Author Topic: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media/social media  (Read 1149645 times)



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media
« Reply #4252 on: October 06, 2024, 07:02:57 AM »
love it.
especially right to CNNs Vanderbilt's face.

He could have also added, I guarantee you Anderson would have been right there complaining about the administration's response (but then he would have been fired)

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
I saw Gretchen in the clip in CD's post getting ready to speak
« Reply #4253 on: October 06, 2024, 07:11:04 AM »
and by the way I see Gretchen Carlson is showing on CNN lately.
she must be bashing the Republicans

I don't suppose it was about Doug Emhoff impregnating a nanny and possibly causing a miscarriage?
I don't suppose it was about him hitting very hard his date one night who was tapping on the shoulder a valet parking attendant.

I notice every MSM outlet skipped the latter story and hardly mentions the first ,  but does only prints Emhoff's denial and leaves it there.

Yes what happened to "believe every woman"?

https://www.mrctv.org/blog/brittany-m-hughes/believe-women-right-multiple-people-say-doug-emhoff-once-assaulted-ex#:~:text=A%20new%20report%20has%20emerged%20claiming%20that%20Vice

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media
« Reply #4254 on: October 06, 2024, 07:19:29 AM »
"Me too" died under Biden Harris.

Believe every woman is a ridiculous standard.  Believe no woman who accuses a Democrat is a dangerous policy.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile
Chinese manipulation of US social media with AI
« Reply #4255 on: October 07, 2024, 04:39:03 AM »
China turns to AI for propaganda campaigns

Report uncovers covert operations

By Bill Gertz THE WASHINGTON TIMES

China’s military and the ruling Communist Party have turned to artificial intelligence to boost the impact of propaganda and influence operations through American social media platforms, according to a new study of Beijing’s covert operations.

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA), in particular, is conducting three types of operations against the U.S. where AI tools have greatly increased the impact, a report by the RAND Corporation states.

Once fearful of social media as a threat to their power, China’s leaders are now embracing the use of Facebook and X as key tools for influencing foreign public opinion, the think tank stated in a 183-page study made public this week.

The report is based on an in-depth review of Chinese party and military writings that analyze the goals of information warfare, what the People’s Liberation Army is calling the “Three Warfares” — public opinion warfare, psychological warfare and legal warfare.

The report examines the work of the man who is described as China’s leading military information warfare researcher, Li Bicheng, who specializes in cyber-enabled influence operations. Mr. Li is leading the Chinese military into

adopting AI to run large-scale networks of automated bots to influence both domestic and foreign public opinion, the report contends.

Based on the writings, the report says the PLA has begun using AI and plans to expand the use of more sophisticated bots for waging “public opinion struggle,” along with propaganda bots, follower bots and “roadblock bots.”

The PLA has already been detected using the generative AI system ChatGPT with a cyber group known as Spamouflage, an online propaganda and disinformation operation identified earlier this year. PLA researchers also are using other U.S. open-source AI models, the report said.

AI will also help improve the efficiency of current Chinese campaigns called “astroturfing” — deception operations intended to promote the false impression of widespread public support for an issue.

“On the basis of cracking the enemy’s ability to verify the account information for social bots, the social bot will complete public opinion struggle and intelligence-collection tasks, such as predicting the attributes of artificial users, analyzing their social behavior network, destroying the enemy’s opinion leaders, speeding up the dissemination of the enemy’s redundant content, burying its effective information, comprehensively disrupting the enemy’s information order, intensifying its internal contradictions, and causing a strong large-scale effect,” Mr. Li is quoted in the report as saying.

Chinese military researchers have studied how to use social media to influence the outcome of U.S. elections. The methods highlighted by U.S. intelligence officials were China’s efforts to influence the 2022 midterm elections by magnifying divisions in the U.S. on social media.

Mr. Li wrote articles in 2019 and 2020 that quoted a Chinese intelligence official Wang Danna, regarding “online public opinion warfare modes, responses, and prospects in the U.S. presidential elections,” including a study of former President Donald Trump’s first impeachment.

In one case, a Chinese researcher, Hu Huaping, conducted a study that analyzed the impact of social media on Mr. Trump’s impeachment.

“It is clear that Hu was specifically working on generating content that would have been highly tailored for U.S. political discourse on social media,” the report said.

Another PLA researcher writing on “social media warfare” collected X data from 30 senior officials of the Biden administration, including President Biden’s own official account and all his Cabinet secretaries.

U.S. intelligence officials told reporters last month that propagandists in China, Iran and Russia are using artificial intelligence to create content designed to deceive Americans ahead of the November presidential election.

AI is “a malign influence accelerant, not yet a revolutionary influence tool,” an intelligence official said. “In other words, information operations are the threat, and AI is an enabler. Thus far, the [intelligence community] has not seen it revolutionize such operations.”

Beijing’s social media manipulation efforts since the 2010s so far produced limited results. However, the use of new generative AI tools is expected to “dramatically improve China’s capabilities moving forward, posing a greater threat to global democracies,” the report said.

China’s military justifies its social media operations based on fears the U.S. is seeking to undermine the communist regime, the report states, noting that PLA social media manipulation capabilities began in the mid-2010s and have been underway since at least 2018.

The PLA views social media as “an acute threat to PLA prestige and regime security,” the report says.

Today, the PLA is engaged in “cutting- edge” technology, including AI, to target the American public for supporting Beijing’s strategy and policies.

The report urges the U.S. and other global democracies to prepare for AI-driven social media manipulation by adopting risk-reduction measures. Social media companies are being urged to step up efforts to combat fake and hostile accounts in order to dilute the potency of AI manipulation by China.

A greater understanding of China’s government-wide activities to manipulate social media are needed, the report states.

One organization in particular should be targeted — the United Front Work Department, a Chinese Communist Party organ with an estimated budget of several billion dollars annually.

China’s government banned Facebook, X and YouTube in 2009 in the early days of the social media revolution, after those platforms were used by dissidents to highlight mounting unrest in Tibet and western Xinjiang.

But by 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping ordered the government to redouble propaganda efforts on foreign social media and sharply increased covert and overt influence campaigns abroad.

The operations were further strengthened beginning in 2018 as part of a return to Marxist-style “public opinion struggle” against capitalist forces that Mr. Xi believed were seeking to overthrow his government, the report said.

