Author Topic: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media/social media  (Read 1150231 times)


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
What a looney tune station
« Reply #2251 on: March 05, 2018, 03:28:57 PM »
what is wrong with CC

self proclaimed sex guru at 21 states she has a photo  of Paul Manafort with a Russian "Oligarch"

The scandal of it all    :roll:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/05/asia/thailand-sex-guru-deportation-russia-intl/index.html

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
The professional journalists at CNN perhaps unaware of Farrakhan...
« Reply #2252 on: March 11, 2018, 04:52:01 PM »
http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/10/cnn-louis-farrakhan-scandal/

If only Professor brave sir Robin were here to explain...


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72258
    • View Profile
Turkish goverment owns controlling interest of CNN Turkey?
« Reply #2254 on: March 23, 2018, 08:22:20 PM »
Tucker Carlson has reported for the last two nights that the Turkish government (Erdogan) owns a controlling interest in CNN?!?

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Media, Ministry of Truth, Laura Ingraham
« Reply #2255 on: March 30, 2018, 11:31:26 AM »
http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=95.msg109753#msg109753

These kids enter the political theatre and deserve to have all their points answered.  But no matter what they say or do, the rebuttal should have stuck to substantive answers on political issues.  What Laura said wasn't bad (UCLA is hard to gt into?) but at least for the sake of keeping sponsors she should have stuck to the issues.
------------------------------

The sponsor boycott is more evidence that the same forces of the Left pull the strings with the 'student movement'. 
Exact same reaction as to Rush regarding 'student' Sandra Fluke, 2012.   
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh%E2%80%93Sandra_Fluke_controversy
The kids aren't making original arguments or using original leftist tactics.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72258
    • View Profile
Ralph Peters: Why I left FOX News
« Reply #2256 on: March 31, 2018, 11:04:07 AM »
Would someone post this please?


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Re: Ralph Peters: Why I left FOX News
« Reply #2257 on: April 01, 2018, 05:54:26 AM »
Would someone post this please?


The Washington Post

Why I left Fox News
 
An ad for “Fox and Friends” outside the Fox News Channel studio in New York. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
By Ralph Peters March 30
You could measure the decline of Fox News by the drop in the quality of guests waiting in the green room. A year and a half ago, you might have heard George Will discussing policy with a senator while a former Cabinet member listened in. Today, you would meet a Republican commissar with a steakhouse waistline and an eager young woman wearing too little fabric and too much makeup, immersed in memorizing her talking points.

This wasn’t a case of the rats leaving a sinking ship. The best sailors were driven overboard by the rodents.

As I wrote in an internal Fox memo, leaked and widely disseminated, I declined to renew my contract as Fox News’s strategic analyst because of the network’s propagandizing for the Trump administration. Today’s Fox prime-time lineup preaches paranoia, attacking processes and institutions vital to our republic and challenging the rule of law.

Four decades ago, as a U.S. Army second lieutenant, I took an oath to “support and defend the Constitution.” In moral and ethical terms, that oath never expires. As Fox’s assault on our constitutional order intensified, spearheaded by its after-dinner demagogues, I had no choice but to leave.

My error was waiting so long to walk away. The chance to speak to millions of Americans is seductive, and, with the infinite human capacity for self-delusion, I rationalized that I could make a difference by remaining at Fox and speaking honestly.

I was wrong.

As early as the fall of 2016, and especially as doubts mounted about the new Trump administration’s national security vulnerabilities, I increasingly was blocked from speaking on the issues about which I could offer real expertise: Russian affairs and our intelligence community. I did not hide my views at Fox and, as word spread that I would not unswervingly support President Trump and, worse, that I believed an investigation into Russian interference was essential to our national security, I was excluded from segments that touched on Vladimir Putin’s possible influence on an American president, his campaign or his administration.

I was the one person on the Fox payroll who, trained in Russian studies and the Russian language, had been face to face with Russian intelligence officers in the Kremlin and in far-flung provinces. I have traveled widely in and written extensively about the region. Yet I could only rarely and briefly comment on the paramount security question of our time: whether Putin and his security services ensnared the man who would become our president. Trump’s behavior patterns and evident weaknesses (financial entanglements, lack of self-control and sense of sexual entitlement) would have made him an ideal blackmail target — and the Russian security apparatus plays a long game.

As indictments piled up, though, I could not even discuss the mechanics of how the Russians work on either Fox News or Fox Business. (Asked by a Washington Post editor for a comment, Fox’s public relations department sent this statement: “There is no truth to the notion that Ralph Peters was ‘blocked’ from appearing on the network to talk about the major headlines, including discussing Russia, North Korea and even gun control recently. In fact, he appeared across both networks multiple times in just the past three weeks.”)

All Americans, whatever their politics, should want to know, with certainty, whether a hostile power has our president and those close to him in thrall. This isn’t about party but about our security at the most profound level. Every so often, I could work in a comment on the air, but even the best-disposed hosts were wary of transgressing the party line.

Fox never tried to put words in my mouth, nor was I told explicitly that I was taboo on Trump-Putin matters. I simply was no longer called on for topics central to my expertise. I was relegated to Groundhog Day analysis of North Korea and the Middle East, or to Russia-related news that didn’t touch the administration. Listening to political hacks with no knowledge of things Russian tell the vast Fox audience that the special counsel’s investigation was a “witch hunt,” while I could not respond, became too much to bear. There is indeed a witch hunt, and it’s led by Fox against Robert Mueller.

The cascade of revelations about the Russia-related crimes of Trump associates was dismissed, adamantly, as “fake news” by prime-time hosts who themselves generate fake news blithely.

Then there was Fox’s assault on our intelligence community — in which I had served, from the dirty-boots tactical level to strategic work in the Pentagon (with forays that stretched from Russia through Pakistan to Burma and Bolivia and elsewhere). Opportunities to explain how the system actually works, how stringent the safeguards are and that intelligence personnel are responsible public servants — sometimes heroes — dried up after an on-air confrontation shortly before Trump’s inauguration with a popular (and populist) host, Lou Dobbs.

Dobbs has no experience with the intelligence system. Yet he ranted about its reputed assaults on our privacy and other alleged misdeeds (if you want to know who spies on you, it’s the FGA — Facebook, Google and Amazon — not the NSA). When I insisted that the men and women who work in our intelligence agencies are patriots who keep us safe, the host reddened and demanded, “Patriotism is the last refuge of the — you fill in the blank.” As I sought to explain that, no, the NSA isn’t listening to our pillow talk, Dobbs kept repeating, “Patriotism is the last refuge of the — fill in the blank.”

Because I’d had a long, positive history with Dobbs, I refrained from replying: “Patriotism is the last refuge of the talk-show host.”

