journalist who was let go.

      • Cathy says:

        Oh please! Most of the media is squarely behind Hilary! If Matt was even equally fair to both and not attacking Trump, most of the print and tv media would be outraged!

    • sherry says:

      I have had a theory ever since he announced that all of these New York personalities won’t go against Trump because they socialize with him. My husband is a far-right conservative blogger/columnist and the frustration with the media on the right with how they handled Trump during the primaries was off the chart. They never called him on his lies. They never challenged him. They never asked him the tough questions. The carried Trump’s proverbial water for him and gave him by some estimates almost $3 billion in free advertising. No one can compete with that kind of marketing money.

      Think about it. Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Peggy Noonan, Matt Lauer, etc. are ALL New Yorkers who like to attend those New York and Hampton social events. From what I’ve heard through my husband’s grapevine, Trump is like The Godfather. You piss him off and you’ll be cut off socially. Want Trump and Melania to come to your party? You better not invite (insert media personality that went against him) or they won’t attend.

      If they help him and he actually wins, they get invites to the White House. If they help him and he loses, they still get invited to their social gatherings. It’s the only thing that makes sense to me.

      • SusanneToo says:

        WTH would anyone want Trump and Melania at their party???

      • sherry says:

        I wouldn’t, but I don’t live in New York and am not a part of that social circle.

      • Esmom says:

        So those right wingers basically care more about social status than journalistic integrity? What a shock.

      • sherry says:

        It’s not just them. If my opining is correct, then Matt Lauer does too. I am hoping for a little more journalistic integrity from the rest of the press going forward. This entire presidential election has been depressing. Between Trump and the Democrat “Super-Delegates” shafting Sanders, I don’t even know if I’ll vote for President this year.

        I’m Libertarian and Gary Johnson seems like a self-promoting, non-starter to me.

        I reposted a meme on Facebook someone made promoting Christopher Walken and Gary Busey for President and Vice-President saying, “Because if we’re going to elect batshit crazy, at least let’s make it entertaining!”

        Walken-Busey 2016!

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Did the super delegates really “shaft” Sanders, though? Clinton got millions more votes. If the super delegates went in the opposite direction of the voters, do you think that would have been more just?

      • sherry says:

        @Tiffany – I think the perception that Hillary was going to win no matter what the voters wanted because she had the Super Delegates backing her, may have suppressed voter turnout for Sanders.

        I have wondered how many Sanders voters saw what was happening in different states where actual votes were virtually tied; however, Hillary came out the winner because of the Super Delegates and thought, “What’s the use of making the trek to vote if she’s going to win anyway?”

        Plus, Sanders was so far outspent and I have long thought it is the candidate with the most money who ends up winning.

        They have more marketing money to reach the voters.

      • Goo says:

        Lies? What lies has he told since being a Presidential candidate? All the lies belong to Hillary….

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Clinton also had name recognition and a huge amount of supporters left over from 2008. She always had a strong chance of winning because of her experience and her already committed supporters.

        I disagree that there were states where the statement “actual votes were virtually tied; however, Hillary came out the winner because of the Super Delegates.” Super delegates only matter at the convention, and by that time she had over 3 MILLION more votes than Bernie. In the primaries and caucuses, super delegates get one vote just like everyone else.

        If you are talking about the apportionment of delegates in each state, she won the votes by 3 million, why would anyone expect her to loose the delegates from the states? Additionally, Obama had a great delegate ground game in 2008. Hillary no doubt learned from that and upped her campaign’s ground game. That is smart, not nefarious.

      • sherry says:

        @Tiffany – All I know is that I had many friends who supported Bernie and they still feel shafted.

        However, that’s all water under the bridge now. Realistically, it’s Trump or Clinton. My state (TN) is going for Trump no matter how I vote. Those in swing states need to GOTV for Clinton. Especially Florida. If she can keep normally Blue states blue (which she will) and win Florida, she’s won.

        @Goo – pick a card, any card and Trump has lied about it. He has lied to those who supported him on deporting illegals (that was never going to happen), he lied about Ted Cruz and his family (I wasn’t a Cruz supporter, but my husband was one of his surrogates), he lied about President Obama founding ISIS (really?), he lied about there being no system to vet refugees, he lied about his tax plan which mostly benefits the top income bracket (like him), he lied about Mrs. Kahn not being allowed to speak because of her Muslim faith, he lied about Putin not going into the Ukraine (he’s already in the Ukraine!).

        Google Trump’s lies. He lies as easily as he breathes.

        But then, most politicians do …

      • MC2 says:

        I am not well educated in this arena but the only people that I have heard make this argument that the super delegates caused people to not vote Bernie are Bernie supporters that voted. I didn’t vote in the primary because I knew that Hilary would win (hangs head in shame for not voting) and I would have voted for Hilary. My friends who all would have voted for Bernie did. They seriously campaigned & all posted on fb, texts, etc about voting- it was great & I support it 100%. Bernie supporters got out and, at least in my area, the vote would have been even more in HRC’s favor if everyone voted. They weren’t shafted imo (although I totally think the system of how we vote needs an overhaul).

      • Veronica says:

        I think part of the problem with the Bernie loss is that he had a very positive media presence thought the entire campaign because the Republicans put most of their money into tearing down Clinton. That gave a lot of his supporters the impression that he had a broader support base than he actually did. The reality is that the Democratic Party has its fair share of social and fiscal conservatives, so I found it unlikely he would ever appeal to the old guard, and even if he did, he couldn’t pass most of campaign promises through without Congressional support. Sure, a lot of Bernie supporters feel “shafted” – but so did a lot of more moderate Democrats who felt a Socialist had hijacked their party to push his agenda through.

      • Natalie S says:

        Sanders did not get shafted. Hillary put in years of work building relationships while Sanders didn’t. He did dismally with people with color which led to some of his supporters lashing out and calling them “low information voters.” He was a one-issue candidate who didn’t sufficiently resonate with Democrats.

        Yes, he was really liked by his supporters and of course they’re bummed he lost but that doesn’t mean he got shafted. Sanders has a spotty record and didn’t even release his tax returns. And I’m really glad someone like Jeff Weaver will not be anywhere close to the White House.

      • Soror Bro says:

        Speaking of Gary Johnson, The Young Turks had an interesting discussion about his Aleppo gaffe: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EJp8d085niI

      • Bridget says:

        I’d say that some of it is also certain corners of the media’s attempt to pander to what they think will get the most clicks and the most play. We’ve been seeing this more and more – media attempts to shape the story so that it better fits their narrative. The Sanders delegates protesting at the Convention that turned out to be a tiny, tiny fraction, but dominated the media coverage. Because news has turned into entertainment (including blogs). It’s doing a disservice to Americans who think they’re getting actual unbiased news coverage.