The PLA has played the major role in shaping the foreign influence operations through the “three warfares” strategy, which has been upgraded with technological breakthroughs of recent years.

The military now calls its efforts “intelligentized public opinion warfare,” the report said.

“This broader PLA view of the evolving nature of warfare and the desire to embrace emerging technologies is driving PLA researchers to develop a new operational concept that looks poised to replace, or at least supplement, the traditional three warfares: cognitive domain operations,” the report said.

Mr. Li, the PLA information warfare expert, shifted the focus of Beijing’s influence campaigns, saying previous efforts suffered from a lack of sophistication that made it easy for adversaries to identify Chinese online operations. AI technology is now being used to better delivery Chinese content online.

“In the field of online public opinion guidance, it is necessary to respond to this explosion of information by automatically generating a large number of posts,” Mr. Li wrote in a 2023 article explaining how to influence public discussion using large-scale activities.

China’s paid online troll operatives, known as the “50 Cent Army” for the alleged reward for each posting, also was inefficient despite 15 years of effort, the report said.

Mr. Li also said China’s online influence campaigns were less effective than those of the U.S. and, therefore, needed reform.

Artificial intelligence and so-called intelligentization operations will reduce and eliminate human labor in social media manipulation but still use human oversight, the report said.

The PLA plan for AI-driven social media operations involves a six-step process, beginning with discovery and acquisition of key information, preparation and selection of media carriers and the production of tailored content for each of the targeted online platforms.

The system then would select the appropriate timing, delivery mode, and steps for conducting the operations. Dissemination is then strengthened to create “hot spots” that will be used to form desired effects and further shape the environment and expand influence.

Mr. Li’s AI model seeks to conduct big-data mining and online opinion surveillance and to block “enemy” content that China opposes.

Then, content or “ammunition” for PLA information operations is produced based on specific target audiences, using “image- and video-stitching technology,” along with “multi-media camouflage technology.”

The operations can produce a targeted victim’s voice, specific background and specific scenes to form multimedia information with images, text and sound.

Last, the PLA will launch large-scale online information delivery using different media, including text messages, emails, forums, instant messaging tools, microblogs (such as Sina Weibo) and social media platforms, including Facebook and X. All the operations will be organized through an “online public opinion struggle command and control center.”

The report said China is using U.S.origin open-source AI technology already and could apply them to Mr. Li’s influence program.

“Available evidence suggests Beijing is using open-source models and attempting to covertly use other publicly available closed-source models,” it states. “The advent of generative AI has finally delivered the technical capability to realize Li’s early vision for an AI-driven social media manipulation system.”

Chinese officials argue the AI push is a reaction to U.S. and allied attacks on China’s own systems. Mr. Li is quoted as saying the West is engaged in an “online ideological offensive toward China” in an effort to undermine the communist system.

“This is also an attempt to dissolve our political beliefs, concept of the overall situation, and organizational discipline; to separate the party and cadres from the masses; and to deny our culture, thereby completely toppling our country,” he said.

Mr. Li has long promoted the use of social bots, the RAND researchers said, and “the PLA and likely other parts of the party-state are following in his footsteps and have expressed interest in developing such a capability.”

“Generative AI is very likely to supercharge these efforts, making this an important topic to watch.”

China’s military recently carried out a reform of its Strategic Support Force, spinning off its information warfare section into a new “PLA Cyberspace Force.” The new cyber force is expected to speed up the adoption of AI in information warfare operations, the report said.

The report, “Dr. Li Bicheng, or How China Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Social Media Manipulation: Insights into Chinese Use of Generative AI and Social Bots from the Career of a PLA Researcher,” was written by Nathan Beauchamp-Mustafaga, Kiernan Green, William Marcellino, Sale Lilly and Jackson Smith.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile
"“I want to put this question to you, senator, just to put this to rest. Can you say definitively, here and now, that Donald Trump did lose the 2020 election?” Welker asked.

“Kristen, Joe Biden was elected president in 2020. It was an unfair election in many ways,” said Cotton of that year’s election, which the 2024 GOP nominee has recently admitted to losing following years of pushing otherwise."

Wonderfully concise and bullet proof!!!

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Frank Zappa bias in media posted today and other times recently
« Reply #4258 on: October 08, 2024, 10:24:57 AM »
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/frank-zappa-talks-about-the-bias-of-the-u-s-media/vi-AA1q4J4p?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=eca3f41e07704843a33723e257331e42&ei=17#details


PS, not mentioned:   Frank Zappa died 1993.

In my lifetime going back to the 60s I never remember the media being "right wing"

They had always been tougher on Republicans than Democrats.




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile
Cognitive Dissonance from CNN
« Reply #4259 on: October 09, 2024, 05:19:23 PM »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
The Woke Mind Virus Spread, Illustrated
« Reply #4260 on: October 10, 2024, 07:45:23 AM »
Elon Musk shared this illustration charting terms used by the WaPo & Old Gray Hag whose usage spiked as the woke mind virus spread:



https://share.icloud.com/photos/0dfAVQBy4k2LzJEcvaQlGjZQA

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile
Point well made.

The MSM are pravdas, sedulously engaged with psyops on behalf of Progressivism.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Media, Ministry of Truth, CBS 60 Minutes, Release the tape!!
« Reply #4262 on: October 11, 2024, 05:48:04 AM »
https://nypost.com/2024/10/10/opinion/cbs-must-release-the-full-kamala-harris-transcript-to-live-up-to-its-own-stated-standards/

Apparently both the video and transcript were cut and doctored., and she still wasn't coherent.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2024, 05:51:44 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
I would love to see / hear the behind the scenes calls emails, texts etc from the DNC power brokers to the heads of CBS to force them to do this.

I can only imagine the criticism of the 60 interviewer who did not let Kamala escape so easily the questions.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Re: We are getting better at confronting Left Wing media
« Reply #4265 on: October 14, 2024, 11:46:26 AM »
I wondered what he was thinking, going on that show.  Looks like he showed up ready!  And he probably reached some undecideds

He turned her question about Trump's cognitive test into "Harris is uniquely unqualified...". It made me (and hopefully others) think, yes she is.

For executive experience, I look for a two term or at least second term Governor, plus running something outside of government, plus some foreign policy credibility. She 'ran' one department of a state government,  and was the Senate's leftmost member for part of a term, never had to balance a budget. Being VP doesn't count as running anything.  She was 'in the room' when decisions were made but doesn't take ownership of the policies or the results.