I became a disgruntled employee, limited to topics on which I agreed with the Trump administration, such as loosened targeting restrictions on terrorists and a tough line with North Korea. Over the past few months, it reached the point where I hated walking into the Fox studio. Friends and family encouraged me to leave, convinced that I embarrassed myself by remaining with the network (to be fair, I’m perfectly capable of embarrassing myself without assistance from Fox).

During my 10 years at Fox News and Fox Business, I did my best to be a forthright voice. I angered left and right. I criticized President Barack Obama fiercely (one infelicity resulted in a two-week suspension), but I also argued for sensible gun-control measures and environmental protections. I made mistakes, but they were honest mistakes. I took the opportunity to speak to millions of Americans seriously and — still that earnest young second lieutenant to some degree — could not imagine lying to them.

With my Soviet-studies background, the cult of Trump unnerves me. For our society’s health, no one, not even a president, can be above criticism — or the law.

I must stress that there are many honorable and talented professionals at the Fox channels, superb reporters, some gutsy hosts, and adept technicians and staff. But Trump idolaters and the merrily hypocritical prime-time hosts are destroying the network — no matter how profitable it may remain.

The day my memo leaked, a journalist asked me how I felt. Usually quick with a reply, I struggled, amid a cyclone of emotions, to think of the right words. After perhaps 30 seconds of silence, I said, “Free.”

Ralph Peters is a retired Army officer, a former enlisted man and a prize-winning author of historical fiction.
washingtonpost.com
© 1996-2018 The Washington Post

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72258
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2258 on: April 01, 2018, 06:08:35 AM »
Thank you Doug.

Reactions to Col. Peters article?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2259 on: April 01, 2018, 09:55:58 AM »
I agree that  FB AMZN GOOG are eavesdropping on us far more then the NSA. 

(though we read or hear that at times the NSA is somewhat jealous or interested in getting some, at least , of this data)

Peter's:   "  Yet I could only rarely and briefly comment on the paramount security question of our time: whether Putin and his security services ensnared the man who would become our president. Trump’s behavior patterns and evident weaknesses (financial entanglements, lack of self-control and sense of sexual entitlement) would have made him an ideal blackmail target — and the Russian security apparatus plays a long game."

Me  :   This is the paramount security question of our time?

Peters:  "As indictments piled up, though, I could not even discuss the mechanics of how the Russians work on either Fox News or Fox Business. (Asked by a Washington Post editor for a comment, Fox’s public relations department sent this statement: “There is no truth to the notion that Ralph Peters was ‘blocked’ from appearing on the network to talk about the major headlines, including discussing Russia, North Korea and even gun control recently. In fact, he appeared across both networks multiple times in just the past three weeks.”)
All Americans, whatever their politics, should want to know, with certainty, whether a hostile power has our president and those close to him in thrall. This isn’t about party but about our security at the most profound level. Every so often, I could work in a comment on the air, but even the best-disposed hosts were wary of transgressing the party line."

Me:  I am not sure what he means as "indictments pile up"  .  The mandate was to find collusion and to my knowledge none has been found.   Indictments are on other alleged crimes.     
       As for Trump being a blackmail target this is just  a conspiracy theory at this time.    He is putting the theory before any evidence .   He would do well promoting this theory on CNN.   


My last lament:
How come we never see a single person come out of CNN or MSNBC or ABC or CBS EVER point out the Left's hypocritical propaganda?





Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72258
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2260 on: April 01, 2018, 10:07:45 AM »
A friend comments on Col. Peters:

"I’ve met Peters, and have generally liked some of his past work. That said, he’s always been full of himself, and a bit too convinced he’s the smart guy.  I’m not a Fox watcher, but , , , (t)he fact that they’re not anti-Trump suggests that they’ve maintained a shred of sanity.  And the fact that they aren’t doing the “Russia, Russia, Russia” freakout indicates they’re smart enough to be skeptical.   If he’s convinced that there’s evidence of wrongdoing by Trump he should state what the evidence is, or shut his pie hole."

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2261 on: April 01, 2018, 10:36:51 AM »
What is you opinion of the R Peters piece CD?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72258
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2262 on: April 01, 2018, 11:29:18 AM »
In no particular order:

a) FOX does seem to have gone down somewhat; there are more Barbie and Ken dolls; fewer greybeards with education and life experience.  That said, their best remains top flight:  Bret Baier, Katherine Herridge etc, but it does sadden me to say that the quality of the panel on Bret Baier has become uneven; on good nights as good as it ever was (filtering out the loss of Charles Krauthammer) but on some nights it is filled with hacks from the Washington Pravdas.  The new Mark Levin show on Sundays has deep content (but tends to be too somber-- I fear it will not last). 

For example, Judge Janine of the grating voice is there only because she is a hack for Trump.

OTOH Tucker is fg AWESOME!!! (but a bit blind on Russia)

b) There is considerable sucking up to President Trump-- given the need to "balance things out" this is not necessarily a bad thing, but sometimes it goes to far.  The evening line up becomes but variations on a theme. 

c) The sucking up includes avoiding difficult questions about Trump's verbal softness on Russia.  IMHO there IS something weird about it , , , what to make of Trump's out of left field comments yesterday about leaving Syria soon?  WTF?  The point is not whether this is a good and/or necessary idea, but why is it a surprise to the Pentagon?!?  And to our men there in the field?  And to our allies?  Is he just flapping his gums at the cost of making the fight immeasurably harder by casting doubt in the minds of friend and foe alike about American will?  An ugly question crossed my mind , , , Is this surprise announcement consistent with a man who just had to take a hard line on the Russki assassination in Britain letting Putin know not to worry-- that their understanding (whatever it may be) remains in place?

I remain of the point of view that we are BADLY overextended militarily and in great need of shortening the list of things to do:

a) Iran-- Bolton calls for ending the nuke deal and pre-emption, Iran's move for land bridge to the Mediterranean as a possible trigger for war with Israel
b) The Norks-- Bolton calls for pre-emption
c) China-- the South China Sea AND Trade War
d) Russian adventurism in Europe and the Middle East, cyber war
e) the Middle East in general
f) etc etc etc

I love Tucker Carlson, but he took some cheap shot at Peters on both Russia and the Iraq War when Peters was last on his show.  Being Tucker, the shots had some serious sting to them and I can easily picture Peters still being sore , , ,

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues, Ralph Peters leaves Fox
« Reply #2263 on: April 02, 2018, 07:41:20 AM »
A friend comments on Col. Peters:

"I’ve met Peters, and have generally liked some of his past work. That said, he’s always been full of himself, and a bit too convinced he’s the smart guy.  I’m not a Fox watcher, but , , , (t)he fact that they’re not anti-Trump suggests that they’ve maintained a shred of sanity.  And the fact that they aren’t doing the “Russia, Russia, Russia” freakout indicates they’re smart enough to be skeptical.   If he’s convinced that there’s evidence of wrongdoing by Trump he should state what the evidence is,"

I agree with the above. I also don't watch Fox News (outside of Fox News Sunday on network) so I can mostly speculate.   I've posted Ralph Peters analysis here when I've liked it or agreed with it.  I think Peters' views have changed more recently.  For one thing he was a Hillary supporter: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/ralph-peters-the-man-too-militaristic-for-fox-news/  Fine, but you can get plenty of that elsewhere.  Regarding the Trump-Russia complaint, would somebody please tell us what Trump did that deserves the controversy.  My God we have been patient.