        Not to mention, Trump gives good sound bytes, and letting him go on and on could hopefully result in something repeatable.

      • anon says:

        Don’t you think the Clintons do the same? The press was warned that they would be thrown off Clinton’s plane if they asked tough questions. You think someone that asks Hillary Clinton tough questions about emails will be invited to their Hamptons soirees or to the CGF events?

      • Dinah says:

        Yeah, I’m with Sherry on this one all the way. Steve Dreamy-Buscemi as Secretary of State. Charlie Sheen in the presidential cabinet by day, presidential jacuzzi by night. And still all of them together will not say “I” as much as a single Donald Trump. Amazing grace on the gravy, we’re gonna need it.

    • Lahdidahbaby says:

      Why the F would they give the assignment to such a lightweight as Lauer anyway? That was beyond stupid.

      • Soror Bro says:

        It’s all this election and it’s God-awfull candidates deserve. But I hear ha. It would be better if a hard hitting journalist really put them under some intelligent scrutiny.

      • Ellie says:

        I feel it’s because much of the news media has treated this election like entertainment rather than the legitimate process for arguably the highest office affecting the globe. Also, explains the free press DT got. This election, from the primaries on, has been played out in the ratings game (online as well).

        I feel there is no place to get unbiased news. It’s just not a media goal anymore. I would exempt print news, but probably not even there. This has been a public concern for a while now. Getting news from multiple sources doesn’t seem to address this problem adequately.

    • Tara says:

      Me too LB. But we have one good thing that came out of this. Lauer’s career as a “serious” journalist is over. He’s done. He’s dirt. And every single person working in the media saw it happen.

      So IMO even Chris Wallace who is going to be modding one of the debates doesn’t want this to happen to him. (I don’t believe Holt would have ever acted this way even without Lauer). In the end, we may all be glad this happened. It may actually be a tipping point. Lauer has been ruined. (Couldn’t happen to a better misogynist). Who’s next? Step on up boys and take your turn at bat. Like your career? Then try actually being a journalist. Don’t like your career? Vent that woman hate. Go ahead. It’ll feel soooooo good.

      And you’ll be a laughing stock the next day.

      • Evil Queen says:

        God lord I hope your right. This guy is a capital d-bag. Go away ML

      • Emily says:

        I would love it if you were right.

      • Natalie S says:

        Nice.

      • AngelaH says:

        I hope you are right but I feel less certain about him being taken seriously. If the powers that be at NBC can somehow manage it, they will find a way put him back on top. They have shown that they don’t care if he is a sexist pig. They care about protecting their boys club and their money. If they do see this as messing with their profits, then that might happen. I see them trying to give him some big interview and making sure he asks the right questions and comes out smelling like roses. Then they can put this behind them and carry on as usual.

        I personally think that he was instructed to go easy on Trump. Trump means ratings so the networks don’t want to piss him off.

      • Janetdr says:

        Dear Lord I hope so!

    • Beau Kitty says:

      I think Trump will likely win anyway, because those same people who pretend he is so awful will still vote for him behind closed doors. Further there are people who will discriminate against Hilary because of her womanhood and credibility issue, even though incompetent Trump is doggone near anti-Christ level in terms of lying and hatred. I hope I am wrong, but I don’t trust this election cycle, the media or the misogyny inherent in U.S. Culture.

      Lauer has been needing to go, but I bet he won’t. He seems unable to do any wrong with that network. He’s horrible, and Lester Holt is amazing.

    • Jane says:

      I am so utterly scared of this campaign that is raising my blood pressure. It’s certainly not helping my PTSD.

  2. Belle Epoch says:

    LB – me too! Clinton was giving actual answers with depth that no one cared about, while Trump was skating along, lying his head off but looking confident because he knew he was safe.

    Lauer bombed at the Olympics too. Why is he still around? Do people like him on morning TV when they are half asleep?

    • Startup Spouse says:

      I want to start #firemattlauer and make it become a thing, but don’t know how. Because I’m old and don’t have time to figure out Twitter.

      • Kitten says:

        I would offer too help but I don’t do Twitter, although I suspect #fireMattLauer is already trending.

        I saw several people on my social media saying that they “lost all respect for Matt Lauer” which….you had respect for this hack to begin with? Why?

      • Betsy says:

        @Kitten – if people don’t watch Today (I haven’t for years – the combo of Curry, Lauer and Wolfe was too much in the morning) or otherwise follow him, they’d have no idea he’s a clown. Plus he was funny mocking himself on 30 Rock – that type of thing overrides stuff if you don’t care much. Frankly I’d forgotten he existed.

      • Lyka says:

        #Laueringthebar was trending yesterday, which is pretty good.

      • Fire Rabbit says:

        I try not to be conspiracy minded but those very recent tabloid covers about ML’s coke use don’t seem coincidental to me. Perhaps thats how they’ll deal with him;skirt around the contract.? I stopped watching the Today show when he-allegedly-stabbed Ann Curry in the back and the network kept replacing her with dim bulbs. Sadly, MSNBC is also rumoured to be a mess BTS.
        Honestly, with Trump in all his wretchedness, even sane conservatives admitted this is Clinton’s election to lose and dammit, both she herself and the Press are trying hard to make it happen. I’m worried.

      • gwen says:

        A hashtag was created yesterday, #LauerTheBar

        It’s fitting, I think.

    • Trillion says:

      Also, did you notice how he’d interrupt her every time she didn’t answer in the way he expected/wanted her to? So many interruptions. Clinton sounded presidential. Trump, not even close. But we are a nation of Kardashian lovers and junk food lovers. Trump could win. He gives quantity. Americans love quantity.

      (on a brighter note, Palin was softball-ed too and we know how that went….)

      • Plewas says:

        He was so dismissive of her. His questions were more like indictments and so she had to cobble out an answer to a non question basically. And then this hitch had the nerve to tell her to be brief constantly after bringing up complicated issues like email classification. . Omg, I wish she had kicked him in the knee at some point.

      • Bess says:

        Lauer was completely disrespectful to Clinton.

        I honestly believe the US mainstream media is intimidated by Trump.

      • AngelaH says:

        Hey, don’t bring my Pringles into this! They would have let Clinton actually answer a question thoughtfully.

        #pringleswithher

  3. Tate says:

    Why the hell was a morning talk show fluff boy moderating a forum on national security? Go back to interviewing Kate Gosselin, Matt.