You could certainly question Trump's qualifications the first time around, but at this he is a former President with success at both foreign and domestic policy, and accountable for those results.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2024, 11:58:45 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Got this my email today : Epoch Times
« Reply #4266 on: October 15, 2024, 01:22:03 PM »
Janice Trey, CEO of The Epoch Times
 
www.theepochtimes.com
From:
newsletter@theepochtimes.com
Unsubscribe
To:
xxxxxxxxxxxx

Tue, Oct 15 at 11:18 AM


The Epoch Times
“I am committed to the success and growth of The Epoch Times, to continuing our award-winning and truthful journalism.”


Dear Readers,

 

I would like to express my deep gratitude to you, our readers, for your support. As the new chief executive officer of The Epoch Times, I am committed to the success and growth of The Epoch Times, to continuing our award-winning and truthful journalism, and to ensuring that the right to free speech is upheld.

 

As a nonprofit organization free of commercial or political influence, The Epoch Times seeks to serve the public with independent, impartial, and rigorous reporting, giving you the information you need to make informed decisions. We seek to report the news truthfully, honor traditional and classical values, and bring hope to our readers. Your support and contributions help us train journalists to investigate, find the truth, and report it in an unbiased way and make our journalism available to college students, free of charge.

 

As a news organization founded more than two decades ago to report the truth about human rights abuses in communist China, The Epoch Times understands well the conflict between the free world and totalitarianism. While the free world aspires to promote moral and human rights, communist regimes strive for one-party rule—demolishing traditional morality and crushing differing opinions.

 

In 2004, The Epoch Times published the editorial series "Nine Commentaries on the Chinese Communist Party," which won the National Journalism Award from the Asian American Journalists Association. This work inspired Tuidang, or "Quit the CCP," a grassroots movement in which more than 436 million Chinese have openly and peacefully renounced their membership in the CCP and its affiliated organizations—a process that could mark the beginning of a peaceful transition to a free China. In 2018, we published "How the Specter of Communism Is Ruling Our World," documenting the Chinese regime’s subversive infiltration in Western countries. Today, we continue to express our solidarity with the people of China and all countries under tyranny, and to sound warnings to freedom-loving people around the world.

 

Today, The Epoch Times is the fourth-largest newspaper in America by subscriber count. Around the world, we publish in 36 countries and 23 languages. In 2023, Epoch Original documentaries garnered 36 awards, nominations, and official selections in film festivals around the world. And in the same year, the history of our company was read into the congressional record on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. Currently, our app is the highest-rated newspaper app by customer review on the App Store and the Play Store in the United States. Download our app here.

 

Without your loyal support and donations, The Epoch Times could not fulfill its mission as a truly independent media organization committed to traditional journalism. Please tell your friends about The Epoch Times and encourage them to subscribe. Here is a sample digital paper for you to share.

 

I am proud of our tradition and the quality of our content. You can rest assured that I will continue the legacy of our reporting and expand it even further, to give every subscriber even more value, by leveraging my executive experience in Fortune 500 companies and board roles in the fields of academia and the performing arts, and for a think tank. If there is anything I can do to make our enterprise better, please feel free to contact our customer service team and let them know, “This message is for Janice.”


Janice Trey, CPA

 
Copyright © 2024 The Epoch Times. All rights reserved.

The Epoch Times. 229 W. 28 St. Fl. 7 New York, NY 10001
« Last Edit: October 15, 2024, 01:24:34 PM by ccp »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
post # 2
« Reply #4267 on: October 15, 2024, 01:23:08 PM »
Hopefully the new CEO will clean up the scandal and keep Epoch Times going and thriving since we need conservative outlets.

With reference to this:

https://apnews.com/article/epoch-times-cfo-indictment-money-laundering-caad358778bb6b73e32e9f989f3b9665

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
The Media to Itself: Media Needs to do a Better Job Mediaing for Harris
« Reply #4268 on: October 15, 2024, 03:43:38 PM »
Amoebas that take the short bus have more self-awareness than this nitwit:

https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fx.com%2FNickFondacaro%2Fstatus%2F1845846684468695128%3Ffbclid%3DIwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2y3UYc41Ub3hWMQftTldGcSpDX8m6gZzi3sLksH6eaad6l-L-oKDaFuec_aem_3Eq66_BQBFQlQSxgvFmu6g&h=AT3Wm4EAgITK-lc6JT9KtaD5SEWblpa7s5EALD6uEdR89Wa6DiC8UF1b5rn9_P5Nq9qblW9cDSw4eR4w0u_HyWsbrBz1k7al5wlD5Q6EQ4Ah9ZrCsX3nabwTC_Z-F_YSRy83dnN21sPJMx2bQ3ns8NA&__tn__=H-R&c[0]=AT3jO_6g__yz4NVzcNAfJF-IQ0IU7_is_TAfrvgLNbVFHYW6K1eKnrYJKGVi9hcibt91UTMNCvkI2j2XExd2-YDvcrsa9ff2QFiku9002JtDcYqcWLYpwvwhd8c1LJdf4oYSj6wjXdKfKqFiv2ZX_SeeD1rhnHCCGuEKVScmfWvZ2Wp172W1

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; David Candy Crowley Muir
« Reply #4269 on: October 19, 2024, 02:51:37 PM »
Biased Democrat debate "moderators" "correcting" Trump: "actually the crime rate is going down."

No, actually the crime rate is scary high and going higher, so, is there a nice way of saying, STFU?

Careers should roll.

https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2024/10/19/paging-david-muir-and-abc-news-your-humiliating-fact-check-on-crime-stats-is-calling-n2180783#google_vignette

In what other sport do the referees wear one of the competing teams' uniforms?
« Last Edit: October 20, 2024, 05:16:05 AM by Crafty_Dog »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; David Candy Crowley Muir
« Reply #4270 on: October 20, 2024, 10:37:43 AM »
Biased Democrat debate "moderators" "correcting" Trump: "actually the crime rate is going down."

No, actually the crime rate is scary high and going higher, so, is there a nice way of saying, STFU?

Careers should roll.

https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2024/10/19/paging-david-muir-and-abc-news-your-humiliating-fact-check-on-crime-stats-is-calling-n2180783#google_vignette

In what other sport do the referees wear one of the competing teams' uniforms?