Virtually all pundits believe they don't get enough face time to fully express their views.  I see conservative panelists on shows like Meet the Press get about one sentence in and I wonder why they didn't use their 10 seconds more effectively.  What Peters doesn't see about himself is that maybe he isn't that telegenic, maybe his thoughts aren't that unique or profound, maybe his presence isn't in demand from the Fox hosts or viewers.  The Washington Post is publishing his view because he is attacking Fox News, not as a military analyst.  I don't see Fox competitors like MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS rushing to sign this free agent.

Searching 'youtube ralph peters' brings up, "Ralph Peters calls President Obama a Total Pussy on national television, Ralph Peters goes too far, even for Fox News.  He accused conservative Fox host Tucker Carlson of sounding like a Nazi sympathizer from the 1930s!  Some self reflection might be in order instead of blaming others.

Join the club, most Americans don't get a free podium to express views with unlimited face time to a nationwide television audience - that someone else built.

Maybe he can join the forum and share his views with an audience that Crafty built.
------------------------
Regarding Fox News, fair and balanced?
[Crafty] "what to make of Trump's out of left field comments yesterday about leaving Syria soon?  WTF? "

Yes, someone could have taken that statement apart and other tidbits of nonsense.  There is a need for a network that covers all the news, from both sides, and is objective, not just fills the conservative gaps that the liberal bias media misses.  And there is a need for a place where conservatives can hear the best conservative views.  Fox might be trying to hit on both counts and missing on both.  They will likely get less conservative over time and leave a gap to their right for new entrants like the other networks left for them.  Meanwhile, they already developed a brand that will never be trusted as fairly covering both sides.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2018, 08:24:30 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2264 on: April 02, 2018, 12:42:15 PM »
" The new Mark Levin show on Sundays has deep content (but tends to be too somber-- I fear it will not last).  "

The first one with Walter Williams was good but I agree somewhat somber is a goo description .  I did not see much of the Lee interview and I missed yesterday

Mark is more dynamic on the radio then on TV.   While I understand the lack of emotion is not to turn off viewers it also makes it boring except to those who already know him I think.


"  I don't see Fox competitors like MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS rushing to sign this free agent."

I assume they will interview him  with two questions

Do you hate Trump?

Will you be 'able' to not say anything negative about Obama?

If yes to both - he has a lucrative consulting job with CNN though not likely MSLSD.

Simple as that


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72258
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Minnesota Public Radio Links conservatism with white supremacists, neo-nazis
« Reply #2267 on: April 18, 2018, 10:35:15 AM »
Please read John Hinderaker's account of this.
Anatomy of a Smear
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/04/minnesota-public-radio-anatomy-of-a-smear.php
-----------------------
Center for the American Experiment did amazing reporting on Edina Schools, formerly the top district in the state, now as bastion for leftist indoctrination.  The reporter was ripped, labeled and name called, but not challenged on the facts.  The reporting was excellent and the article was picked up by many, many conservative outlets, Drudge Report, Brit Hume. Fox’s Dana Perino, Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, the Canadian psychologist whose recent book was the #1 best seller on Amazon for several weeks. The piece became one of the Weekly Standard’s most-read articles of 2018.  Power Line, Real Clear Politics, InstaPundit (three times), Fox News, the Kansas City Star, the Independent Women’s Forum, Intellectual Takeout, Education News, Breitbart, The American Conservative, PJ Media, Erick Erickson in the Macon, Georgia Telegraph, Legal Insurrection, Frontpage Magazine, Hot Air, Alpha News, and DBMA Public Forum:
http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1337.msg108535#msg108535

Instead of mentioning those sites of mainstream conservatism, MPR linked the story to nazi and white supremacist sites.  Hinderaker tried to reach them back for explanation and was denied.

WHO.HOLDS.THEM.ACCOUNTABLE??

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
They are not accountable. That’s why they feel free to do this. Also, they will continue to be funded by money seized at gunpoint by the IRS and Minnesota tax authority.



Please read John Hinderaker's account of this.
Anatomy of a Smear
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/04/minnesota-public-radio-anatomy-of-a-smear.php
-----------------------
Center for the American Experiment did amazing reporting on Edina Schools, formerly the top district in the state, now as bastion for leftist indoctrination.  The reporter was ripped, labeled and name called, but not challenged on the facts.  The reporting was excellent and the article was picked up by many, many conservative outlets, Drudge Report, Brit Hume. Fox’s Dana Perino, Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, the Canadian psychologist whose recent book was the #1 best seller on Amazon for several weeks. The piece became one of the Weekly Standard’s most-read articles of 2018.  Power Line, Real Clear Politics, InstaPundit (three times), Fox News, the Kansas City Star, the Independent Women’s Forum, Intellectual Takeout, Education News, Breitbart, The American Conservative, PJ Media, Erick Erickson in the Macon, Georgia Telegraph, Legal Insurrection, Frontpage Magazine, Hot Air, Alpha News, and DBMA Public Forum:
http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1337.msg108535#msg108535

Instead of mentioning those sites of mainstream conservatism, MPR linked the story to nazi and white supremacist sites.  Hinderaker tried to reach them back for explanation and was denied.

WHO.HOLDS.THEM.ACCOUNTABLE??

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Strangely: [MPR] "About 5 percent of our total funding comes from government sources, mostly in the form of program grants from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting."
https://www.mpr.org/about/faqs

It's only 5%?  Why not make it 0% from the taxpayer?  I think they cling to the neutral image that the name "public radio" gives them even though everyone knows they go almost non-stop with blatant liberal bias.  Honesty and Leftism have little overlap so renaming it National Liberal Radio isn't even considered.

In this case, liberal bias is not the complaint.  It is the reckless racial slur they put on their opponent and refuse to correct.

I guess they can't go liberal and argue with logic all at the same time.  Must resort to slurs.



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth, Correspondents' Dinner video
« Reply #2270 on: April 29, 2018, 09:04:35 AM »
Michelle Wolf, alleged comedian, turns correspondents' dinner into what it was always was, a leftist fest, only cruder.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/04/29/full_comedian_michelle_wolf_roasts_trump_media_more_at_white_house_correspondents_dinner.html


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
MSM gets what they earn
« Reply #2271 on: April 29, 2018, 09:36:36 AM »
I saw Wolf last night. 