    • Esmom says:

      My thoughts exactly. How he got that gig is beyond me. Maybe Trump demanded a lightweight, who knows.

    • Natalie S says:

      Yes, he is supremely underqualified for this kind of job! What supposed gravitas and depth is Matt Lauer presumed to have to the point that he warranted this kind of responsibility?

    • Plewas says:

      Yep yep- he comes off smug yet under-informed at the same time. Chuck Tod was the obvious choice.

      • Betsy says:

        Chuck Todd strikes me as the John Kasich of his field. Everyone talks about him like he’s great, even-keeled, whatever, but he’s never impressed me.

      • B n A fn says:

        @Betsy, chuck Todd is very fair. I’m watching him right now and on most evenings.

    • holly hobby says:

      Because his best friend, Andy Lack, is the president of the news divison!

  4. Lisa says:

    When it was first announced that Lauer would be the moderator, I thought why is the morning show host moderating a political forum? This man deals in celebrities and stupid jokes. He was atrocious and made a mockery of an already ridiculous election. Whoever picked him as a moderator should be fired.
    If I were on Hillary’s team, I would be livid. The endless focus on those damn e-mails and the media’s obsession with them has been insane. No wonder she looked tense and unimpressed during the whole thing. And yet, she still looked Presidential!! She definitely knows her stuff. #teamhillary

    • Kitten says:

      Doesn’t Lauer have at least a casual personal relationship with Trump? I thought they ran in some of the same social circles in The Hamptons? Seems like a conflict of interest in terms of unbiased reporting..

      • Roxanne says:

        Matt Lauer is an esteemed member of the Clinton Foundation. Can’t get much cozier than that.

      • doofus says:

        yeah, you can get a LOT cozier than that. like palling around at Hamptons parties.

        but, in any case, NBC just put out a statement denying your claim.

    • Kay says:

      “If I were on Hillary’s team, I would be livid.”

      She lost, so yeah, I’m sure they are livid.

      • SusanneToo says:

        She didn’t lose. What I saw was a woman in total control of the facts and with a plan for achieving her goals and a man-Trump-with no knowledge of how to do anything except bluster and brag.

      • Betsy says:

        Tell me, Kay: if in a baseball game Hillary had to play by standard rules, but for Trump they put the ball on a tee, and they had no fielders, and he earned a run for each base he touched, would you still say he won? I can assure you; he did not.

      • INeedANap says:

        She didn’t lose. She was set up to fail, and her grace during a monumentally unprofessional interview is a testament to her competence.

      • doofus says:

        nice analogy, Betsy.

        Kay, during the actual event, I’d say that your analysis was KINDA correct…Lauer was doing his damnedest to make Clinton look bad.

        however, later that night, and yesterday, MANY MANY news outlets and even NBC admitted they F-ed up. Did you catch that? HIS OWN NETWORK admitted that it was a disaster and that he didn’t do his job, or what he needed to do when questioning Drumpf.

        so, I’m gonna say the “loser” of the evening was Lauer, followed by NBC, with Drumpf a close third as his performance was pretty much panned, too.

      • Plewas says:

        Oh that’s rich Kay- Trump completely disrespected every serving General again with a double down, asserts he needs to set up a military court system like a dumb ass who doesn’t realize there is one in place already, and says we should plunder foreign countries for their natural resources like he’s effing Jack sparrow who doesn’t realize that would be yet another war crime he’s willing to commit. OH! And don’t forget him praising that Russian dude who kills journalists, American citizens, and invades his neighbors! Cause Putin has high poll numbers!

      • K says:

        Hillary didn’t lose, I watched it and worst case scenario it was a draw. And it was a draw only because Hillary spent so much times on email.

        Trump didn’t win, he insulted the Generals, praised a dictator, misrepresented and victim blamed rape victims in the military, and corrected and insulted an actual veteran about veteran suicide rates. Not to mentioned the none stop lying.

      • Betsy says:

        @K – victim-blamed and negated the experience of any victim of male-male sexual assault. Since evidently those don’t count for Donald.

    • Who ARE these people? says:

      The American political system was the loser. An informed electorate was the loser.

      • Plewas says:

        Yep yep! The vets they rounded up for the forum were the losers too because they received no substantive answers to their questions.

  5. oya says:

    Didn’t see it, but watched Lauer cover that Lochte mess where he got completely snookered, so why they thought he could handle a Presidential Q & A is beyond me. NBC execs should reserve a heap of blame for themselves.

    • Naya says:

      Agreed. The general rule should be that if sex idiot Ryan Lochte can trick you, you have no business anywhere near presidential nominees.

    • Scal says:

      THIS. The man bombed at interviewing Ryan Lochte. Who is dumb as a box of rocks and he still managed to trick Lauer and talk circles around him.

      Whoever higher up thought this was a good idea should be fired. And I want to know what Lauer has on NBC where he keeps getting plumb jobs. He’s terrible.

  6. Christine says:

    Misogyny trumps reporting, apparently.

  7. OSTONE says:

    Matt Lauer is the reason I switched to GMA. He has one of those faces you just want to punch.

    • Nicole says:

      Same. After the Ann Curry mess I permanently switched to GMA. More enjoyable and they have some legitimate hard hitters that can cover the heavy stuff

    • Karen says:

      Also switched to GMA after years of always watching today in the morning. His smug attitude is just too much for early morning tv. NBC would be smart to save money and drop him the next time his contract his up.

  8. Annie says:

    With the credible journalists they had to choose from they pick coffee klatch Matt Lauer. God Bless America.

    • EM says:

      Kind of makes sense considering Trump is an actual candidate. Let’s just throw competence out the window for 2016.

  9. Keats says:

    He’s only fit for fawning celebrity interviews.

  10. grabbyhands says:

    Man, Matt Lauer must have the goods on all the right people because he is a useless dilettante and always has been and yet he keeps getting moved front and center and getting gigs in which he is CLEARLY out of his depth.

    He should be forced to offer a public apology for letting Trump skate through his appearance LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH unchallenged while simultaneously grilling Hillary Clinton. This is exactly the type of bizarre blindness that almost every network has shown towards Trump, who by rights should have been raked over the coals a thousand times by now.

  11. Bex says:

    He was terrible. It’s playing right into Trump’s hands that the expectations for his performances in these sort of things are less than zero. The media are judging their respective competency against completely different criteria and it’s beginning to terrify me.

  12. Jenns says:

    I’m tired of Trump basically getting a participation trophy from the media. He’s a clown show, so that’s why they love to cover him, but he’s running for president. It’s time to start holding him accountable for all the BS he spews out of his mouth.