Of course the fact these stats weren’t updated until late in the campaign season and was done so in the figurative dead of night sans any sort of fanfare (or even press release as best I can tell) has NOTHING to do with upcoming elections as they are with a respected, federal police agency with an unblemished record … and are here to help.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
”Looking Wonderfully Proud of Themselves, Like they Just Shat a Cookie”
« Reply #4271 on: October 20, 2024, 11:50:51 AM »
The author doesn’t state it, but the reason what he describes is occurring is because the MSM has been fully co-opted by Uniparty’s Deep State:

Let's Not

CHRIS BRAY
OCT 19, 2024

In the opening moments of the first Gulf War, the US Army dealt with miles of well-manned Iraqi defensive works by attaching bulldozer blades to tanks and filling in the trenches. Plotting strategy, Saddam Hussein had hoped to produce a quagmire at the front end of the war; the quagmire lasted for several extraordinarily horrible minutes, and the tanks rolled on over the newly made mass graves.

Watching that lopsided war as a journalist, Michael Kelly rented a car and drove onto the battlefield — where a group of tired and hungry Iraqi soldiers surrendered to him, glad that what they thought were the advance elements of the American military were just one guy in a Nissan who didn’t want to kill them. Kelly declined their surrender, but left them some juice from the car before he drove on: “When I looked in the rearview mirror, they were all standing in the road, the wind whipping them, sucking on the little straws of the orange juice boxes.” Turned away at a military checkpoint up the road, he drove back and gave them a ride to surrender properly to the real army, just as a favor.

An extraordinarily alert and courageous reporter — killed in 2003 covering the next Gulf War — Kelly saw the war. His book is surprising, over and over again, capturing savagery and ridiculousness in interwoven strands. I’ve remembered those little straws in the rearview mirror since 1994. Kelly wasn’t writing the preferred narrative of the war, passing on the framing of the day in the common practice of contemporary American political journalists; instead, he went to the place where men were killing each other, saw it, and described what he saw, a man on a battlefield taking notes and handing out juice boxes. Incredibly, he was there to write dispatches for the Washington Post and the New Republic, and doesn’t that put some points on the “era of cultural decline” scoreboard.

Since the day several decades ago when a high school English teacher caught me looking bored and started giving me lists of extra books to read, I’ve been making a mental list of the surprises: Sherwood Anderson’s small-town newspaper reporter filling his pockets with twisted apples; Oe’s cancer patient, in his goggles, celebrating the vitality of his cancer; Paul Bowles describing the moment when the sheltering sky rips open and Port sees beyond it. “His cry was a separate thing beside him in the desert. It went on and on.”

Since the day a teacher asked a certain sullen teenager if he’d read Joan Didion, I’ve been impressed by the degree to which it’s possible to write some words on a piece of paper and do something surprising. Looking over at a bookshelf, I remember sitting up all night to read David Bowman’s first novel. I remember discovering Pauline Maier, Elliott West, Patricia Nelson Limerick, historians who showed me things in the past that I hadn’t seen there. Susan Strasser wrote a history of trash, and it turned out to be vivid social history. If you went to law school, you probably remember the first legal scholar you encountered who wrote with extraordinary clarity and insight. If you’re a pilot, you probably read Fate is the Hunter at some early point, and you probably still carry it in your mind.

So.

Writing at The Atlantic this week, Anne Applebaum has a stunning piece of brand-new insight, and my goodness is it a brilliantly fresh idea:


See, Trump is JUST LIKE HITLER! Didn’t see that one coming, right? Imagine how excited she was to have that amazing new thought, living inside such a fresh and original mind.

There are writers who try to see something clearly, and then to show it to other people, and there are writers who are…Anne Applebaum. The prevailing model in American “mainstream” media is to go plow the same row again and again and again, because plowing where everybody else has already plowed is, I don’t know, safe? Consensus journalism, the 9,746th journalist ringing your doorbell to announce that Trump is a lot like Adolf Hitler. Looking wonderfully proud of themselves, like they just shat a cookie. All day, every day, all messages are the same message. Idea for a new movie: Groundhog Minute.

And I’m just done with it. David Brooks, Tom Nichols, William Kristol, and Peggy Noonan have all written the most amazingly refutable piles of nonsense in the last few days, being professionals at the task, and I kept asking out loud if David Brooks hears himself, because every paragraph clashes and refutes all the other paragraphs around it. But no. For me, barring some miraculous act of banality that just can’t be ignored, the election is over. There’s nothing left to say about this…horrible, horrible, horrible thing. It’s road trips and music until November 5, because my patience is all gone for this ludicrous spectacle. I’ll figure out some other things to write about until then. I may spend 2028 in Nunavut. Join me. Bring whiskey. Don’t bring news.

https://chrisbray.substack.com/p/lets-not


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Remembering Rush
« Reply #4273 on: October 21, 2024, 12:19:08 PM »



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
LA Times does not endorse Harris so Editorial head quits
« Reply #4276 on: October 23, 2024, 08:31:32 PM »
and runs to cry to the Columbia School of Jurnolisters about the trauma:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/los-angeles-times-editorial-boss-resigns-after-billionaire-owner-patrick-soon-shiong-scraps-harris-endorsement/ar-AA1sOE3z?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=4b29a85190184b2ab3b551d9e2247e6c&ei=13

- unionized staff goes nuts   8-)

- she states her virtue to her cause: 

“But two things concern me: This is a point in time where you speak your conscience no matter what,” she said."

 :roll: :roll: :roll:


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Shanahan tried to bribe reporter to give up "sources"
« Reply #4278 on: October 24, 2024, 10:10:17 AM »


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Bezos ordering WP not endorse either candidate
« Reply #4281 on: October 27, 2024, 09:34:40 AM »
kind of odd isn't it?

LA Times now WP

has to be some sort of business decision. 

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Re: Bezos ordering Washington 'Compost' 'POTP' not endorse either candidate
« Reply #4282 on: October 27, 2024, 11:35:15 AM »
kind of odd isn't it?

LA Times now WP

has to be some sort of business decision.

Very odd, yes.
 
Bezos may see a backlash coming against Elon for taking sides and not want to be in a similar situation.  Businesses used to give money to both sides so they would have access no matter who won.

This breaks a long tradition but newspapers shouldn't take sides.  They should opine on the issues of the day (on the editorial page) and stop short of actually choosing the candidate, IMHO. 