It simply shows the MSM for what they truly are.  Trump was absolutely great in what he did by not going to this celebrity self back slapping self congratulatory falsely claimed as some sort of celebration of the  first amendment award network money making show. 

But alas, and of course, we have the usual cast of dupes undermining the President's point with  Kasich and Paul Ryan showing respect for this charade.

 I am very glad Ryan is out .  Just wish it was now not later.  He is done.  I wonder if he thinks he is setting up for a possible come back when Trump leaves center stage.   :|

Kasich on CNN (of course) today (anyone who wants to get on CNN simply come out publicly in some way making Trump look bad and you will be on the next day!)
talking about some "middle of the road" and compromise and the usual rhino foolish nonsense that was tried for nearly 30 yrs of Bush family politics.
Kasich with his "ocean" of Americans in the middle .  Yeah right .

The libs were all glowing over  that front page funeral photo of W with his arm around (OMFG) Hillary, and H Bush in the chair and the Bamas etc
that it is so wonderful that these people of "class" were able to get along so well and above it all.

 What  the photo said to me  is  thanks to H we got Bill Clinton, and thanks to W we got Obama.   To me it does look like a DC swamp.
For those who did not see the pic here it is :

 http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-barbara-bush-funeral-photos-20180422-story.html
 
And for good measure here is the Huff truly Compost's take on Wolf who is labeled as "bold":

POLITICS 04/29/2018 12:06 am ET Updated 22 minutes ago
Here Are Michelle Wolf’s Boldest Moments At The White House Correspondents’ Dinner
Kellyanne Conway was not pleased.
headshot
By Carla Herreria

21k
110
Comedian Michelle Wolf took the bold route during the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner on Saturday night.

She roasted those in ― and out ― of the room, focusing on President Donald Trump’s questionable wealth, slamming Democrats for not doing anything, and going after Trump administration officials who attended.

Kellyanne Conway, a target of Wolf’s jabs, was expressionless as the comedian suggested journalists stop bringing Conway on their news shows.

 “If you don’t give her a platform, she has nowhere to lie,” Wolf said. “It’s like that old saying: If a tree falls in the woods how do we get Kellyanne under that tree?

“I’m not suggesting she gets hurt,” Wolf clarified. “Just stuck.”

Check out Wolf’s boldest moments during the 30-minute roast below.


1. When she wanted her appearance to be over, like a porn star “when she’s about to have sex with a Trump.”

The comedian started the roast by getting straight to the point.


2. When she was “starstruck” over Sarah Huckabee Sanders and her “perfect smoky eye.”

“Maybe she’s born with it. Maybe it’s lies. It’s probably lies.”


3. When she said Trump’s personal lawyer is the only person who can shut her up.

“It’s 2018 and I am a woman. So you cannot shut me up unless you have Michael Cohen wire me $130,000.”


4. When she hit Trump where it hurts the most.

“Mr. President, I don’t think you’re very rich. Like, you might be rich in Idaho, but in New York, you’re doing fine,” Wolf said, before leading the audience in a back-and-forth on how broke Trump really is.


5. When she called out the news media for being obsessed with Trump.

“I think what no one in this room wants to admit is that Trump has helped all of you.”


6. When she knew she wasn’t Roy Moore’s type.

“I’m 32 years old, which is an odd age. Ten years too young to host this event and 20 years too old for Roy Moore.”


7. When she supported Trump’s plan to arm teachers with guns.

Subscribe to the Politics email.
How will Trump's administration impact you?


They need to get those school supplies somehow.


8. When she said it was too easy to make fun of Republicans.

“Democrats are harder to make fun of because you guys don’t do anything.”


9. When she explained why Trump was off-limits.

“I would drag him here myself, but it turns out the president of the United States is the one pussy you’re not allowed to grab. He said it first. Yeah, he did.”


10. When she admitted that she doesn’t want Trump to be impeached.

“Because just when you think Trump is awful, you remember Mike Pence.”


11. When she went for Hillary Clinton.

Well, Michigan is pretty close to Washington, D.C.


12. When she reminded everyone what’s going on in Flint, Michigan.

It’s been four years.


Do you have information you want to share with HuffPost? Here’s how.
HuffPost
BEFORE YOU GO
PHOTO GALLERY
Inside The White House
headshot
Carla Herreria
Reporter, HuffPost
Suggest a correction
MORE:



looks Huff compost this am -  they call Wolf "bold" ! 

AdChoices
POLITICS 04/29/2018 12:06 am ET Updated 22 minutes ago
Here Are Michelle Wolf’s Boldest Moments At The White House Correspondents’ Dinner
Kellyanne Conway was not pleased.
headshot
By Carla Herreria

21k
110
Comedian Michelle Wolf took the bold route during the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner on Saturday night.

She roasted those in ― and out ― of the room, focusing on President Donald Trump’s questionable wealth, slamming Democrats for not doing anything, and going after Trump administration officials who attended.

Kellyanne Conway, a target of Wolf’s jabs, was expressionless as the comedian suggested journalists stop bringing Conway on their news shows.

 “If you don’t give her a platform, she has nowhere to lie,” Wolf said. “It’s like that old saying: If a tree falls in the woods how do we get Kellyanne under that tree?

“I’m not suggesting she gets hurt,” Wolf clarified. “Just stuck.”

Check out Wolf’s boldest moments during the 30-minute roast below.


1. When she wanted her appearance to be over, like a porn star “when she’s about to have sex with a Trump.”

The comedian started the roast by getting straight to the point.


2. When she was “starstruck” over Sarah Huckabee Sanders and her “perfect smoky eye.”

“Maybe she’s born with it. Maybe it’s lies. It’s probably lies.”


3. When she said Trump’s personal lawyer is the only person who can shut her up.

“It’s 2018 and I am a woman. So you cannot shut me up unless you have Michael Cohen wire me $130,000.”


4. When she hit Trump where it hurts the most.

“Mr. President, I don’t think you’re very rich. Like, you might be rich in Idaho, but in New York, you’re doing fine,” Wolf said, before leading the audience in a back-and-forth on how broke Trump really is.


5. When she called out the news media for being obsessed with Trump.

“I think what no one in this room wants to admit is that Trump has helped all of you.”


6. When she knew she wasn’t Roy Moore’s type.

“I’m 32 years old, which is an odd age. Ten years too young to host this event and 20 years too old for Roy Moore.”


7. When she supported Trump’s plan to arm teachers with guns.

Subscribe to the Politics email.
How will Trump's administration impact you?


They need to get those school supplies somehow.