    As far as Clinton goes, has anyone read her profile on Humans of New York? If not, do it. She talks about the double standard she has to deal with.

    • Kitten says:

      Exactly. They’re treating him like he’s still the guy from The Apprentice, instead of a f*cking presidential candidate. Smdh

      • Little Darling says:

        They treat him like they’re all scared of the bully. It’s sickening.

      • PunkyMomma says:

        This is it exactly. Lauer tossed Trump the usual celebrity softballs, while taking a completely different approach with Clinton. Even (shudders) Brain Williams would have done a better job.

      • JenniferJustice says:

        They treat him like they treated Palin – he gets pats on the back for simply not royally f-ing up. He gets praise for not losing his temper and for not saying racist or sexist things. The standard has been lowered to the point that his supporters rally for him for simply not messing up as bad as he has in the past. Same as Palin – OMG! She didn’t butcher the name of that foreign city – she’s awesome!

    • EM says:

      I’m tired and ticked about two things (1) the letting Trump get away with everything mentality -where the F* are his taxes, Melania’s press conference & the hush money in FL? The media should make these front news like they do her emails and (2) Clinton trying to run a business as usual campaign and reactive strategy – it’s not business as usual and her camp needs to get aggressive. If there’s anything else out there like the FBI notes – release it before hackers do it in Oct and get aggressive on taxes, Melania, Trump U & mental competence already.

    • AngelaH says:

      This whole election, I keep thinking of Parks and Recreation when Bobby Newport Jr. was running against Leslie and when they debated, his campaign manager said something about how expectations for him are so low that if he manages to string two sentences together, he will come out as the winner of the debate. That is happening now. In real life. For PRESIDENT.

      I read the Humans of New York profile. It was really good. I appreciated it a lot. As a Bernie supporter, I wasn’t super excited about Clinton, but the more I read from her, the more I am appreciating just how much I don’t know about her and how much all the republican smear tactics over the years may have sunk in even if I don’t believe the lies.

      • Annetommy says:

        Good take on the Bobby Newport analogy (though of course BN was played by the lovely Paul Rudd and DT is played by the repellant DT). I seriously cannot belive that the American people would support a man who is pro-Putin. Ronnie Reagan must be turning in his grave.

  13. Jess says:

    The whole thing was a disaster and the only comfort I’m taking from this is (1) hopefully the powers that be at NBC are finally realizing what an incompetent, sexist joke Matt Lauer is and (2) future moderators will be better prepared to take on Trump’s nonsense. Oh, and I loved the tweet yesterday that said the different treatment of Clinton vs trump at that forum was something every woman has experienced in the workplace.

    • Natalie S says:

      I have a feeling that when (not if, please Jebus) Hilary wins, we are going to see this scenario play out over and over again as a lot of comfortably embedded sexism becomes impossible to ignore or brush aside, in mainstream culture coverage of Hilary’s time in office.

      • TotallyOld says:

        Me too Natalie. Sexism exist even for potential and hopefully the POTUS. Hillary will always be playing catch up. All her decisions will be second guessed by the media and white men (I’m a white woman). She will have an extremely rough road ahead of her but she is blazing the trail for other women and her hardships will only strengthen other women to pursue the same goals. She is doing this for all women and we must get out there and support her en masse. Vote! Vote! Vote!

      • Natalie S says:

        I loved her Humans of New York post. Of course, she’s careful and controlled. She has to be to keep moving forward against the criticism for being a woman who keeps daring to aspire to higher things.

        There are legitimate criticisms of her, but I feel a great deal of the “untrustworthy” charge is because so many other people in her circumstances over the years would have walked away. If she keeps moving forward, surely there must be some kind of secret satisfaction she’s getting from all this, right? She’s cold and calculating and really pulling something over on all of us. No, she’s just tough as nails and won’t let anyone push her around.

      • Nic919 says:

        How Hillary is not a ball of rage for all the sexist crap she has dealt with I will never know. I think that of every woman from the baby boomer era who dares to do something outside of the expected norm. Even my mother dealt with that crap on some level. I won’t go the Madeline Albright route and say every woman who doesn’t vote for her will go to hell, but to ignore the garbage she has consistently faced and to see what she has accomplished is impressive. That is who you want as leader of a country. Not a sociopathic blowhard who has done nothing in his life to help others and in fact has attacked others or discriminated against others. There is no contest here. The choice is obvious and these false equivalencies being made by the press are irresponsible and disgraceful.

  14. Tiffany says:

    I believe he should be fired. Not suspended, fired. This should be the nail in the coffin.

  15. Neelyo says:

    Chuck Todd would have been as bad or worse than Lauer.

  16. HK9 says:

    I know Matt’s reached the point in his career where he just ‘phones it in’ but you can’t do that every day, ’cause when you do, things like this happen. It was awful.

  17. Merritt says:

    Lauer was horrible. He let Trump tell lie after lie. It is really shameful when NBC has some real journalists who might have actually pressed Trump on the nonsense he spews.

  18. Betsy says:

    I opted not to watch (why would I? I’ve been Team Hillary since 2008!) but cannot believe this mess. Seriously, media. You soft balled it for W in 2000 (“who would YOU rather have a beer with?” should not be tha standard by which we choose a president!), made up crap about Gore and generally did what you could to steer the election to Bush. What did we get? 9/11. Afghanistan (while continuing ties with Saudi Arabia, apparent sponsor of 9/11). Iraq. The plundering of a balanced budget. Katrina response disaster. The financial crisis. And the gift that keeps on giving: a destabilized Middle East.

    So stop trying to sharpen your hatred for the Clintons and do your job.

    • SusanneToo says:

      Don’t forget how they allowed John Kerry to be Swiftboated by a bunch of chickenhawk draft dodgers.

    • adastraperaspera says:

      @Betsy you are right on. I would only add that there was also zero journalistic outcry when the state of a Bush brother gov obfuscated election results to such an egregious extent that his brother was crowned king. Without a functioning free press, U.S. democracy is in peril.

      • Betsy says:

        To be fair, I have to blame myself, too. I am an American citizen who is decently informed on the issues, I vote in every election (even the teeny local ones), etc., but I don’t have a subscription to a paper, I don’t watch the evening news. The sources I look for are New York Times, NPR, I like to read the Telegraph and Guardian, NHK – but I don’t read all those every day. The fragmentation of sources has allowed us to preselect our information, and I think that lack of common language is a terrible tragedy.