For people who followed most of the issues the last 4-20 years or more and find themselves to be Democrat right now, Kamala is likely the best choice to advance those views.  And vice versa.  If you prefer peace and prosperity to more inflation, stagnation, open borders, abandoned military and new foreign wars, Trump is probably your best choice.

A major, national newspaper and news site should want both sides to be their customer and trust their product.

The "fake news" attack is resonating - because it was true before he said it and because they keep proving it true. cf. Russian collusion. Journalism is about the least trusted profession out there, notches below used car salesmen.  Doing more of thr same won't fix that.

"Mainstream" sources need to at least try to hide their bias if they want to be trusted.  This could be a start.  They want to be mainstream, right?

Like a candidate yard sign, it tells us which side the homeowner is on, but nothing about the candidate.  Newspaper endorsements that are Democrat year after year for decades going on centuries are likewise meaningless.  It just tells us which side the newspaper is on.  Not a striped shirt but a team uniform.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2024, 11:41:23 AM by DougMacG »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Bezos Tells WaPo to Hire More Conservative Staff
« Reply #4283 on: October 28, 2024, 10:06:10 AM »
That low rumble you hear is the gnashing of teeth over at the WaPo, which Bezos owns. Perhaps he sees the writing on a yet to be revealed wall?

https://nypost.com/2024/10/28/media/washington-post-owner-jeff-bezos-wants-conservative-writers/

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Re: Bezos Tells WaPo to Hire More Conservative Staff
« Reply #4284 on: October 28, 2024, 12:14:53 PM »
That low rumble you hear is the gnashing of teeth over at the WaPo, which Bezos owns. Perhaps he sees the writing on a yet to be revealed wall?

https://nypost.com/2024/10/28/media/washington-post-owner-jeff-bezos-wants-conservative-writers/

On an NYT staff meeting after the 2016 election, allegedly, they found out no one in the room knew anyone that voted for Trump ever n though he swept the swing states and broken the blue wall.  As Rush L put it, they sent "foreign cotrespondents" out to the heartland to find out what happened.

They need balance in their news department, not just the opinion page.

Good for Bezos for stepping in, no matter the motive.

A local billionaire, former Republican State Senator, bought the state's largest paper 10 years ago, the Minneapolis Startribune, aka 'Star and Sickle' ,
https://images.app.goo.gl/u8qWbZSwLWUgGpPd6
and he made no change to the total liberal slant of the paper even though MN is now a pretty closely divided state.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2024, 12:23:54 PM by DougMacG »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Bezos at the Helm & Dons his Captain Obvious Hat. The Left then Loses its Mind
« Reply #4285 on: October 28, 2024, 06:34:26 PM »
Whoo doggy, Captain Obvious in his Jeff Bezos form joins the party late, mulling how the media got to the point it is considered horribly biased, though without admitting his rag is indeed horribly biased. Yo Jeffy, remove your “Democracy Dies in Darkness” masthead seemingly erected in response to Trump’s 2016 victory if you truly want to walk the walk.

As that may be, reading the comments to his not really a mea culpa is fun in itself. Elsewhere I posted a piece about “Progressives” removing themselves from forums where their perspectives aren’t the only ones allowed. Well that tribe certainly proves the point by unleashing an incredible amount of vitriol at the Post’s decision to not endorse a political candidate and then daring to explain why. The resulting tears are delicious:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/10/28/jeff-bezos-washington-post-trust/

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
A lovely companion piece to what I posted above. Check out the Rapaport vid linked in this:

https://quoththeraven.substack.com/p/mainstream-medias-final-historic?r=2k0c5&triedRedirect=true

BTW, I’m riffing in the title off an Emerson quote:

“The louder he spoke of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons.”

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/jeff-bezos-column-wash-post/2024/10/28/id/1185775/

Bezos says endorsements give the "perception" of bias.

The world's richest man or close to it took this long to figure it out!

He is just as dishonest as the papers editors, writers, and other staff

He wants more Conservative journalists -  are there any anymore?

The schools are what 95 % Democrats.






ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
USA Today does not endorse
« Reply #4288 on: October 28, 2024, 08:07:07 PM »
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/10/28/usa-today-latest-publication-snub-kamala-harris-non-endorsement/

as fast as corporation CEOS have gone woke from one day to the next all concluding it was great for biz

some are changing their tune

or is this temporary too late after the damage is done to be pretend they are above all the partisanship?



Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
More WaPo Fun
« Reply #4289 on: October 28, 2024, 08:23:21 PM »
Loses 8 percent of subscribers after failing to endorse a presidential candidate:

https://nypost.com/2024/10/28/media/washington-post-hit-with-over-200k-cancellations-after-move-to-block-harris-endorsement-report/

Seems to confirm the thesis that “Progressives” abandon platforms that allow any sort of wrongthink, even wrongthing by omission.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
CNN bans Girdusky after he called Hasan a terrorist then mentions Vance
« Reply #4290 on: October 29, 2024, 06:18:48 AM »
https://time.com/7122829/ryan-girdusky-mehdi-hasan-cnn-panel-beeper-racism-jd-vance/

Oh, but it is ok for them and rest of their crowd and MSM to sit an call us Nazis ALL DAY LONG.

A new deflective headline linking what he said to Vance thus all of us.

"They [us] are all NAZIS".


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Here is a newspaper that endorsed Harris, Babylon Bee
« Reply #4291 on: October 29, 2024, 08:37:14 AM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Bezos Washington Post, between a rock and a hard place
« Reply #4292 on: October 29, 2024, 09:23:15 AM »
The Washington Post lost $77 million last year.  One might think a change in direction is in order.

Jeff Bezos steps in and acts like he owns the place.

8% of subscribers reportedly canceled their subscriptions over the Harris non-endorsement.

Why would people assume they would nominate her?  The most important issue is the economy and the most rusted to handle that is - the other guy.

The Post did not endorse Trump.  It simply didn't endorse - yet - unless they succumb to this kind of pressure.  This one, non-act of non-endorsement of course did not have the effect of increasing subscriptions from conservatives to offset those lost on the Left.  At least not in the short run.

Did these subscribers who left not know who to vote for and needed that reassurance?  Obviously not. 

What they needed was to know their money is supporting an instrument of the Left.