8. When she said it was too easy to make fun of Republicans.

“Democrats are harder to make fun of because you guys don’t do anything.”


9. When she explained why Trump was off-limits.

“I would drag him here myself, but it turns out the president of the United States is the one pussy you’re not allowed to grab. He said it first. Yeah, he did.”


10. When she admitted that she doesn’t want Trump to be impeached.

“Because just when you think Trump is awful, you remember Mike Pence.”


11. When she went for Hillary Clinton.

Well, Michigan is pretty close to Washington, D.C.


12. When she reminded everyone what’s going on in Flint, Michigan.

It’s been four years.


Do you have information you want to share with HuffPost? Here’s how.
HuffPost
BEFORE YOU GO
PHOTO GALLERY
Inside The White House
headshot
Carla Herreria
Reporter, HuffPost
Suggest a correction
MORE:


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Re: Ben Shapiro: CNN lies on school shootings
« Reply #2273 on: May 21, 2018, 12:36:08 PM »



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Googel and Uber
« Reply #2276 on: June 01, 2018, 05:19:54 AM »
*buying* favorable coverage in newspaper! 

no fake news here.  move along folks:

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/05/31/report-evening-standard-sold-positive-coverage-to-google-and-uber/

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Roseanne Barr, Green Party candidate
« Reply #2277 on: June 01, 2018, 07:57:57 AM »
Barr filed with the Federal Election Commission as a Green Party presidential candidate in January 2012. She formally announced her candidacy for the party's 2012 presidential nomination on February 2, 2012. On July 14, 2012, she came in second,[81] losing the nomination to Jill Stein.

Barr was given a prime speaking role at the Green Party National Convention in Baltimore, Maryland, but decided to instead send surrogate Farheen Hakeem, Muslim co-chair of the Green Party, to speak on her behalf.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roseanne_Barr

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Roseanne Barr, Green Party candidate
« Reply #2278 on: June 01, 2018, 11:01:09 AM »
Barr filed with the Federal Election Commission as a Green Party presidential candidate in January 2012. She formally announced her candidacy for the party's 2012 presidential nomination on February 2, 2012. On July 14, 2012, she came in second,[81] losing the nomination to Jill Stein.

Barr was given a prime speaking role at the Green Party National Convention in Baltimore, Maryland, but decided to instead send surrogate Farheen Hakeem, Muslim co-chair of the Green Party, to speak on her behalf.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roseanne_Barr

Crazier than a bag of cats.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Roseanne Barr, Green Party candidate
« Reply #2279 on: June 01, 2018, 11:40:22 AM »
Crazier than a bag of cats.

Yes.  Crazy as batsh*t and her craziness has no foundation in conservatism.  Raise taxes, "greatly increase" welfare, "greatly decrease" defense.  Trump was "the lesser of two evils", she said on Jimmy Fallon, says more about Hillary than her support for Trump.
https://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/135262/roseanne-barr/#.WxGRkkgvyyI

"Trump supporter Roseanne Barr"...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2018/01/11/tv-roseanne-will-be-a-trump-supporter-real-life-roseanne-barr-is-already-a-pro-trump-internet-mainstay/?utm_term=.75d488d54027
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/30/politics/trump-roseanne-canceled/index.html

But somehow "Hillary Supporter" is not the mainstream first name of Harvey Weinstein:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/harvey-weinstein-indicted-rape-criminal-sexual-act-charges/story?id=55545228

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72258
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2280 on: June 01, 2018, 05:43:37 PM »
Useful debating points-- thanks.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Re: Media, The Vulgar New Yorker, Samantha Bee words against Ivanka
« Reply #2282 on: June 05, 2018, 02:54:56 PM »
Pardon me but I need to cut and paste this exactly as published to make this point of their vulgarity and the true ugliness of their freedom of press opinion.  This is the prestigious New Yorker writing explicit drivil masked as analysis and deep thinking:

“Cunt” makes of womanhood something repugnant, and so does Ivanka, who embraces the shine and the softness of femininity at the same time that she rejects its bravery, love, and power.
[They are saying it was right of Samantha Bee to call her a feckless one.]

Good God.  People I know subscribe to this.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2284 on: June 09, 2018, 09:56:05 AM »
"Moroccan Times"  ?

Pravda on the Atlantic  POVA

GM,

These tweets were probably displayed on their CV when they applied for NYT jobs.


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2285 on: June 09, 2018, 10:34:52 AM »
"Moroccan Times"  ?

Pravda on the Atlantic  POVA

GM,

These tweets were probably displayed on their CV when they applied for NYT jobs.



I don't doubt that.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
paycheck over party
« Reply #2286 on: June 10, 2018, 10:10:45 AM »
Just bash Trump and you can be a left wing media star.  Especially if you had called yourself a Republican .  Ran McCains campaign . 

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/nicolle-wallace-msnbc-ratings-surge/2018/06/10/id/865247/

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Sharyl Attkisson: 50 Media "Mistakes" in the age of Trump
« Reply #2287 on: June 19, 2018, 04:40:12 AM »
While NBC Meet the Press is still obsessed with Trump "Lies", who is tracking Media "Mistakes"?

Here is a top 50 list from Sharyl Attkisson to get it started.  Forgive the long post but each one of these is an important story.  Read this at the link to get all sources linked.

https://sharylattkisson.com/2018/06/10/50-media-mistakes-in-the-trump-era-the-definitive-list/
...
1. Aug. 2016-Nov. 2016:
The New York Post published modeling photos of Trump’s wife Melania and reported they were taken in 1995. Various news outlets relied on that date to imply that Melania—an immigrant—had violated her visa status. But the media got the date wrong. Politico was among the news agencies that later issued a photo date correction.

2. Oct. 1, 2016:
The New York Times and other media widely suggested or implied that Trump had not paid income taxes for 18 years. Later, tax return pages leaked to MSNBC ultimately showed that Trump actually paid a higher rate than Democrats Bernie Sanders and President Obama.

3. Oct. 18, 2016:
In a Washington Post piece not labelled opinion or analysis, Stuart Rothenberg reported that Trump’s path to an electoral college victory was “nonexistent.”

4. Nov. 4, 2016:
USA Today misstated Melania Trump’s “arrival date from Slovenia” amid a flurry of reporting that questioned her immigration status from the mid-1990s.

5. Nov. 9, 2016:
Early on election night, the Detroit Free Press called the state of Michigan for Hillary Clinton. Trump actually won Michigan.

Nancy Sinatra via Twitter

6. Jan. 20, 2017:
CNN claimed Nancy Sinatra was “not happy” at her father’s song being used at Trump’s inauguration. Sinatra responded, “That’s not true. I never said that. Why do you lie, CNN?…Actually I’m wishing him the best.”

7. Jan. 20, 2017:
Zeke Miller of TIME reported that President Trump had removed the bust statue of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. from the Oval Office. The news went viral. It was false.