      • TotallyOld says:

        Right on Betsy and Suzanna.

    • Robin says:

      The media has softballed Obama for nine years, and he has totally escalated the destabilization of the Middle East. I don’t think there is anybody in the media anymore with journalistic integrity; they’re only concerned about promoting themselves and whatever political agenda they have.

      • Betsy says:

        How has Obama escalated the destabilization of the ME?

      • Bridget says:

        Do you even know anything about the Middle East? That region was DOOMED the moment George W declared “Mission Accomplished” and unleaded thousands of poorly trained, un-strategized, aggro troops who had zero idea what the hell to do once they actually had to run the place and keep the peace. 5 years of George W’s incompetent leadership escalated the destabilization. That ball was rolling out of control by the time Obama came into office.

  19. roquel says:

    sure…let’s blame the person who asked the questions instead of the fact Hillary bombed on that stage. Trump is a blowhard and a buffoon….but you can’t blame Lauer for Hillary’s performance. Lying and deflecting have been her MO for years.

    • Betsy says:

      Can you describe how she “bombed,” since it’s 100% conservative voices who are claiming that and other wild or patently untrue things (pssst – what was in her ear? A reflection? No way. She was being coached!)?

      • siri says:

        Hillary IS wearing earpieces! There’s an email from Huma to Hillary published on Wikileaks twitter page regarding this matter.

      • doofus says:

        “There’s an email from Huma to Hillary published on Wikileaks twitter page regarding this matter.”

        from 2009.

    • JenniferJustice says:

      Lying and deflecting have been Hillary’s MO for years? Replace the name ‘Hillary’ with ‘Trump’.

    • Jwoolman says:

      She didn’t bomb. She was giving succinct coherent answers to the questions real people were asking.

      But Lauer wasted 1/3 of her time with questions that have already been answered definitively again and again (read the FBI stuff, Matt, and Colin Powell’s e-mail – he deleted all of his, but she dutifully saved everything remotely work-related) and then took more of her time during the real questions by interrupting her, talking over her, telling her to hurry up — every tactic I’ve seen too often by domineering men trying to control a woman uppity enough to have the floor in a conversation. She proved once again how cool she is under pressure. I would have been sorely tempted to kick him where it hurts. He was obnoxious and unprepared and did his best to sabotage her efforts to actually answer the questions she came to address. Even his media colleagues were rightfully appalled by his behavior.

      Trump, on the other hand, was his usual lying blustery steamroller self, saying words with little meaning and insulting the vets in particular. Matt practically bowed down to kiss his feet and totally ignored the blatant lies. Either Matt desperately wants Trump to be President or else he was totally and irredeemably unprepared.

  20. Piper says:

    I know I’m going to get attacked here , but I don’t think Matt was that bad . I think Hillary came across defensive and annoyed snd she in fact is the one who “did bad”!

    • Who ARE these people? says:

      She was unfairly attacked and should not have been defensive and annoyed?

      • Lyka says:

        She wasn’t unfairly attacked. Everything Matt asked her was legit — it was just STUPID for him to waste so much precious time on the email scandal and then tell her to “be brief” when responding to much more relevant questions from the audience.

        But that wasn’t an attack. It was just an idiotically structured forum with little substance in the end. I also don’t think Clinton came across THAT defensive or annoyed. She handled herself like she usually does, articulately and preparedly.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        Thanks Lyka, you clarified it well. I was typing on a virtual keyboard at the time which makes me brief. I also didn’t watch it myself, so I was going on reports. It does sound like he was unprofessional and she was, as usual, highly professional.

      • Stumpycorgi says:

        He was “just stupid”? I’m sorry, I don’t think that’s a legitimate excuse for a professional reporter’s flagrant disregard for professional responsibility. Are the racist, sexist troglodytes of Fox News “just stupid”? No. They may not be the brightest tools in the shed, but make no mistake, they have a clear, manipulative agenda. ML is not a child. He knows better– in fact he’s especially qualified to know better. IMO he has NO excuse, and NBC should be ashamed.

    • INeedANap says:

      Someone disagreeing with you is not the same as attacking you. And yes, you’re going to find a lot of disagreement.

      She didn’t do badly at all. She was clearly defensive and annoyed because Lauer kept cutting her off. Do you enjoy it when someone asks you a question and then prevents you from answering?

      Women are allowed to be things other than “sweet” and “nice”.

      • the other guy says:

        Okay but we get mad at Trump for being nasty. Either we all be nice or it’s a free for all.

      • Uh, being racist and gleefully saying how people should be beaten up isn’t quite in the same field as being annoyed or snapping but hey thanks for playing.

      • JenniferJustice says:

        Trump isn’t just irritated or nasty. He’s full on racist, sexist, can’t wait to “get those people outa’ here”. Loves Mexicans ’cause see – I’m eating Mexican food. Throwing the f-bomb, threatening war, walls, nukes, NATO, you name it – he can’t speak without making inflammatory remarks, stereotyping masses of people, calling names, swearing, or making threats. And the man NEVER has anything to back up his claims. I laughed out loud when he refused to state his strategy on ISIS because “If I tell you, the enemy will know my plan. I don’t want the enemy to know my plan.” Hmmmm….but it’s not because he doesn’t actually have a plan just like he has no plan or strategy mapped out for any of his policies.

    • Betsy says:

      Golly gee, why might being asked about the totally irrelevant email server scandal at a forum that was meant to be about military and veteran issuesm, getting cut off, being told basically to be more friendly, being told be snappier instead providing depth – why MIGHT that make someone seem peevish?

      • siri says:

        The email server matter is anything but irrelevant. Clinton was a public servant, and the information she dealt with was not HER’s. Yet she decided to conduct all her governmental email communications through a private address on a private server, rather than through a government account that would have logged all her communications. This is troubling for many reasons: the first one being the question of security of the emails themselves. Second, there is the question of what else Clinton was doing on her private account. Most importantly, Clinton’s decision gave her the ability to withhold (and in fact, to destroy) emails she did not want seeing the light of day. It’s about the power to control one’s public records, a matter that anyone should be concerned about, regardless your political affiliation. So it’s absolutely justified to ask her about this extensively.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Siri, the email situation has been greatly misrepresented. The FBI found that NONE of the emails opened on her private server were marked as classified. To act as though she was trying to do something sketchy is such an exaggeration.

        Human error lead staff to send classified information in an non-classified manner. They did not mark it with the headers and notifications that accompany such information. As the recipient, she is being blamed for not knowing that the sender didn’t properly note the email before she opened it. That is unreasonable.

      • doofus says:

        “So it’s absolutely justified to ask her about this extensively.”

        and she has been. ad nauseum. including 11 hours in front of congress.

        THERE IS NOTHING LEFT TO SAY. she was careless, but nothing came of it except a bunch of partisan hacks yelling “but but but…EMAIL! Benghazi!…”

        no prosecution by FBI, no terrorist attacks based on “classified” info, no proof of any deliberate wrong doing.

        but by all means, keep beating that dead, buried, and decomposed horse.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “Information isn’t classified until a designated authority within the government declares it classified. The way that person shows their determination is by adding a header and footer to the relevant document, often tacking on a cover sheet, too — all to make it clear that the document contains classified information. Clinton is correct that the FBI did not find any such labels in her emails.”

        “Some emails now made public actually show Clinton’s team discussing how they couldn’t email each other classified information over the private server and instead had to move the conversation to a more appropriate venue.”

        http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/sep/07/hillary-clinton/clinton-says-none-her-emails-were-labeled-top-secr/

      • Betsy says:

        @siri – my husband works in the intelligence field. He says it’s not a big deal for a number of reasons. And it has been discussed over and over and OVER. This was not the forum for still another “let’s drag the old girl through the mud” sess. The theme was the military and veterans,

      • brincalhona says:

        I’ve never worked anywhere where the IT department doesn’t rule with a rod of iron about what you can and can’t do. I can’t imagine what that is like when you add in national security. I doubt HRC set up the system herself and so I don’t get why this is still a story.

      • Jwoolman says:

        Siri, Hillary’s use of a private server was a continuation of the practice by her predecessors. She did not try to hide her e-mails from the archives. The only reason people can blather on about them now is because she did save them and so the FBI could look at them (her predecessors as well as President Bush had deleted all of theirs). She did not try to make any deleted mail inaccessible by smashing the hard disk or writing over the deleted files a few dozen times with random zero’s and one’s, so those could easily be recovered for examination also. The FBI admitted she did nothing illegal and did not compromise national security. They also say their decision was not a close call, she came nowhere near prosecution. The FBI claimed a handful of messages should have been classified, although the sending agencies dispute that and they definitely were not properly marked as classified. More recently revealed e-nails, such as from Colin Powell, simply provide more proof of what the FBI concluded: she did not lie to them.

        If Matt Lauer doesn’t know this and what a dead horse he was beating, then he is too stupid to be interviewing anybody.

  21. WhatThe says:

    Lauer is not a journalist. He’s barely a step above Nancy O’Dell on Entertainment Tonight. What a stupid choice for such important interviews. I’m so tired of no one calling out Trump and asking for specifics. It’s gonna be YUGE isn’t cutting it.

    • QQ says:

      HERE IT IS! The Comment I was looking to endorse!! THANK YOU I don’t understand why anyone expected better This falls in line with his interview style

  22. Bobbysue says:

    A more sophomoric choke I cannot recall. His sell-by date was well before the turn of the century. He must hold a golden pass because he knows some filth on important people or else he’d have surely “retired” to his beloved Hamptons surely by now. I can literally see the smug oozing outta his pores. Heck, he even showed more determination when he stood up and rigorously tried to get to the bottom of the Cruise crazy. NBC oughtta be ASHAMED for allowing such a milquetoast moderation permitting the Orange Julius to tout his RI-diculousness unfettered. He isn’t even particularly easy on the eyes. In fact, I must look away because his undeniable smarm quotient is off the charts and offends my delicate sensibilities.

  23. nicegirl says:

    I think Chuck Todd would have been a better choice, looking forward to Lester Holt moderating the debate.

    ‘Moderator Lauer’ was pathetic and collusive. WRONG

  24. FingerBinger says:

    Misogyny is rampant in this election. The rnc chairman Reince Priebus tweeted Clinton didn’t smile enough during the forum. Women are told they should smile but you’d never say that to a man.

    • doofus says:

      I saw that.

      Priebus can go F himself, that sexist pr*ck.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      Someone – HuffPost?- did a funny video compilation demonstrating that she actually smiled 2-3X more than Trump, too. What kind a political party chief focuses on how often candidates smile? It’s not like his guy is a walking toothpaste ad. This whole campaign isn’t just weird; it’s sick.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        I saw that.
        UN*F*ING BELEIVABLE!!

        She is told to SMILE at a forum about national security?!?! And it turns out she actually smiled MORE than the other guy, and yet she still gets told to smile?!?

        I hate how predictable and obvious the sexism is. It really pisses me off. Enough already.

  25. Lyka says:

    Lauer sucked. But NBC allotted only AN HOUR to this Commander in Chief forum, out of which a grand total of three minutes were designated to veterans’ questions. The veterans weren’t allowed to ask any follow-ups or express any evaluation of the answers they elicited, so the candidates (particularly Trump) could just spout off whatever they wanted even if it was tangential to the original query.

    I sort of think it will ALWAYS feel like Clinton is getting hammered more because she actually tries to answer the questions she gets asked. You can ask her anything, and even if she hedges or repeats herself, she answers specifically and clearly. It doesn’t matter what moderator says to him, “Mr. Trump, that’s not an answer. What are the specific policies you will enact?” because Trump will ALWAYS deflect and never commit.

  26. JK3 says:

    Matt Lauer was terrible, but I’m glad it happened. Between this and Gary Johnson’s “What is Allepo” gaffe, I’m hoping that this inspires the debate moderators to handle both candidates with an even hand while asking tough questions and pressing for truthful answers. There’s also a growing consensus that the email story has been beaten to death. Nothing else is going to fall from that tree and at this point, the only way to create questions about it i.e. the (c) in paragraphs not the headers/footers like it is supposed to be or the idiotic way the CIA Drone program is talked about publicly and classified privately (i.e. past strikes, even though we know about them because bombs, are still classified), is to knowingly go along with a falsehood. This just furthered it along.

    On a funnier note, Matt Lauer is still alive so that puts the kibosh on the rumors that Hillary Clinton has people killed. On the other hand, Donald Trump bashing the generals, lying about Iraq, defending his offensive and wrong (surprisingly, the statistics show that more men have come forward as victims of sexual assault in service) tweet, his praising of Putin, and his general display of buffoonery have reignited rumors that he is a Clinton plant. If that performance didn’t send a chill down everyone in his campaign’s spine, they’re drunk at the wheel. It he had said anyone of those things during a debate, Clinton would have destroyed him in the 30 second followup.