What if the Washington Post were to endorse Harris, and put that statement right up on their banner, "Washington Post, Instrument of the Left".  Sounds absurd but doesn't everyone say the support truth and honesty?

This is an evenly divided country, lacking in a credible, evenly divided media.  Maybe Jeff Bezos, no matter how he votes, has a little better vision for the business than these people the referee on their side.
-------------------------------
Related article:
https://freebeacon.com/author/stiles/media/bloodbath-journalists-still-freaking-out-and-quitting-their-jobs-because-they-cant-endorse-kamala/

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Tapper Zapper: Hemingway Tells All
« Reply #4293 on: October 29, 2024, 12:40:01 PM »
ZANG!!!

Jake Tapper Is Lying About CNN’s Key Role In The Russia Collusion Hoax

BY: MOLLIE HEMINGWAY

OCTOBER 29, 2024

On Jan. 12, 2017, I appeared on a CNN panel to discuss current events. It was memorable, and not just because we were taping from the roof of a building near the U.S. Capitol as part of the outlet’s special coverage of Trump’s first inauguration. Just as we were about to go on, we were significantly delayed by President Barack Obama surprising Vice President Joe Biden with a Presidential Medal of Freedom.

As I recall, there were maybe five or six of us on set, including former Obama political appointee Jim Sciutto and host Jake Tapper, two of the four authors of the most important story of the entire Russia collusion hoax. “Intel chiefs presented Trump with claims of Russian efforts to compromise him” had been published just two days prior, followed up by BuzzFeed publishing the actual document claiming widespread collusion between Trump and Russia. That document — which nine months later was revealed to have been secretly bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton and the Democrat National Committee — included salacious lies about Trump supposedly paying prostitutes to urinate on a bed that the Obamas had slept in during a visit to a fancy Moscow hotel. The hysteria was such that many people wondered if Donald Trump would make it to the inauguration.

It may sound crazy now, but Washington, D.C. at that time was full of people who either believed or pretended to believe that Donald Trump really had colluded with Russia to steal the election.

I was one of the exceedingly few who didn’t. I thought Hillary Clinton’s Russia information operation was silly before the election, and when she turned to it as an explanation of her loss, I thought a likelier explanation was that Americans liked Trump’s policies and disliked hers. I said so on television during December, when faulty and weak intelligence assessments from the Obama administration were issued in an effort to legitimize her stance.

Biden’s Presidential Medal of Freedom ceremony finally ended and the regular programming began. Evan Perez, a third co-author on the big story (Carl Bernstein being the fourth), did a report from a different location about a rare statement from known liar James Clapper, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence. In his statement, Clapper claimed to have been dismayed by the leaks that led to the CNN story and said he did “not believe the leaks came from within the IC,” meaning intelligence community.

Tapper Defends His Russia Collusion Hoax

Before I tell you what happened next, I need to explain why I’ve never told this story publicly before. During commercial breaks and while remote reporters are on air, people on television sets share personal stories, funny jokes, and information about stories they’re working on. I have long treated on-set interactions that are not broadcast as not to be discussed.

But in the same way that a reporter can publicly disclose an anonymous source who burns them with bad information, Tapper and CNN are causing serious harm to the country with their revisionist history of their own key role in the Russia collusion hoax. It’s become a matter of conscience that I stop hiding what I witnessed at CNN.

In his debate Sunday with J.D. Vance, an extremely emotional and petulant Tapper asked no policy questions, choosing instead to talk almost exclusively about the mean things that neoconservatives such as Gen. John Kelly and former Rep. Liz Cheney have to say about Trump. In an amazing coincidence, this is also a major closing argument of the Kamala Harris presidential campaign. Vance highlighted the unimportant nature of Tapper’s questions, noted that the claims were credibly disputed, and kept trying to turn the conversation to important policy distinctions between the two campaigns.

Vance also noted Tapper’s problems with “integrity,” highlighting his media outlet’s leading role in driving the hysteria surrounding the dangerous Russia collusion conspiracy.

Tapper claimed, falsely, that all he and his colleagues did was report that the FBI was investigating the matter. He further claimed, falsely, that his viewers would not have been led to believe that Trump had conspired with Russia:

VANCE: Ask yourself a basic question about network integrity. You guys talked about the Russia hoax nonstop.

TAPPER: The FBI was investigating it. The FBI was investigating it. So we — so we covered them.

VANCE: And so you took the words of unnamed FBI agents and put them on your network as if they were the gospel truth. You did it again and again. A viewer of your network would’ve believed that Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin conspired in 2016.

TAPPER: No.

VANCE: That was totally and preposterously false.

TAPPER: No —

VANCE: That’s why —

TAPPER: What you just said is false. We covered an FBI investigation. I don’t know why you want to talk about the FBI investigation.

VANCE: You covered it in a way that gave credence to anonymous sources, accusations. You did it yourself. Your network did it, Jake. But again, can we talk about the issues that Americans care most about?

Nothing Vance said was false, even if it understated the mendacity of CNN’s massive role in fanning the flames of the Russia collusion hoax. More on that in a bit.

Grabbing Wrists

Back on the roof in January of 2017, Evan Perez was shown on television reading and reporting on Clapper’s statement from a remote location. Tapper and his colleagues interpreted the statement as confirmation of their story and a repudiation of Trump’s dismissal of the Russia collusion story as false.

While Perez’s package was airing, and at the point he read Clapper saying that he didn’t think the leak came from the intelligence community, Sciutto said that he was pretty sure Clapper knew the leak came from the intelligence community “because …,” he said, trailing off as he rolled his hands suggestively and somewhat like a football referee very slowly calling a false start. He said it for all to hear, though I’m not sure anyone else other than Jake Tapper, who he was sitting to the right of, and I heard and understood. Tapper squeezed Sciutto’s left wrist the way my mom used to squeeze my wrist at church when I was being too loud. I interpreted this message roughly as “stop talking you idiot.”

Sciutto was a former Obama administration political appointee in the State Department. It wasn’t clear if he was saying that Clapper had leaked to him or one of his three co-authors, a Clapper aide had leaked to CNN, or merely that Clapper knew Comey or one of his aides was leaking to CNN.