8. Jan. 26, 2017:
Josh Rogin of the Washington Post reported that the State Department’s “entire senior administrative team” had resigned in protest of Trump. A number of media outlets ranging from politically left to right, including liberal-leaning Vox, stated that claim was misleading or wrong.

9. Jan. 28, 2017
CNBC’s John Harwood reported the Justice Department “had no input” on Trump’s immigration executive order. After a colleague contradicted Harwood’s report, he amended it to reflect that Justice Department lawyers reportedly had reviewed Trump’s order.

10. Jan. 31, 2017:
CNN’s Jeff Zeleny reported the White House set up Twitter accounts for two judges to try to keep Trump’s selection for Supreme Court secret. Zeleny later corrected his report to state that the Twitter accounts had not been set up by the White House.

11. Feb. 2, 2017:
TMZ reported Trump changed the name of “Black History Month” to “African American History Month,” implying the change was untoward or racist. In fact, Presidents Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton had all previously called Black History month “African American History” month.

12. Feb. 2, 2017:
AP reported that Trump had threatened the president of Mexico with invasion to get rid of “bad hombres.” Numerous publications followed suit. The White House said it wasn’t true and the Washington Post removed the AP info that “could not be independently confirmed.”

13. Feb. 4, 2017:
Josh Rogin of the Washington Post reported on “Inside the White House-Cabinet Battle Over Trump’s Immigration Order,” only to have the article updated repeatedly to note that one of the reported meetings had not actually occurred, that a conference call had not happened as described, and that actions attributed to Trump were actually taken by his chief of staff.

14. Feb. 14, 2017:
The New York Times’ Michael S. Schmidt, Mark Mazzetti and Matt Apuzzo reported about supposed contacts between Trump campaign staff and “senior Russian intelligence officials.” Comey later testified “In the main, [the article] was not true.”

15. Feb. 22, 2017:
ProPublica’s Raymond Bonner reported CIA official Gina Haspel—Trump’s later pick for CIA Director—was in charge of a secret CIA prison where Islamic extremist terrorist Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times in one month, and that she mocked the prisoner’s suffering. More than a year later, ProPublica retracted the claim, stating that “Neither of these assertions is correct…Haspel did not take charge of the base until after the interrogation of Zubaydah ended.”

16. April 5, 2017:
An article bylined by the New York Times’ graphic editors Karen Yourish and Troy Griggs referred to Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, as Trump’s wife.

17. May 10, 2017:
Multiple outlets including Politico, the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, AP, Reuters and the Wall Street Journal reported the same leaked information: that Trump fired FBI Director James Comey shortly after Comey requested additional resources to investigate Russian interference in the election.
The New York Times’ Matthew Rosenberg and Matt Apuzzo, and CNN’s Sara Murray reported the information in sentences and paragraphs that omitted attribution, as if it were an established fact. The Washington Post’s Philip Rucker, Ashley Parker, Sari Horwitz and Robert Costa wrote news articles in the style of opinion pieces and from an omniscient viewpoint as if they were somehow in the mind of Trump. For example, they reported, “Every time FBI Director James B. Comey appeared in public, an ever-watchful President Trump grew increasingly agitated that the topic was the one that he was most desperate to avoid: Russia.” (Other reporters —Reuters’ Dustin Volz and Susan Cornwell— did properly attribute the claim.)
The Justice Department, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe said the media reports were untrue and McCabe added that the FBI’s Russia investigation was “adequately resourced.”

18. June 4, 2017:
NBC News reported in a Tweet that Russian President Vladimir Putin told TV host Megan Kelly that he had compromising information about Trump. Actually, Putin said the opposite: that he did not have compromising information on Trump.

19. June 6, 2017:
CNN’s Gloria Borger, Eric Lichtblau, Jake Tapper and Brian Rokus; and ABC’s Justin Fishel and Jonathan Karl reported that Comey was going to refute Donald Trump’s claim that Comey told Trump three times he was not under investigation. Instead, Comey did the opposite and confirmed Trump’s claim.

20. June 7, 2017:
In a fact-check story, AP reported erroneously that Trump misread the potential cost to a family with insurance under the Affordable Care Act who wanted care from their existing doctor.

21. June 8, 2017:
The New York Times’ Jonathan Weisman reported that Comey testified Trump Attorney General Jeff Sessions told Comey not to call the Russia probe “an investigation” but “a matter.” Weisman was mistaken about the attorney general and the probe. Actually, it was Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch (not Sessions) who told Comey to refer to the Hillary Clinton classified email probe (not the Russia probe) as “a matter” instead of “an investigation.”

22. June 22, 2017:
CNN’s Thomas Frank reported that Congress was investigating a “Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials.” The report was later retracted. Frank and two other CNN employees resigned in the fallout.

23. December 2, 2017:
ABC News’ Brian Ross reported that former Trump official Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn was going to testify that candidate Trump had directed him to contact “the Russians.” Even though such contact would not be in of itself a violation of law, the news was treated as an explosive indictment of Trump in the Russia collusion narrative, and the stock market fell on the news. ABC later corrected the report to reflect that Trump had already been elected when he reportedly asked Flynn to contact the Russians about working together to fight ISIS and other issues. Ross was suspended.

24. July 6, 2017:
Newsweek’s Chris Riotta and others reported that Poland’s First Lady had refused to shake Trump’s hand. Newsweek’s later “update” reflected that the First Lady had shaken Trump’s hand after all, as clearly seen on the full video.

25. July 6, 2017:
The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman, CNN and numerous outlets had long reported, as if fact, the Hillary Clinton claim that a total of 17 American intelligence agencies concluded that Russia orchestrated election year attacks to help get Trump elected. Only three or four agencies, not 17, had officially done so.

26. Aug. 31, 2017:
NBC News’ Ken Dilinian and Carol Lee reported that a Trump official’s notes about a meeting with a Russian lawyer included the word “donation,” as if there were discussions about suspicious campaign contributions. NBC later corrected the report to reflect that the word “donation” didn’t appear, but still claimed the word “donor” did. Later, Politico reported that the word “donor” wasn’t in the notes, either.

27. Sept. 5, 2017:
CNN’s Chris Cillizza and other news outlets declared Trump “lied” when he stated that Trump Tower had been wiretapped, although there’s no way any reporter independently knew the truth of the matter—only what intel officials claimed. It later turned out there were numerous wiretaps involving Trump Tower, including a meeting of Trump officials with a foreign dignitary. At least two Trump associates who had offices in or frequented Trump Tower were also wiretapped.

28. Sept. 7, 2017:
The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman reported Democrat leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi called President Trump about an immigration issue. Trump actually made the call to Pelosi.