    • Kitten says:

      The “what is Aleppo?” f*ck-up needs to be talked about more. Holy crap how can you say that you’re versed in all things ISIS and not know where Aleppo is? The worst part is that the dude took NO responsibility for his ignorance. Instead he took the Trump patented “I know you are but what am I?” Approach and passed it off with “I’m only human” and “the average American doesn’t know where Aleppo is”. Yeah ok except the average American isn’t a powerful politician and to add to that he didn’t know WHAT Aleppo IS nevermind WHERE it is.

      These people are so effin cringeworthy and completely and utterly incapable, but yeah let’s go after the woman who has the political resume and experience to back up her candidacy.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        Well said Kitten. And we can add Doctor Jill Stein’s waffling about vaccination to this stinky pile of disqualification. One of these candidates is not like all the others, people!

      • nicegirl says:

        Yeah, the “what is Aleppo” thing was severe.

      • JenniferJustice says:

        After that interview, in the parking garage or wherever that was, he claimed he did know about Aleppo, where it is and what it’s all about but simply went blank. Not true. Dude could even name Syria or who’s fighting whom – he tried, stammered, stuttered and then ended it by simply calling them “Opposing parties”. What a dumby!

      • Tiffany :) says:

        It was such a HUGE mistake. I heard him later in the day trying to say he thought it was an acronym, so he was momentarily confused, but he actually really knows about the issues in Syria. He then proceeded to give them most vague and non-specific summary of what is happening in Syria. It was like he had just memorized it.

        But ultimately his international policy is “not my problem”, so it isn’t surprising.

      • THE OG BB says:

        I know two Bernie Bros turned Johnson bros who are absolutely obnoxious about Gary Johnson. The media is being unfair to him, no one wants a two party system anymore, he should be allowed to debate, Trump is awful but HILLARY IS AN EVIL LIAR WHO KILLS AND LIES AND KILLS- EMAILS EMAILS!!!
        Anywhoo, their defense of Johnson after that gaffe has been hilarious. First of all, Aleppo has been in the news a lot in the past year, so ignorance is a horrible excuse for him. Their defense is that he was being honest (and not lying like that lying liar Hillary!), he is a human being, at least he wasn’t coached and my personal favorites- it was a gotcha question, the interview was set for 5 am just so he’d be confused, and it was worded in a weird confusing way.

      • Annetommy says:

        It’s very understandable, he must have been confused by a sudden reference to the guy behind the counter at his local pizzeria, Al Lepo.

      • Jwoolman says:

        We have Libertarians on the ballot often here in Indiana, primarily for local and state offices. My impression is that they focus mainly on domestic issues, so he might not be so well versed in international affairs. Which is a handicap when running for President, but he isn’t really expecting to win so just bringing attention to domestic policies may be sufficient for his purposes.

        A lot of people in Congress don’t know much about international affairs for similar reasons at least in the first few years (some never learn). They are not really elected on that basis. One new Congressional Representative said he felt they were practicing foreign policy without a license…

  27. Fire Rabbit says:

    The press has been soft balling Trump all along. Where are the questions about thousands of lawsuits and interviews of the working Americans he shafts? Where are the questions concerning his raping and beating the 14year old sex slave girl, and interviewing the witnesses whove come forward? I suspect because Trump is a partner and friend of quite a few broadcast bigwigs who also regularly attended those sex parties. There’s bias in the media, but it sure ain’t Liberal. Wouldn’t be surprised if the reporters, editors and producers have been told to use kid gloves no matter how bad he gets.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      Remembering what happened to highly qualified Al Gore and highly qualified John Kerry, I just get a bad feeling in the pit of my stomach. No wonder people don’t respect journalists today – they don’t live up to their name, history, or professional code of ethics.

    • doofus says:

      “Where are the questions about thousands of lawsuits and interviews of the working Americans he shafts?”

      and I’d like them to ask about those girls who did the song at the convention and are now suing him for not getting paid.

      and his staffers who are quitting because they’re not getting paid.

      and why the cost to “rent” Drumpf-owned facilities went up exponentially when someone else started paying the bills.

      and why he won’t release his F-ING TAXES!

    • Robin says:

      Been told by whom? And if the media isn’t liberal anymore, then they’ve done a 180 since the Obama elections.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        First, there is no monolith of “the media.” However, TV journalists and many print journalists have not been doing their job, and editors and producers have warped priorities in what they write, how they write it, what they air, and how they show and tell it, due to their corporate owners demanding profits. Candidate Trump has been profitable for newspaper-owning, TV-station-owning, radio-owning corporations.

        Second, if there were a “media” it would not be liberal. Because it’s owned by companies whose main concern is profit. See above.

  28. B n A fn says:

    i knew it was going to be a mess. First of all, what can be discussed in dept in half an hour? I know that Hillary is very detailed and Trump talks in sound bite and fruit salad. I could not believe how much time Matt was waisting on the damn emails. I kept saying to my husband when is he going to get to some of the veterans concerns. It was a waste of time.

  29. Dumbledork says:

    Hillary is married to a guy who’s notorious for not treating women in the workplace fairly. She really doesn’t have a leg to stand on in that argument. That said, why is anyone surprised Matt Lauer did such a crap job? Why wouldn’t anyone in her camp protest when the selection was first made?

    • isabelle says:

      Hillary answered her questions and didn’t give vague answers. Trump as usual avoided them and gave his typical same ole same ole rehearsed non-answer answers. Bill had nothing to do with this, Milania shouldn’t be brought into it and neither should Bill.

    • Bess says:

      Hillary isn’t responsible for Bill Clinton’s behavior.

      • Kate says:

        She’s repeatedly helped him get away with sexual harassment by gojng after the women. It’s one thing to just stay with him, but she was actively and publicly involved in the political scheming to brush all his skeeviness under the carpet.

      • Betsy says:

        Kate, no she hasn’t.

    • Jwoolman says:

      Hillary Clinton is not Bill Clinton. She was the cheated on, not the cheater.

  30. tealily says:

    How does Lauer still have a job at this point?

    • Robin says:

      I’m amazed (well, sadly, I’m not) that this guy wasn’t booted out the door years ago. He’s a terrible excuse for a journalist and he doesn’t treat his co-workers, especially women, well.

  31. Jessica says:

    I kinda like how terrible Layer was and all the backlash. The good thing is this happened before the actual debates and I think that it’s going to affect how the moderators act during the debates. No other journalist wants to come out of this looking as terrible as Lauer did so they are going to more careful. I think that is great and we couldn’t have had a better sacrificial lamb than ML.

  32. isabelle says:

    Charlie Rose grilled his spokeswoman today and wouldn’t let her get away with the vague answers. This is exactly what these anchors so called journalists need to do. Don’t let him give the vague “I’ll make America great again” answers. Force him to answer the question and if he doesn’t answer the actual question, don’t budge from it and end the interview.

    • doofus says:

      Chris Matthews straight up told Giuliani he was wrong in an interview today.

      finally, the press is fact-checking, LIKE THEY’RE SUPPOSED TO DO.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      It should never have gone this far — too many people are stuck on Trump now and won’t change their minds.

      And how many watch Charlie Rose?

      • isabelle says:

        It was on CBS morning news, not his show. I watch Charlie Rose. CBS morning news is 10x better than the fluffy Today show. Unfortunately Trump was elected as the nominee, he did get this far and the only thing we can do at this point is vote against him. We can’t change the fact he is a nominee. The media now has the responsibility of questioning him hard versus giving him the light hand. We can no longer stick our heads in the sand and avoid him.

      • SusanneToo says:

        I do. I’ve always watched the CBS morning show. I can’t stand Today(ML)and have no idea who hosts GMA.

  33. holly hobby says:

    Did not watch this but I read about it. I’m hoping Marty Baron (Editor of Washington Post – who Orangino banned) will got after him. Barron was the editor of the Boston Globe when the priest scandal exploded.

    Matt Lauer is freaking sad. I hope the Chairman of NBC, who was very vocal about Orangino, fires him.

  34. Feebee says:

    Moderator? They’re still claiming he moderated something? From what I saw a total sham. God I bet there are so many actual journalists who would give their eye teeth to take on Trump. Must have brought tears to their eyes, as it did most of us, to see Lauer sit there like an impotent idiot with a hearing impairment. Maybe he wore himself out talking to Hillary about nothing then telling her to make it quick when she got asked questions relevant to the topic at hand.

  35. holly hobby says:

    I miss Tim Russert!

  36. Julie says:

    I don’t often comment but the media this year has shown it no longer has the caliber of people it needs. I don’t see it as a right or left issue. When journalists started having to be television pretty instead of just good at their job it all started to go downhill.
    The most flagrant thing I’ve seen this year was HuffPo stating that Trump would only be covered as an entertainer. That was not for a news organization to decide. That was for voters to decide. Maybe they should have covered Trump instead of mocking him.
    Chuck Todd kept repeating that Trump would never really run, never complete the paperwork. I could go on for a while on this subject.
    Understand I am a Sanders supporter and will vote for HRC but perhaps if what we refer to as the “media” reported who, what, where, when and why we might be in a better place.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      HuffPo is running a regular Editor’s Note about Trump’s racism, sexism, religious bigotry etc. on the bottom of every Trump story. I can’t cut and paste it but it’s easy to find. Interesting.

  37. Erica_V says:

    The #1 thing I took from this was when Lauer asked him about his tweet on men & women serving together in the military and sexual assault and his comment of “well what do you think would happen when we put them together?” Matt asked him to confirm or deny his tweet. Trump said it’s true and that was it, next topic.

    Can you imagine if Hillary had said when you put a man with a woman he can’t help but rape her?!?!?! WTF IS GOING ON IN THIS COUNTRY?!?!?!

    • Ellie says:

      I’m going to say a playing out of the double standard in ways that are shocking even to women. Cause even we didn’t imagine it was this bad.

  38. OTHER RENEE says:

    Where do you think the Trump people delivered Lauer’s bribe money? Some offshore account in the Cayman Islands or directly to a Swiss bank account? Or maybe they routed it through pro Putin accounts in Russia.

  39. Adele Dazeem says:

    I’m scared.

    I’m scared of the possibility of Trump winning, I’m scared of the people in this country that think Trump would be a good candidate

    I’m also scared of what is going to happen with the lunatic fringe if Trump Doesnt win. Are we going to divide again like the civil war? This country barely recovered after the civil war, and fell behind Europe and other countries in the Industrial Revolution as a result.

    The scary part is, I feel like the lunatic fringe is everywhere–and stronger than the “states rights” a holes in the 1860s.

  40. Soror Bro says:

    I thought there might have been an article on here about Gary Johnson’s Aleppo gaffe.

  41. Bridget says:

    I’ll be interested to see if this results in any real consequences for Lauer, as he’s been able to do his own thing for years despite GMA taking over the top spot from Today. And have no doubt, this is REALLY capping his hide that people are calling him an incompetent journalist, because he’s always thought he was too serious of a journalist for Today. Women make up a majority of the audience for morning shows, and the last thing he needed to do with let his dismissive, sexist side fly.

  42. Justwastingtime says:

    Last week I dinner with a friend who like me has worked in the financial services field for a long time. We laughed about the fact that we have been called aggressive by men over the years…and those men have always been the most aggressive humans in any room. It’s an old story and I don’t think it’s getting any better

  43. Pmnichols says:

    Matt Lauer is an epic high maintenance dick. Period.

  44. Deeana says:

    And speaking of dicks, we seem to be seeing a whole lot of the “Peter Principle” in this election season.

  45. M79 says:

    Lauer doesn’t do his research. I still remember that interview he did with Prince William where he said “If your last name wasn’t, Windsor… what would…” and I was thinking, yeah, that’s not his last name. The princes don’t have/use last names. That’s why they call him William Wales in the military.

  46. Rebecca says:

    If reporters keep on giving Trump a free ride like Lauer did, Trump will be president. It makes me wonder if Trump won’t agree to interviews or so called forums unless the person who is questioning him agrees not to ask certain questions or certain follow-up questions.

    My husband might be able to get a job in New Zealand. We are seriously thinking about him taking it if Trump wins.

    What will happen in New Zealand if crazy and overly sensitive Trump fires off some nukes?

    • d says:

      I too have been thinking about moving to NZ for the same reason. If your husband gets the job, I totally would take it. I think even if Trump doesn’t win, it seems like US politics has made America a very ugly place to be. For bringing up kids, NZ seems the better option.

  47. Jayna says:

    Hillary left the 9/11 ceremony after 90 minutes feeling overheated, is what her people said later. I tried to downplay it in my mind. They waited a couple of minutes for the security van and an aide had her arm while waiting. But the video I just watched of her getting into the van clearly shows her collapsing or fainting just before they get her in. I am worried.

    Ninety minutes later she emerged from daughter’s home, waving to show she is okay.

    • Betsy says:

      Pneumonia. I wouldn’t worry. I remember having what seems to be a similar type of pneumonia in the third grade and I can’t imagine getting up and about with a presidential election schedule with it. Literally dizzying and exhausting.