It may be hard to remember, but at this point in the Russia collusion information operation, people knew almost nothing. Few if any people realized the FBI was corrupt. People didn’t even realize Comey’s central role running the scam. As far as they knew, and would be told incessantly by Tapper, the intelligence alleging Russia collusion came from a British super spy and was so credible that it was being taken extremely seriously by trustworthy intelligence agencies. Incoming National Security Advisor Mike Flynn had not yet been ousted in an FBI setup that included criminal leaks. Attorney General Jeff Sessions hadn’t recused himself from his job after he was leaked against. We didn’t know that four affiliates of the Trump campaign had been spied on. We didn’t know that the FBI had lied to the FISA Court to get wiretaps on one of them. We didn’t know about all of the unmasking and leaking against incoming Trump administration officials. We really knew nothing about how corrupt and political the deep state was. And we didn’t yet understand that major media existed almost exclusively as regime mouthpieces, uncritically serving as leak receptacles for the information operations they run against the American people.

After we were done that day, Tapper came up to me on the roof — something he rarely did when I saw him at CNN — and told me that he really wanted to get me on his Sunday show. I perceived this as an attempt to keep me quiet about what I had witnessed. It failed, and I began writing immediately about how the dossier story was an information operation being fueled by top officials in the intelligence community. I published “Top-Level Intel Officers’ War Against Donald Trump Is Bad For The Country,” a few days later.

I was able to write that piece, as well as spend the next few years confidently fighting the Russia collusion hoax under unbelievable resistance, because of Jim Sciutto and Jake Tapper’s actions that day. I already doubted the Russia collusion hoax because I knew actual Trump voters, but that day I realized that even the authors of the signature Russia collusion article knew that it was an intelligence community leak operation and were uncritically regurgitating it. If I knew enough to do what I did based on that tiny interaction between Jim Sciutto and Jake Tapper, Jake Tapper sure as hell knew enough to not take part in the regime’s information operation he promulgated every day for the next few years.

Tapper is trying to hide now, inaccurately saying he merely reported what government operatives leaked to him. What he did was much worse. But even if that was all he did, it would be indefensible.

In a 2013 New Yorker essay on Bob Woodward, John Cassidy wrote, “The real rap on Woodward isn’t that he makes things up. It’s that he takes what powerful people tell him at face value; that his accounts are shaped by who coöperates with him and who doesn’t; and that they lack context, critical awareness, and, ultimately, historic meaning. In a 1996 essay for the New York Review of Books, Joan Didion wrote that ‘measurable cerebral activity is virtually absent’ from Woodward’s post-Watergate books, which are notable mainly for ‘a scrupulous passivity, an agreement to cover the story not as it is occurring but as it is presented, which is to say as it is manufactured.'”

Amen, and amen. A real reporter does not operate as a leak receptacle for nefarious government agents. A real reporter knows that if the intelligence agencies are going out of their way to manufacture a story, he should at the very least be extremely skeptical and ideally he should tell the truth about intelligence agencies leaking in order to hurt a political opponent. Jake Tapper wasn’t “covering” an FBI investigation into Russia collusion. He was willing to work with them in an information operation alleging that the 2016 election was stolen. If I knew it was all a big scam by Jan. 12, 2017, he knew even earlier.

It Wasn’t Just Coverage of An FBI Investigation

Hillary Clinton and DNC operatives had spent the better part of 2016 trying to push their Russia collusion disinformation operation out to anybody who would run with it. It was so weak that almost no one bit and those who did were exclusively partisan activists. They had, however, managed to get the FBI to run wild with it, even using it to help secure a wiretap to spy on an American.

But the point was really to get the made-up dossier out into the public. Clinton and the DNC designed and developed the Russia collusion dossier through Fusion GPS. That group claimed that the author of the dossier was Christopher Steele, who they pitched to the press as some kind of former British super spy. He turned out to be something of a politically motivated joke who had outsourced the collection of information to a guy who seemed to brainstorm outlandish ideas for the dossier with his drinking buddies and who had previously been the subject of an inconclusive FBI counterintelligence investigation into whether he was a Russian spy. And the “most important contributor” to the Russia collusion hoax dossier was identified by the Wall Street Journal as a disgruntled Russian public relations executive with a reported drinking problem.

Even years before that all slowly came out, no serious journalist would touch the dossier of made-up stories and unsubstantiated claims because they would almost certainly get sued. It was a real conundrum for Democrats. And there was a real problem inside intelligence agencies. They had just spent the previous year running an insane investigation into whether Trump was himself a Russian spy and had gone after key people associated with his campaign, including incoming National Security Advisor Mike Flynn.

At an Oval Office meeting on Jan. 5, 2017, FBI Director James Comey discussed what to do about the Russia collusion operation with President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and National Security Advisor Susan Rice. Obama gave guidance about how to perpetuate the Russia collusion hoax investigations. They discussed whether and how to withhold national security information, likely including details of the investigation into Trump himself, from the incoming Trump national security team. Imagine if Mike Flynn learned that Comey’s people had been spying on Trump campaign affiliates and investigating him.

An ostensibly similar briefing about Russian interference efforts was given to Trump on Jan. 6, after which Comey privately briefed Trump on the “pee tape” allegation contained in the Clinton-funded dossier. The extra briefing was because the intelligence couldn’t be included in an official intelligence report as it was that much of a joke and hadn’t been verified by any legitimate institution, even if the FBI had used it to secure a warrant on an American. Comey told Trump — and later memorialized in memos — that he was giving the briefing because CNN was “looking for a news hook” in order to publish a story about the dossier and he wanted to warn Trump about it.

You will never guess the news hook CNN used to publish their story about the dossier. OK, you did guess and yes, it was that Comey had briefed Trump about the dossier!

The leak of the briefing of Trump was used to legitimize a ridiculous dossier full of allegations the FBI knew to be false and that multiple news organizations had previously refused to report on for lack of substantiation, and it created a cloud of suspicion over Trump’s incoming administration by insinuating he was being blackmailed by Russia. BuzzFeed, using the CNN story as justification, published the full dossier hours later. It was all very convenient.

Incidentally, Jake Tapper was livid with Ben Smith, the editor of BuzzFeed, for publishing the actual dossier after Jake’s story ran. He said “collegiality wise it was you stepping on my d–k.”

“I think your move makes the story less serious and credible,” he said, adding, “I think you damaged its impact.”

He was right. Tapper had carefully written the story with his colleagues to make it seem like the Clinton-funded dossier was non-partisan and extremely serious. When Smith published what it actually was, everyone outside of DC and New York could see it was hilariously juvenile. It was so stupid that you had to be an idiot to believe it.