29. Nov. 6, 2017:
CNN’s Daniel Shane edited excerpts from a Trump event to make it seem as though Trump didn’t realize Japan builds cars in the U.S. However, Trump’s entire statement made clear that he does.

30. Nov. 6, 2017:
CNN edited a video that made it appear although Trump impatiently dumped a box of fish food into the water while feeding fish at Japan’s palace. The New York Daily News, the Guardian and others wrote stories implying Trump was gauche and impetuous. The full video showed that Trump had simply followed the lead of Japan’s Prime Minister.

31. Nov. 29, 2017:
Newsweek’s Chris Riotta claimed Ivanka Trump “plagiarized” one of her own speeches. In fact, plagiarizing one’s own work is impossible since plagiarism is when a writer steals someone else’s work and passes it off as his own.

32. Dec. 4, 2017:
The New York Times’ Michael S. Schmidt and Sharon LaFraniere and other outlets reported that Trump Deputy National Security Adviser K.T. McFarland supposedly contradicted herself or lied about another official’s contacts with Russians. The story was heavily, repeatedly amended. CNN, MSNBC, CBS News, New York Daily News and Daily Beast picked up the story about McFarland’s “lies.”

33. Dec. 4, 2017:
ABC News’ Trish Turner and Jack Date reported that former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort had recently worked with a Russia intelligence-connected “official.” But the Russian wasn’t an “official.”

34. Dec. 5, 2017:
Bloomberg’s Steven Arons and the Wall Street Journal’s Jenny Strasburg reported the blockbuster that Special Counsel Robert Mueller had subpoenaed Trump’s bank records. It wasn’t true.

35. Dec. 8, 2017:
CNN’s Manu Raju and Jeremy Herb reported that Donald Trump Jr. conspired with WikiLeaks in advance of the publication of damaging Democrat party and Clinton campaign emails. Many other publications followed suit. They had the date wrong: WikiLeaks and Trump Junior were in contact after the emails were published.

36. Jan. 3, 2018:
Talking Point Memo’s Sam Thielman reported that a Russian social media company provided documents to the Senate about communications with a Trump official. The story was later corrected to say the reporter actually had no idea how the Senate received the documents and had no evidence to suggest the Russian company was cooperating with the probe.

37. Jan. 12, 2018:
Mediaite’s Lawrence Bonk, CNN’s Sophie Tatum, the Guardian, BBC, US News and World Report, Reuters and Buzzfeed’s Adolfo Flores reported a “bombshell”— that President Trump had backed down from his famous demand for a wall along the entire Southern border. However, Trump said the very same thing in February 2016 on MSNBC, on Dec. 2, 2015, in the National Journal, in October 2015 during the CNBC Republican Primary debate, and on Aug. 20, 2015, on FOX Business’ Mornings with Maria.

38. Jan. 15, 2018:
AP’s Laurie Kellman and Jonathan Drew reported that a new report showed trust in the media had fallen during the Trump presidency. But the report that AP cited was actually over a year old and was conducted while Obama was president.

39. Feb. 2, 2018:
AP’s Eric Tucker, Mary Clare Jalonick and Chad Day reported that ex-British spy Christopher Steele’s opposition research against Trump was initially funded by a conservative publication: the Washington Free Beacon. AP corrected its story because Steele only came on the project after Democrats began funding it.

40. March 8, 2018:
The New York Times’ Jan Rosen reported on a hypothetical family whose tax bill would rise nearly $4,000 under Trump’s tax plan. It turns out the calculations were off: the couple’s taxes would go actually go down $43; not up $4,000.

41. March 13, 2018:
The New York Times’ Adam Goldman, NBC’s Noreen O’Donnell and AP’s Deb Riechmann reported that Trump’s pick for CIA Director, Gina Haspel, had waterboarded a particular Islamic extremist terrorist dozens of time at a secret prison; and that she had mocked his suffering. In fact, Haspel wasn’t assigned to the prison until after the detainee left. ProPublica originally reported the incorrect details in Feb. 2017.

42. March 15, 2018:
AP’s Michael Biesecker, Jake Pearson and Jeff Horwitz reported that a Trump advisory board official had been a Miss America contestant and had killed a black rhino. She actually was a Mrs. America contestant and had shot a nonlethal tranquilizer dart at a white rhino.
Watch Sharyl Attkisson’s TEDx Talk: Is Fake News Real?

43. April 1, 2018:
AP’s Nicholas Riccardi reported that the Trump administration had ended a program to admit foreign entrepreneurs. It wasn’t true.

44. April 30, 2018:
AP reported that the NRA had banned guns during Trump and Pence speeches at the NRA’s annual meeting. AP later corrected the information because the ban had been put in place by Secret Service.

45. May 3, 2018:
NBC’s Tom Winter reported that the government had wiretapped Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen. NBC later corrected the story after three senior U.S. officials said there was no wiretap.

46. May 7, 2018:
CNBC’s Kevin Breuninger reported that Trump’s personal lawyer, Cohen, paid $1 million in fines related to unauthorized cars in his taxi business, had been barred from managing taxi medallions, had transferred $60 million offshore to avoid paying debts, and is awaiting trial on charges of failing to pay millions in taxes. A later correction stated that none of that was true.

47. May 16, 2018:
The New York Times’ Julie Hirschfeld Davis, AP, CNN’s Oliver Darcy and others excerpted a Trump comment as if he had referred to immigrants or illegal immigrants generally as “animals.” Most outlets corrected their reports later to note that Trump had specifically referred to members of the murderous criminal gang MS-13.

48. May 28, 2018
The New York Times’ Magazine editor-in-chief Jake Silverstein and CNN’s Hadas Gold shared a story with photos of immigrant children in cages as if they were new photos taken under the Trump administration. The article and photos were actually taken in 2014 under the Obama administration.

49. May 29, 2018
The New York Times’ Julie Davis reported the estimated size of a Trump rally to be 1,000 people. There were actually 5,500 people or more in attendance.

50. June 1, 2018
In a story about Trump tariffs, AP reported the dollar value of Virginia’s farm and forestry exports to Canada and Mexico was $800. It’s $800 million.
Politicians are often fact-challenged. But for us in the media— our whole business is in facts. And we’ve played too fast and loose with our own.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2288 on: June 19, 2018, 05:34:00 AM »
Doug,
Did you see on Drudge the the WcomPost staff are yelling at Bezos to "share the wealth" after he saved them from unemployment?

Pretty ironic.  If I were Bezos I would fire all of them and replace them with illegals.   :evil:


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
some thoughts on impeachment polls
« Reply #2289 on: June 22, 2018, 07:06:54 AM »
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/poll-trump-impeachment/2018/06/22/id/867683/

Impeachment is for "high crimes and misdemeanors "
Trump has done none of these 

Source : Levin
             even Tribe who is a virulent leftist does not think Trump is guilty of this Constitutional definition

The polls is really saying that this many people are against his policies and want him out.

I was impeaching Clinton
Perhaps his transgressions  did not reach to the level of  a Constitional definition what the framers meant for this way of getting a Pres out of office

I also would argue I was for impeaching Obama and I really believe the Constitional arugment that he should have been removed from office was VALID .  Yet of course he has too much  support and politically it could not have happened. 

Bottom line: Left is calling for impeachment for no reason other then they don 't like Trump

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2290 on: June 22, 2018, 04:04:03 PM »
someone should put a photo of children killed by collateral damage from  drones strikes ordered by Barak with him sitting comfortably in his DC mansion looking at the bodies.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Einstein was no racist
« Reply #2291 on: June 23, 2018, 04:20:50 AM »
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/albert-einstein-racist-travel-diaries-controversy/

Did the lib include this quote of Einstein of Ghandi:


“Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth. (said of Mahatma Gandhi)”


― Albert Einstein, On Peace

He was not a racist . 
No he did review every thought before he spoke or wrote to be sure it is cleansed to the standards of the politically correct crazy Left of 2018.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Why would Beck think anything different of
« Reply #2292 on: June 25, 2018, 03:06:13 PM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
New JUDGEJURYJURNOLIST (#2)
« Reply #2293 on: June 28, 2018, 03:54:31 PM »
The obvious "revealed" :
:
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/06/28/journolist-2-discovered-over-400-left-of-center-members/

 :wink:

 :-o  I am shocked.

A left wing media cabal - no way .  :roll:

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Kimbery Guidoyle - impressive indeed
« Reply #2294 on: July 07, 2018, 10:07:24 AM »
I admit a am pleasantly surprised at how impressive she it.  Behind every successful man is a good woman.  Maybe she can get Trump Jr to run for office.  Or she run with his connections:

https://www.breitbart.com/radio/2018/07/06/guilfoyle-happy-give-beatdown-complete-liars-smear-merchants-media/

A new Trump Dynasty !   That would "beat down" the LEFT.   :lol:

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72258
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19445
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth on abortion
« Reply #2296 on: July 09, 2018, 07:57:24 AM »
Trying to listen to the Sunday shows with a critical ear, Fox News Sunday had guest host Dana Perino on yesterday.  Dana looked nice and did a fine job with the program while Chris Wallace vacationed and makes his travel to Helsinki for the next summit.  But it is what these hosts do not ask that goes otherwise unnoticed.

It is good that a supposedly conservative show and channel had a Leftist guest on, Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, and that she was treated with kindness and respect.  Ms Hogue did a great job of defending the indefensible.  They talked about polls, precedent, rights and Supreme Court nominations.  It is what was not asked that irks me.
http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2018/07/08/senator-lindsey-graham-on-north-korea-putin-and-trumps-scotus-pick.html

I would be happy if host in these interviews split the guest's time roughly in half, letting the guest present their view and then challenge that view.  After discussing how popular abortion is and how long it has been the law etc., she could have asked:

When does human life begin?
The position of NARAL is there is no life worthy of any protection in law before birth, is that right?  But your opponents are all over media claiming that a 'baby' has "a beating heart 14 days after conception".  Are they wrong?  Isn't your side completely in denial of modern science and common sense here, that there is no life there before birth?  If we can't all agree life begins at conception, why can't we at least agree that a human organism is clearly alive once it has a beating heart and it has DNA separate and distinct from the mother?  Why isn't that at least worthy of contemplation of protections in the political processes of the states?

Opponents or Roe v Wade believe it is a wrongly decided case because the constitution does notspeak to the issue of abortion and that powers not granted expressly to the federal government are left to the states and to the people.  Are they wrong?  Where in the constitution does it speak to federal power to limit or ban protections for the unborn?  Where in the constitution does it define trimesters which make up the specifics in the ruling of Roe?  Is it not a wrongly decided case?

Black unborn are aborted at 5 times the rate of whites, is there not in fact a racist component of this that traces all the way back to the very founding of the nation's largest abortion provider and continues today?
-----------------------
Can you imagine how the media would handle this issue if the sides were reversed?  What would happen if a bunch of rich, powerful, white conservative men in Washington were insisting that inner city minority were afforded easy access to kill off their young before birth and women like Ms. Hogue were on the shows describing how inhumane that is and how evil it is to support that?  Abortion would be stopped in its tracks immediately if the political and media sides were reversed.
----------------------
Strangely, this is the same person on the same issue, much tougher before she had the opportunity to host a major show:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4H4SDquYcAg

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
I thought California banned these...
« Reply #2297 on: July 16, 2018, 06:08:14 AM »
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/suspect-killed-officer-injured-in-southern-california-shootout/?__twitter_impression=true

Suspect killed, officer injured in Calif. shootout
AUG 22, 2014 2:05 PM EDT CRIMESIDER

BY CRIMESIDER STAFF / KCAL LOS ANGELES

sanbernardinoofficershooting.x-ms-bmp
Ambulance arrives at the Arrowhead Regional Medical Center in Colton, Calif., after a shooting involving police and an alleged gunman in San Bernardino, Calif., Friday, Aug. 22, 2014
CBS Los Angeles
 
 
 
 
 
SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. -- A police officer is in critical condition and a suspect is dead following an early morning shooting Friday near a Southern California nightclub, CBS Los Angeles reports.

A 31-year-old veteran officer and a new officer trainee were in an area known for criminal activity at around 2 a.m., to "check on some individuals," said Lt. Rich Lawhead of the San Bernardino Police Department.

The officers confronted a group of five people, who had just left a nightclub, in front of a home on a dead-end street and "almost immediately shots were fired," Chief Jarrod Burguan said.

A male suspect's gunfire wounded the senior officer, a 6-year veteran of the San Bernardino Police Department, twice in the upper body.

He was transported to Arrowhead Regional Medical Center for surgery. He remains in critical condition.

The training officer was able to return fire and wounded the suspect, who was a man in his 30s. He was also transported to a local hospital where he was pronounced dead.

Police have not released the names of the officers or the suspect.

Five other people, including three women and one man, were taken in for questioning, CBS Los Angeles reports.

An assault revolver with high-capacity magazines and a revolver were recovered at the scene.

KCAL Los Angeles



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19756
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #2299 on: July 23, 2018, 09:17:11 AM »
As much as I dislike the WP I don't like Trump using the power of government to extort more friendly stories from a particular newspaper:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5982733/Trump-slams-Washington-Post-North-Korea-claim-warns-sister-company-Amazon-postal-rates.html

If you think they get too cozy a deal from the USPS and went that overturned fine.  But if you are using it as a club to punish a newspaper for it s particular stories that is something that can come back to haunt any of us.