On that note, Vance said CNN viewers believed the Russia collusion hoax, which Tapper denied. In fact, a 2018 poll showed that a shocking 67 percent of Democrats believed that Russia had tampered with vote totals in the 2016 election. Even in 2020, years after it was debunked by real reporters, a majority of Americans believed Tapper’s daily drumbeat of disinformation about Russia colluding with Trump. (Tapper once mocked the majority of Republicans who believed, accurately, that the Obama administration had spied on the Trump campaign.)

This is CNN

To take just a few examples of how Tapper and CNN pushed the Russia collusion hoax relentlessly, let’s first note that they hired Clapper and other intelligence officials involved in the information operation to help amplify the Russia collusion hoax with their on-air commentary.

In February 2017, CNN reported another blockbuster, that was also false, “US investigators corroborate some aspects of the Russia dossier.” Jake Tapper kept saying that the dossier had been corroborated for years, until the story became an embarrassment.

Also in February 2017, my husband, then a Senior Writer at The Weekly Standard, wrote a media criticism column for that magazine on the problems surrounding the credulous use of anonymous sources to report on the alleged Trump-Russia scandal. “It’s now widely believed that CNN jumped the gun and failed to confirm key details [of the dossier] because they were too trusting of the high-ranking Obama intelligence officials who vouched for the story,” he wrote. “Naturally, those officials remain anonymous.” This observation caused Tapper to fly off the handle and send a angry email to the editors of the Weekly Standard, which was CC’d to the other three authors of CNN’s dubious report on the dossier.

In June 2017, they were forced to pull one of their Russia-Trump conspiracy stories based on a single anonymous source — the stories were always sourced to anonymous intelligence officials — who connected Anthony Scaramucci to a Russian investment fund managed by a Kremlin-controlled bank. At least in that case three CNN journalists were fired for their shoddy work.

Also in June 2017, Jake Tapper co-authored a story claiming James Comey would dispute Donald Trump’s claim that Comey had told him three times he was not under investigation. Here’s how Tapper’s story began:

In his much-anticipated congressional testimony on Thursday, fired FBI Director James Comey will dispute President Donald Trump’s blanket claim that he was told he was not under investigation multiple times, according to sources familiar with Comey’s thinking.

Rather, one source said that Comey is expected to tell senators that he never assured Trump he was not under investigation, because such assurances would have been improper. Another source hinted that the President may have misunderstood the exact meaning of Comey’s words, especially regarding the FBI’s ongoing counterintelligence investigation.

The story got major play on CNN, with Comey’s alleged disputation being treated as credible and Trump’s claim treated as non-credible.

When Comey testified under oath, however, he not only admitted he kept telling Trump he wasn’t under investigation — contrary to the information operation that he’d helped run through leaks to the media and other means — but he had done so three times, exactly as Trump said. The first time he said it, he volunteered it without even being asked.

The story was rewritten, rather than retracted, and a bizarre note was appended at the top that said, “Comey does not directly dispute that Trump was told multiple times he was not under investigation.” What a journalistically disastrous way to say Comey “completely confirmed in every way what Trump said about being told he was not under investigation.”

In December of 2017, CNN went wild with a story claiming that congressional investigators learned Donald Trump, Jr., had been given advance notice via email about Democrat documents before they were published. The story didn’t include any evidence that the random person who emailed Trump, Jr., was correct, that his email had been opened, that he was in any way connected to Russia, or anything, really, to justify the hysteria.

But then it got worse. It turned out that CNN’s Manu Raju had completely and utterly botched the story, which he claimed was based on two anonymous sources. Instead of advance notice on Sept. 4, it was late notice on Sept. 14, well after the documents were publicly available. Clearly he just ran with a story from two people in Rep. Adam Schiff’s office who couldn’t read dates properly.

Speaking of Raju, he was a favorite and reliable leak recipient for the Democrats pushing the Russia collusion hoax (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here, for example). He also helped bury the confirmation that Susan Rice was involved in unmasking Trump officials, contrary to what she had said publicly.

CNN literally ran thousands of false and misleading Russia collusion stories. Jake Tapper didn’t limit his embrace of hoaxes to the Russia collusion hoax, mind you. He also gave credence to Julie Swetnick’s false claims about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the “fine people” hoax, COVID hysteria, and the most extreme Democrat lawfare.

After the 2016 election, I doubted the Russia collusion hoax that took Washington by storm because I knew actual Trump voters and because I’d lived through other moments of hysteria, including the march to the Iraq War based on fraudulent intelligence assessments. But the confidence I had in reporting that the Russia collusion hoax was a nefarious information operation was thanks to Jake Tapper and Jim Sciutto revealing it as such on set that day. In a way, I’m thankful, because I never would have had the courage to take on all of the media to report the truth.

But Tapper is not allowed to rewrite his horrible history or the horrible history of CNN. He and the network he appears on should not be treated as credible.

Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is the Editor-in-Chief of The Federalist. She is Senior Journalism Fellow at Hillsdale College and a Fox News contributor. She is the co-author of Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court. She is the author of "Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats Seized Our Elections." Reach her at mzhemingway@thefederalist.com

https://thefederalist.com/2024/10/29/jake-tapper-is-lying-about-cnns-key-role-in-the-russia-collusion-hoax

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Hell Hath No Fury like a Karen/Snowflake Scorned
« Reply #4294 on: October 30, 2024, 01:51:42 PM »
A schadenfreude thread would have been a fine place for this to live. WaPo now up to 10% of circulation lost since the Bezos non-endorsement of Trump. Likely also a good predictor of the hair rending that will follow a Trump victory:

https://nypost.com/2024/10/30/media/washington-post-loses-250k-subscribers-for-not-endorsing-kamala-harris/

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
CNN: "GOP strategist"
« Reply #4295 on: October 31, 2024, 10:08:22 AM »
And who are they referring to, Margaret Hoover on some purported rumors:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gop-strategist-says-there-s-concern-at-trump-campaign-over-internal-polls/ar-AA1tgKUA?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=c4204293de874938a760cbb3764171ae&ei=18

That is like having Elizabeth Cheney and asking who she is voting for.  Same thing.

BTW there is concern on both sides.  Who knew?

 :roll: :roll:



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile