“The free press is the despot's enemy.”

[RandomGuy]

Flake didn't mince words.


Outgoing Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake launched a fiery attack on President Trump Wednesday over Trump’s criticisms of the media -- alleging that the president pushes “pernicious fantasies,” uses Stalinist language and causes global instability by undermining the free press.

"An American president who cannot take criticism, who must constantly deflect and distort and distract, who must find someone else to blame is charting a very dangerous path. And a Congress that fails to act as a check on the president adds to the danger,"” Flake said.

He also criticized Trump for describing the press as “the enemy of the people,” a phrase he said was used by mass-murdering Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.

"The free press is the despot’s enemy, which makes the free press the guardian of democracy," he said. "When a figure in power reflexively calls any press that doesn’t suit him “fake news,” it is that person who should be the figure of suspicion, not the press."

He criticized Trump not only for his attacks on the media, which he claimed had given encouragement to dictators in Syria and the Philippines to undermine the press, but also for his own promotion of dubious stories.

"Not only has the past year seen a president borrow despotic language to refer to the free press, but it seems that he has now in turn inspired authoritarians and dictators with his own language," he said.

In particular, Flake cited what he called Trump’s “pernicious fantasies about rigged elections and voter fraud, which are as destructive as they are inaccurate.”

...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/17/arizona-republican-sen-jeff-flake-blasts-trump-for-attacks-on-press-in-fiery-senate-floor-speech.html

[hater]

:lmao calling cnn,wapo and nyt the “free press”. :lmao

They been CIA mouthpiecs for decades

[Mark Celibate]

Except we don’t have a free press. They are owned by the same group of a few people, and state the same message in lockstep for the same masters. Any alternative media is immediately denounced as “fake news” by the globalist media cabal.

[baseline bum]

And yet Flake keeps voting with the Dear Leader when it actually matters. Flake is just being an attention whore trying to prop sales of his book. He had a check and a balance in his monumentally important swing vote in the senate, but he never used it. Fuck him.

[hater]

Turner and Bezos probably promised him a gazillion dollars for this stunt.

Whore

[Mark Celibate]

Isn’t Jeff fake quitting or am I getting mixed up? Let’s get a real senator in there.

[spurraider21]

Except we don’t have a free press. They are owned by the same group of a few people, and state the same message in lockstep for the same masters. Any alternative media is immediately denounced as “fake news” by the globalist media cabal.
lol no. "fake news" was a term originally coined to describe the shit like "POPE ENDORSES DONALD TRUMP" stories that were being shared on social media.

now trump uses the term to describe anything he doesn't like. "globalist media cartel" doesn't go around calling alternative media fake news unless they're demonstrably fake like hillary's body double :lol

[RandomGuy]

Isn’t Jeff fake quitting or am I getting mixed up? Let’s get a real senator in there.

Easy.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/11/28/democrat-kyrsten-sinema-says-trump-not-thing-race-replace-sen-jeff-flake/900777001/

[RandomGuy]

Except we don’t have a free press. They are owned by the same group of a few people, and state the same message in lockstep for the same masters. Any alternative media is immediately denounced as “fake news” by the globalist media cabal.

We have a free press. "alternative media" tends to have shitty journalism, and is generally rightfully mocked. Unless you are a big fan of Alex Jones' overpriced supplements.

https://i.makeagif.com/media/6-10-2016/dwdx7E.gif

[RandomGuy]

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/BlindFrailBarnowl-max-1mb.gif

Yummy bone broth. :rollin

[hater]

lol no. "fake news" was a term originally coined to describe the shit like "POPE ENDORSES DONALD TRUMP" stories that were being shared on social media.

now trump uses the term to describe anything he doesn't like. "globalist media cartel" doesn't go around calling alternative media fake news unless they're demonstrably fake like hillary's body double :lol

Lol no. Fake News was coined in 2016 by an obscure site called PropOrNot in conjuction with the Washington Post. They listed lots of legitimate independent news sites and called them Russia Propaganda and.... Fake News.

Here are some details:
After returning from a Thanksgiving trip to Philadelphia on Saturday, I received word that Consortiumnews.com, the 21-year-old investigative news site that has challenged misguided “group thinks” whether from Republicans, Democrats or anyone else over those two-plus decades, was included among some 200 Internet sites spreading what some anonymous Web site, PropOrNot, deems “Russian propaganda.”

I would normally ignore such nonsense but it was elevated by The Washington Post, which treated these unnamed “independent researchers” as sophisticated experts who “tracked” the Russian propaganda operation and assembled the black list.

And I’m not joking when I say that these neo-McCarthyites go unnamed. The Post’s article by Craig Timberg on Thursday described PropOrNot simply as “a nonpartisan collection of researchers with foreign policy, military and technology backgrounds [who] planned to release its own findings Friday showing the startling reach and effectiveness of Russian propaganda campaigns.”

From consortiumnews

So Celibates description is pretty spot on

[RandomGuy]

Jones, despite his laughable theories, is a pretty good example of what a free press looks like.

He can claim all sorts of shit about those in power, with little to ever back him up, and the kinds of shit he gets away with here would have him locked in a cell in many countries that now get to use Trumps example to hide behind.

[hater]

Here is the link to the original WaPo article that basically started the Fake News meme and was parroted by cnn and other “free press” :lmao

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/russian-propaganda-effort-helped-spread-fake-news-during-election-experts-say/2016/11/24/793903b6-8a40-4ca9-b712-716af66098fe_story.html?utm_term=.3482d59cf471

[Pavlov]

Lol no. Fake News was coined in 2016 by an obscure site called PropOrNot in conjuction with the Washington Post. They listed lots of legitimate independent news sites and called them Russia Propaganda and.... Fake News.

Here are some details:
After returning from a Thanksgiving trip to Philadelphia on Saturday, I received word that Consortiumnews.com, the 21-year-old investigative news site that has challenged misguided “group thinks” whether from Republicans, Democrats or anyone else over those two-plus decades, was included among some 200 Internet sites spreading what some anonymous Web site, PropOrNot, deems “Russian propaganda.”

I would normally ignore such nonsense but it was elevated by The Washington Post, which treated these unnamed “independent researchers” as sophisticated experts who “tracked” the Russian propaganda operation and assembled the black list.

And I’m not joking when I say that these neo-McCarthyites go unnamed. The Post’s article by Craig Timberg on Thursday described PropOrNot simply as “a nonpartisan collection of researchers with foreign policy, military and technology backgrounds [who] planned to release its own findings Friday showing the startling reach and effectiveness of Russian propaganda campaigns.”

From consortiumnews

So Celibates description is pretty spot on:lol another conspiracy!

[RandomGuy]

Lol no. Fake News was coined in 2016 by an obscure site called PropOrNot in conjuction with the Washington Post. They listed lots of legitimate independent news sites and called them Russia Propaganda and.... Fake News.

Here are some details:
After returning from a Thanksgiving trip to Philadelphia on Saturday, I received word that Consortiumnews.com, the 21-year-old investigative news site that has challenged misguided “group thinks” whether from Republicans, Democrats or anyone else over those two-plus decades, was included among some 200 Internet sites spreading what some anonymous Web site, PropOrNot, deems “Russian propaganda.”

I would normally ignore such nonsense but it was elevated by The Washington Post, which treated these unnamed “independent researchers” as sophisticated experts who “tracked” the Russian propaganda operation and assembled the black list.

And I’m not joking when I say that these neo-McCarthyites go unnamed. The Post’s article by Craig Timberg on Thursday described PropOrNot simply as “a nonpartisan collection of researchers with foreign policy, military and technology backgrounds [who] planned to release its own findings Friday showing the startling reach and effectiveness of Russian propaganda campaigns.”

From consortiumnews

So Celibates description is pretty spot on

https://medium.com/@thewokerise/our-brutal-reviews-of-infowars-life-supplements-part-i-the-intro-8a0c7f114900

[hater]

Cant blame Trump for hating the “free press” :lmao as they have spread fake news after fake news of the Russia hoax for over a year now.

Lets remember one of the most blatant fake news events:

FRIDAY WAS ONE of the most embarrassing days for the U.S. media in quite a long time. The humiliation orgy was kicked off by CNN, with MSNBC and CBS close behind, and countless pundits, commentators, and operatives joining the party throughout the day. By the end of the day, it was clear that several of the nation’s largest and most influential news outlets had spread an explosive but completely false news story to millions of people, while refusing to provide any explanation of how it happened.


Cz3b7Ssx-AU


Turns out they had the wrong date for the incriminating email and it was actually sent AFTER wikileaks had released the info :lmao

There was just one small problem with this story: It was fundamentally false, in the most embarrassing way possible. Hours after CNN broadcast its story — and then hyped it over and over and over — the Washington Post reported that CNN got the key fact of the story wrong.

The email was not dated September 4, as CNN claimed, but rather September 14 — which means it was sent after WikiLeaks had already published access to the DNC emails online. Thus, rather than offering some sort of special access to Trump, “Michael J. Erickson” was simply some random person from the public encouraging the Trump family to look at the publicly available DNC emails that WikiLeaks — as everyone by then already knew — had publicly promoted. In other words, the email was the exact opposite of what CNN presented it as being.


:lmao

So you cant really blame Trump or Trumptards for hating the fake news media tbqh

[spurraider21]

Lol no. Fake News was coined in 2016 by an obscure site called PropOrNot in conjuction with the Washington Post. They listed lots of legitimate independent news sites and called them Russia Propaganda and.... Fake News.

Here are some details:
After returning from a Thanksgiving trip to Philadelphia on Saturday, I received word that Consortiumnews.com, the 21-year-old investigative news site that has challenged misguided “group thinks” whether from Republicans, Democrats or anyone else over those two-plus decades, was included among some 200 Internet sites spreading what some anonymous Web site, PropOrNot, deems “Russian propaganda.”

I would normally ignore such nonsense but it was elevated by The Washington Post, which treated these unnamed “independent researchers” as sophisticated experts who “tracked” the Russian propaganda operation and assembled the black list.

And I’m not joking when I say that these neo-McCarthyites go unnamed. The Post’s article by Craig Timberg on Thursday described PropOrNot simply as “a nonpartisan collection of researchers with foreign policy, military and technology backgrounds [who] planned to release its own findings Friday showing the startling reach and effectiveness of Russian propaganda campaigns.”

From consortiumnews

So Celibates description is pretty spot on


Here is the link to the original WaPo article that basically started the Fake News meme and was parroted by cnn and other “free press” :lmao

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/russian-propaganda-effort-helped-spread-fake-news-during-election-experts-say/2016/11/24/793903b6-8a40-4ca9-b712-716af66098fe_story.html?utm_term=.3482d59cf471
so what alternative news outlets did WaPo actually call "fake news"

[Pavlov]

Cant blame Trump for hating the “free press” :lmao as they have spread fake news after fake news of the Russia hoax for over a year now.

Lets remember one of the most blatant fake news events:

FRIDAY WAS ONE of the most embarrassing days for the U.S. media in quite a long time. The humiliation orgy was kicked off by CNN, with MSNBC and CBS close behind, and countless pundits, commentators, and operatives joining the party throughout the day. By the end of the day, it was clear that several of the nation’s largest and most influential news outlets had spread an explosive but completely false news story to millions of people, while refusing to provide any explanation of how it happened.


Cz3b7Ssx-AU


Turns out they had the wrong date for the incriminating email and it was actually sent AFTER wikileaks had released the info :lmao

There was just one small problem with this story: It was fundamentally false, in the most embarrassing way possible. Hours after CNN broadcast its story — and then hyped it over and over and over — the Washington Post reported that CNN got the key fact of the story wrong.

The email was not dated September 4, as CNN claimed, but rather September 14 — which means it was sent after WikiLeaks had already published access to the DNC emails online. Thus, rather than offering some sort of special access to Trump, “Michael J. Erickson” was simply some random person from the public encouraging the Trump family to look at the publicly available DNC emails that WikiLeaks — as everyone by then already knew — had publicly promoted. In other words, the email was the exact opposite of what CNN presented it as being.


:lmao

So you cant really blame Trump or Trumptards for hating the fake news media tbqhThe thing is they correct themselves.

Fake news never does.

[hater]

so what alternative news outlets did WaPo actually call "fake news"

List should be in this shady site
http://www.propornot.com/p/home.html?m=1

:lmao WaPo pimping that shitty site :lmao

:lmao Ron Paul listed There :lmao :lol

[spurraider21]

List should be in this shady site
http://www.propornot.com/p/home.html?m=1

:lmao WaPo pimping that shitty site :lmao

:lmao Ron Paul listed There :lmao :lol
:lmao


Editor’s Note: The Washington Post on Nov. 24 published a story on the work of four sets of researchers who have examined what they say are Russian propaganda efforts to undermine American democracy and interests. One of them was PropOrNot, a group that insists on public anonymity, which issued a report identifying more than 200 websites that, in its view, wittingly or unwittingly published or echoed Russian propaganda. A number of those sites have objected to being included on PropOrNot’s list, and some of the sites, as well as others not on the list, have publicly challenged the group’s methodology and conclusions. The Post, which did not name any of the sites, does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet, nor did the article purport to do so. Since publication of The Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites from its list.

[Mark Celibate]

We have a free press. "alternative media" tends to have shitty journalism, and is generally rightfully mocked. Unless you are a big fan of Alex Jones' overpriced supplements.

nah dude, all media is owned by a handful of corporations. And they coordinate together to run the same narratives. You can believe their lies but I won’t. Free press my ass. 90% negative coverage press bias.

http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6 (https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6)

[hater]

So they retracted some of the story later. This is not news, WaPo has been retracting and updating their fake news articles daily.

The damage by the original fake news was done. And that is the origin of the “fake news” meme

[Chucho]

"Free press" should focus on more pressing issues than the president's obesity and potty mouth...or at least not let it be it's top stories the vast majority of the last 7 days.

And American news outlets have basically boiled down to a great representation of the American general population- camps of political bias.

[Chucho]

GOP good now


:) Sorry...just had to.

[Pavlov]

So they retracted some of the story later. This is not news, WaPo has been retracting and updating their fake news articles daily.

The damage by the original fake news was done. And that is the origin of the “fake news” memeWhat did the original story say that was different?

[spurraider21]

nah dude, all media is owned by a handful of corporations. And they coordinate together to run the same narratives. You can believe their lies but I won’t. Free press my ass. 90% negative coverage press bias.

(https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6)http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6
how do you know they coordinate?

how many major news sources is a good number, to you?

what country has the best "free press" in your opinion?

[Chucho]

So they retracted some of the story later. This is not news, WaPo has been retracting and updating their fake news articles daily.

The damage by the original fake news was done. And that is the origin of the “fake news” meme

WaPo snitched themselves out too about the falsity of Trump mocking handicap journalists.

[hater]

what country has the best "free press" in your opinion?

France, Germany, Switzerland, Norway, New Zealand I could go on and on

US has actually one of the most unfree press in the planet. When you have the largest media corps being mouthpieces of the state you know you have a huge problem

[pgardn]

:lmao calling cnn,wapo and nyt the “free press”. :lmao

They been CIA mouthpiecs for decades

You are such an ignorant fck.
RT news run by Vlad is Hater's go to for news.

Not the papers that revealed Watergate, Pentagon Papers, Vietnam lies, Iraq lies, Snowden, Clinton Foundation...
They are mouthpieces of the CIA and yet half your arguments follow THEIR stories. So they are CIA run until they say something you agree with..

What do you read Hater?

[spurraider21]

France, Germany, Switzerland, Norway, New Zealand I could go on and on

US has actually one of the most unfree press in the planet. When you have the largest media corps being mouthpieces of the state you know you have a huge problem
who do you think runs the press in those countries?

germany also has like 4-5 news publications that dominate. just like we do. so why is their's better?

[pgardn]

France, Germany, Switzerland, Norway, New Zealand I could go on and on

US has actually one of the most unfree press in the planet. When you have the largest media corps being mouthpieces of the state you know you have a huge problem

You are full of shit.
We have by far the most able press. We put more people in more places than all the countries you can hope to mention combined. And they are the best by far and away.

[Mark Celibate]

who do you think runs the press in those countries?

germany also has like 4-5 news publications that dominate. just like we do. so why is their's better?
Lol Germany is a post ww2 slave state with a puppet government

[Mark Celibate]

You are full of shit.
We have by far the most able press. We put more people in more places than all the countries you can hope to mention combined. And they are the best by far and away.
But they all report back to the same handful of masters who say what gets published. It’s an illusion.

[hater]

who do you think runs the press in those countries?

germany also has like 4-5 news publications that dominate. just like we do. so why is their's better?

German media often critizizes German interventionalism and wars for example. They also are not all in the Russia is evil camp either.

Us on the other hand no mainstream media has critizized US war machine or Objection to evil Russia in a loong while. All in the tank on US military spending, wars and Russia is evil wagon

[Chucho]

You our are full of shit.
We have by far the most able press. We put more people in more places than all the countries you can hope to mention combined.


Yeah, but we also have an issue of only reporting "what gets ratings", our media is more selective and that's pretty depressing. We are told what is news based on what attracts ratings, not what might be more important to the times we live in. That's a real problem.

[pgardn]

Burn they all report back to the same handful of masters who say what gets published. It’s an illusion.

So the the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, Vietnam, Clinton Foundation, Snowden stories are all illusions?

Got it...

What do you read for your news?

[hater]

Its not just about ratings

US state has a system to provide access to their favorite journalists and blocking the rest. How do you get on the State’s good side? You push news that the state wants to push. Its a very complex intricate system that works for the State

[pgardn]

Yeah, but we also have an issue of only reporting "what gets ratings", our media is more selective and that's pretty depressing. We are told what is news based on what attracts ratings, not what might be more important to the times we live in. That's a real problem.

Of course.
Especially Cable News.

But if you want the most and best information in the world you go to US news.
And it's not EVEN CLOSE.

[hater]

Yong journalists who want to have a good career know they better write the “correct” stories or their careers will go nowhere and they will b flipping pankakes in the near future

Even bigger stakes but same system with large mdia corps. In the end journalists and media corps are but whores and mouthieces to the State

[pgardn]

German media often critizizes German interventionalism and wars for example. They also are not all in the Russia is evil camp either.

Us on the other hand no mainstream media has critizized US war machine or Objection to evil Russia in a loong while. All in the tank on US military spending, wars and Russia is evil wagon

You don't read.
You have got to be kidding.
The above is an outright lie.

[spurraider21]

German media often critizizes German interventionalism and wars for example. They also are not all in the Russia is evil camp either.

Us on the other hand no mainstream media has critizized US war machine or Objection to evil Russia in a loong while. All in the tank on US military spending, wars and Russia is evil wagon
:lmao

[pgardn]

Yong journalists who want to have a good career know they better write the “correct” stories or their careers will go nowhere and they will b flipping pankakes in the near future

Bullshit.

For the cable news shows you watch on cooking.

[spurraider21]

Lol Germany is a post ww2 slave state with a puppet government
of course bro. always a conspiracy. good thing you're woke

[hater]

:lmao

Post a recent example then

[pgardn]

Its not just about ratings

US state has a system to provide access to their favorite journalists and blocking the rest. How do you get on the State’s good side? You push news that the state wants to push. Its a very complex intricate system that works for the State

Where did you get the information on this complex intricate system?

Link. Now please.

Hater is the biggest fake on this board.

[spurraider21]

Post a recent example then
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/22/business/economy/military-industrial-complex.html

[Chucho]

Of course.
Especially Cable News.

But if you want the most and best information in the world you go to US news.
And it's not EVEN CLOSE.

It's getting to the point where Telemundo is the only US news source I go to. The Anchors' tits, tbh.

[spurraider21]

:lol complaining american press sucks because you watch cable news
:lol what's next, complaining about how american sports suck because you watch MLS and Arena Football?

[pgardn]

It's getting to the point where Telemundo is the only US news source I go to. The Anchors' tits, tbh.

Well then your missing a whole bunch of very good stuff. Except for the mammaries.
Your choice.

[hater]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/22/business/economy/military-industrial-complex.html

Yah americans will read page 10 of the economic section :lmao

[koriwhat]

lol no. "fake news" was a term originally coined to describe the shit like "POPE ENDORSES DONALD TRUMP" stories that were being shared on social media.

now trump uses the term to describe anything he doesn't like. "globalist media cartel" doesn't go around calling alternative media fake news unless they're demonstrably fake like hillary's body double :lol

Yeah they do... from early morning news shows to late night talk show hacks. They're all the same corrupt fake news!

[boutons_deux]

Flake still says he would not vote to impeach/convict Trash

[koriwhat]

Where did you get the information on this complex intricate system?

Link. Now please.

Hater is the biggest fake on this board.

Cia in bed with wapo who is owned by bezos... just 1 ex.

[Chucho]

Yah americans will read page 10 of the economic section :lmao


There's a whole lot of truth to this.

[spurraider21]

Yah americans will read page 10 of the economic section :lmao
Hater: US Media doesn't criticize US war machine

shown article that talks about how US is dependent on war machine

Hater: well nobody reads that anyway!

[koriwhat]

So the the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, Vietnam, Clinton Foundation, Snowden stories are all illusions?

Got it...

What do you read for your news?

Def not msm news reporting on any of those. Go wikileaks and further down the rabbit hole. A lot of fake news down that hole too.

[Blake]

Yeah they do... from early morning news shows to late night talk show hacks. They're all the same corrupt fake news!

Lol you're a quack

[RandomGuy]

List should be in this shady site
http://www.propornot.com/p/home.html?m=1

:lmao WaPo pimping that shitty site :lmao

:lmao Ron Paul listed There :lmao :lol

Let me ask you this then:

Is attacking any press coverage of a leader that is negative as being "fake news" good or bad for democracy? Why or why not?

[RandomGuy]

Def not msm news reporting on any of those. Go wikileaks and further down the rabbit hole. A lot of fake news down that hole too.


Let me ask you this then:

Is attacking any press coverage of a leader that is negative as being "fake news" good, or bad for democracy? Why or why not?

[Mark Celibate]

Lol you're a quack
What word rhymes with duck

[RandomGuy]

Lol Germany is a post ww2 slave state with a puppet government


Let me ask you this then:

Is attacking any press coverage of a leader that is negative as being "fake news" good or bad for democracy? Why or why not?

[pgardn]

Cia in bed with wapo who is owned by bezos... just 1 ex.

Link. Total Bullshit. Explain the system please.
The WSJ is owned by R . Murdoch yet has some excellent stuff? Explain?

And why did they out that CNN anchor/ democratic hack with her problem getting questions to the Hillary campaign?

[spurraider21]

So the the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, Vietnam, Clinton Foundation, Snowden stories are all illusions?

Got it...

What do you read for your news?


Def not msm news reporting on any of those. Go wikileaks and further down the rabbit hole. A lot of fake news down that hole too.
:lmao who do you think covered watergate the most extensively? WaPo
:lmao who broke the uranium one story? NYT

[Blake]

What word rhymes with duck

Who cares

[RandomGuy]

U.S. Senator John McCain wants President Trump to stop attacking the American free press.

The Arizona Republican and Vietnam War veteran penned a critical op-ed in the Washington Post on Tuesday, one day before the U.S. leader's teased "Fake News Awards" were scheduled to take place.

Trump’s attempts to undermine the free press also make it more difficult to hold repressive governments accountable," McCain continued. "For decades, dissidents and human rights advocates have relied on independent investigations into government corruption to further their fight for freedom. But constant cries of 'fake news' undercut this type of reporting and strip activists of one of their most powerful tools of dissent."

[koriwhat]

Let me ask you this then:

Is attacking any press coverage of a leader that is negative as being "fake news" good, or bad for democracy? Why or why not?

Lmao as if those news orgs(tmz pundits) report news and not bs tabloidish crap. Yall some brainwashed zombies huh? Oh and blake im the quack huh? Bet you just live you some john oliver and the like.

[spurraider21]

pretty sure it was Splits who posted an article where almost half of republicans think that accurate news is still "fake news" if it paints Donny in a negative light :lol

[Pavlov]

Wait, koriwhat thinks John Oliver is news?

I think I see the problem here.

[koriwhat]

:lmao who do you think covered watergate the most extensively? WaPo
:lmao who broke the uranium one story? NYT

I skimmed over watergate & vietnam... my bad. Why dont you refresh my memory about who covered watergate seeing as i wasnt even born yet.

And to pg, do your own damn google search man. Whats with yall needing your hand held all the time?

[pgardn]

Def not msm news reporting on any of those. Go wikileaks and further down the rabbit hole. A lot of fake news down that hole too.

Who the fck watches MSM for news?

The big papers in the US have broken the biggest stories in the world.
And looking back on history they did a damn good job. Just look what these papers did with Vietnam, Watergate, the Democratic National convention. Now Iraq, Syria... If you don't go US papers you are gonna miss it unless some other minor press corps helps by keeping on the trail.

WHAT DO YOU READ?

[spurraider21]

I skimmed over watergate & vietnam... my bad. Why dont you refresh my memory about who covered watergate seeing as i wasnt even born yet.

And to pg, do your own damn google search man. Whats with yall needing your hand held all the time?
2 reporters from the washington post, primarily. you should read up on how watergate unfolded

[koriwhat]

Wait, koriwhat thinks John Oliver is news?

I think I see the problem here.

No, i think he's a hack brought over here to tell us how to think while soothing us with his shit brit accent. Just like infomercials everything sounds better with a shitty accent.

[pgardn]

I skimmed over watergate & vietnam... my bad. Why dont you refresh my memory about who covered watergate seeing as i wasnt even born yet.

And to pg, do your own damn google search man. Whats with yall needing your hand held all the time?

Washington Post.

And I was not born either.
Christ...
So who is holding whose hand?

[koriwhat]

2 reporters from the washington post, primarily. you should read up on how watergate unfolded

I don't give a fuck about watergate. I give a fuck about right now.

[spurraider21]

I don't give a fuck about watergate. I give a fuck about right now.
well thats convenient 2 posts after complaining about watergate coverage and 1 post after asking me to refresh your memory on watergate coverage

[Pavlov]

No, i think he's a hack brought over here to tell us how to think while soothing us with his shit brit accent. Just like infomercials everything sounds better with a shitty accent.Yeah, John Oliver's purpose is to tell you how to think by being on premium cable a few weeks out of the year.

You're totally onto him.

[koriwhat]

Let me ask you this then:

Is attacking any press coverage of a leader that is negative as being "fake news" good, or bad for democracy? Why or why not?

You asked and i responded. Now shut the fuck up!

[koriwhat]

well thats convenient 2 posts after complaining about watergate coverage and 1 post after asking me to refresh your memory on watergate coverage

Didnt complain about watergate one bit. Dont care.

[Pavlov]

Def not msm news reporting on any of those. Go wikileaks and further down the rabbit hole. A lot of fake news down that hole too.So you get your regular news from Wikileaks and what other sites?

[koriwhat]

Yeah, John Oliver's purpose is to tell you how to think by being on premium cable a few weeks out of the year.

You're totally onto him.

And the others? It's not just one douche on tv at night.

[koriwhat]

So you get your regular news from Wikileaks and what other sites?

Anywhere you dont get your news from.

[Pavlov]

And the others? It's not just one douche on tv at night.Yes, you think comedians on TV are there to tell you how to think.

You're totally onto them.

[spurraider21]

:madrun mainstream media didn't cover watergate! :madrun

yes they did


wait, remind me how the media covered watergate?

these 2 guys from wapo


:madrun i dont care about watergate! fuck everything! fuck both sides!

[Pavlov]

Anywhere you dont get your news from.Sure, you're so edgy.

But what actual sites?

[pgardn]

So you get your regular news from Wikileaks and what other sites?

He has now become a nihilist and does not believe in anything.

[pgardn]

Anywhere you dont get your news from.

You are now done.

Why do you enter these conversations when you don't know wtf you are talking about and more importantly, don't care?

Seriously, just don't type.

[koriwhat]

yes they did



these 2 guys from wapo

Quote my actual words dipshit... btw when i asked to have a refresher on watergate it was sarcasm but you up tight knowitalls grasp for anything. Fuck out of here.

[Mark Celibate]

Who cares


:lmao you know

[koriwhat]

You are now done.

Why do you enter these conversations when you don't know wtf you are talking about and more importantly, don't care?

Seriously, just don't type.

Lmao whatever

[koriwhat]

Sure, you're so edgy.

But what actual sites?

Im not edgy at all... what is this hs?

[Pavlov]

Im not edgy at all... what is this hs?This is you dodging a simple question. What sites do you visit to get your news?

[pgardn]

Lmao whatever

Exactly.

"I don't care, I don't read, wtf I'm I doing here, ..."

[RandomGuy]

Link. Total Bullshit. Explain the system please.
The WSJ is owned by R . Murdoch yet has some excellent stuff? Explain?

And why did they out that CNN anchor/ democratic hack with her problem getting questions to the Hillary campaign?

This is called an ad hominem attack.

Rather than bother refuting any of the reporting or particulars of coverage, the tactic goes for some attack on the source.

It is flawed reasoning 101 and so common/old that it has a formal name, and has had a formal name since the ancient Greeks.

You can argue with flawed reasoning, but it is generally more effective to show that the reasoning is itself flawed.

[RandomGuy]

yes they did



these 2 guys from wapo

Well done.

I am guessing the response is to declare victory, donning-kruger style.

[RandomGuy]

Let me ask you this then:

Is attacking any press coverage of a leader that is negative as being "fake news" good, or bad for democracy? Why or why not?


You asked and i responded. Now shut the fuck up!

No actually, you didn't respond. This is a general question, meant to allow you to provide an opinion of an action without attaching persons or parties to it.

[RandomGuy]

Lmao as if those news orgs(tmz pundits) report news and not bs tabloidish crap. Yall some brainwashed zombies huh? Oh and blake im the quack huh? Bet you just live you some john oliver and the like.

Maybe my question was too hard.

Should leaders be allowed to say that any negative coverage of them is "fake", as if they are the ONLY person who can say what is fake or not? Is this a good thing to you?

[Blake]

:lmao you know

Lol you care

[koriwhat]

This is you dodging a simple question. What sites do you visit to get your news?

who's dodging? there's a difference between dodging and not giving you what you want. it's my choice whether or not i answer your shit line of questioning. i don't see you as important so therefor i don't give a fuck to answer everyone of your Q's when asked.


Exactly.

"I don't care, I don't read, wtf I'm I doing here, ..."

oh, i def read.


Maybe my question was too hard.

Should leaders be allowed to say that any negative coverage of them is "fake", as if they are the ONLY person who can say what is fake or not? Is this a good thing to you?

btw, your Q wasn't a tough one.

fuck no that's not good and teeters on the edge of a dictatorship. now with all that's come out in the last year sit back for a minute and reflect on most things newsworthy. how much of it has been news and not just some fabricated bs because a bunch of entitled fucks hate djt? yall prop these networks up as if they have a clean track record of which they don't and never have. they're bs liars and yall love lies.

[spurraider21]

it's my choice whether or not i answer your shit line of questioning. i don't see you as important so therefor i don't give a fuck to answer everyone of your Q's when asked.
yes its your choice to dodge a question or to answer it

[Blake]

Im not edgy at all...

Rofl the effort is noted tho

[koriwhat]

yes its your choice to dodge a question or to answer it

and it's your choice to shut the fuck up and mind your own god damn business.

[DisAsTerBot]

and it's your choice to shut the fuck up and mind your own god damn business.

Bro you’re so angry these days. Bitches and blunts, remember?

[spurraider21]

and it's your choice to shut the fuck up and mind your own god damn business.
i didnt make that choice, obviously. this is a message board, which serves the exact opposite purpose of shutting up and minding ones own business

[Blake]

and it's your choice to shut the fuck up and mind your own god damn business.

:lol damn dude it's just a discussion

[koriwhat]

Bro you’re so angry these days. Bitches and blunts, remember?

far from angry. my allergys suck right now and the weather is cold as fuck but other than that i am quite comfortable and upbeat today.


i didnt make that choice, obviously. this is a message board, which serves the exact opposite purpose of shutting up and minding ones own business

whatever weirdo.

[koriwhat]

:lol damn dude it's just a discussion

whatever blake

[Blake]

far from angry.

Whatever kw

[hater]

Let me ask you this then:

Is attacking any press coverage of a leader that is negative as being "fake news" good or bad for democracy? Why or why not?

Its bad of course. Keyword being “any” only the real fake news should he attacked as fake news.

Now answer this, Is attacking any independent news coverage that doesnt go along with Russian narrative as fake news good or bad for democracy?

[koriwhat]

Its bad of course. Keyword being “any” only the real fake news should he attacked as fake news.

Now answer this, Is attacking any independent news coverage that doesnt go along with Russian narrative as fake news good or bad for democracy?

only state sponsored "news" is allowed. i mean just take a look at the gustapo of social networks shadow banning and hiding other "news" outlets on their platforms. what's good for the gander isn't good for those that don't subscribe.

[RandomGuy]

fuck no that's not good and teeters on the edge of a dictatorship. now with all that's come out in the last year sit back for a minute and reflect on most things newsworthy. how much of it has been news and not just some fabricated bs because a bunch of entitled fucks hate djt? yall prop these networks up as if they have a clean track record of which they don't and never have. they're bs liars and yall love lies.

So 100% of all the negative coverage of things Trump has done is "fake". He is a perfect president who has never done anything wrong? Trump has said everything bad about him is "fake".

[koriwhat]

So 100% of all the negative coverage of things Trump has done is "fake". He is a perfect president who has never done anything wrong? Trump has said everything bad about him is "fake".

i never claimed such a thing.

however, bitching about how many diet cokes the dude has daily teeters on insanity. that's news? really? whether true or not, that's news? that right there should get whatever network news credentials revoked. that's not news!

news networks are like reality tv; both are fake as fuck and the masses can't get enough of that bs entertainment. fuck reality, right?

[spurraider21]

i never claimed such a thing.

however, bitching about how many diet cokes the dude has daily teeters on insanity. that's news? really? whether true or not, that's news? that right there should get whatever network news credentials revoked. that's not news!

news networks are like reality tv; both are fake as fuck and the masses can't get enough of that bs entertainment. fuck reality, right?
might not be newsworthy. doesn't make it fake.

[RandomGuy]

Its bad of course. Keyword being “any” only the real fake news should he attacked as fake news.

Now answer this, Is attacking any independent news coverage that doesnt go along with Russian narrative as fake news good or bad for democracy?

Best answer:
It depends.
A claim should stand or fall on its own. If that "independent news coverage" was saying that the Russian narrative is fake because Bigfoot really did it, then no. If the "independent news coverage" has a valid point to make, then yes.

Generally:
Blanket dismissal of something simply because it doesn't go along with any narrative is bad.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Hater: still sandinistas trolling.
celibate: still a nazi
koriwhat: still an imbecile with calf tats

[koriwhat]

Generally:
Blanket dismissal of something simply because it doesn't go along with any narrative is bad.

"remember, you can't read wikileaks only we can."

[spurraider21]

Best answer:
It depends.
A claim should stand or fall on its own. If that "independent news coverage" was saying that the Russian narrative is fake because Bigfoot really did it, then no. If the "independent news coverage" has a valid point to make, then yes.

Generally:
Blanket dismissal of something simply because it doesn't go along with any narrative is bad.
while this is nice in principle, there is also the notion of credibility. benefit of the doubt, etc.

[koriwhat]

Hater: still sandinistas trolling.
celibate: still a nazi
koriwhat: still an imbecile with calf tats

fuzzy: still a faggot who thinks he's so damn cool

[RandomGuy]

So 100% of all the negative coverage of things Trump has done is "fake". He is a perfect president who has never done anything wrong? Trump has said everything bad about him is "fake".



i never claimed such a thing.

however, bitching about how many diet cokes the dude has daily teeters on insanity. that's news? really? whether true or not, that's news? that right there should get whatever network news credentials revoked. that's not news!

news networks are like reality tv; both are fake as fuck and the masses can't get enough of that bs entertainment. fuck reality, right?

Not saying you did say such a thing. I am merely trying to figure out how one tells the difference between fake and not fake. You can say what you think clearly here.

Trump says, without exception that all the bad coverage is fake.

Do you accept this as truth?

[RandomGuy]

while this is nice in principle, there is also the notion of credibility. benefit of the doubt, etc.

Very true. One should apply more skepticism to some than others. Even so, really dodgy sources occasionally hit on something important and valid. One has to take things with some critical thinking.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

fuzzy: still a faggot who thinks he's so damn cool

It's been a few weeks since that discussion yet you still hold onto it. Now you need to tell the board again about how calm, cool, and collected you are. You spam posting rants which boil down to alt-right and/or conspiratard talking points provides a nice counterpoint.

[koriwhat]

Not saying you did say such a thing. I am merely trying to figure out how one tells the difference between fake and not fake. You can say what you think clearly here.

Trump says, without exception that all the bad coverage is fake.

Do you accept this as truth?

could be. i have no clue. i don't watch cnn, msnbc, fox, etc... i don't watch tv for christs sake. i am linked to videos from said channels at times and just smh at the way those anchors present themselves. other than the occasional video and article, i don't put much stock in MSM news outlets.

when my own local news reports about some old ladies cat in a tree i know we've reached the end of an actual news source. so fuck em all!

[koriwhat]

It's been a few weeks since that discussion yet you still hold onto it. Now you need to tell the board again about how calm, cool, and collected you are. You spam posting rants which boil down to alt-right and/or conspiratard talking points provides a nice counterpoint.

you're a faggot. that's no conspiracy.

[RandomGuy]

could be. i have no clue. i don't watch cnn, msnbc, fox, etc... i don't watch tv for christs sake. i am linked to videos from said channels at times and just smh at the way those anchors present themselves. other than the occasional video and article, i don't put much stock in MSM news outlets.

when my own local news reports about some old ladies cat in a tree i know we've reached the end of an actual news source. so fuck em all!

You don't read, and you don't watch news, but you just *know* its all biased.

What would you expect press coverage of a truly shitty president to look like?

[hater]

Best answer:
It depends.
A claim should stand or fall on its own. If that "independent news coverage" was saying that the Russian narrative is fake because Bigfoot really did it, then no. If the "independent news coverage" has a valid point to make, then yes.

Generally:
Blanket dismissal of something simply because it doesn't go along with any narrative is bad.

Yup and it goes both ways

Unfortunately the mainstream media has been flooding mostly fake news as there is no proof of Russia collusion and they keep getting material from “sources” which they do not disclose. Just like the example I posted in page 2. Rehash and repeat daily

[koriwhat]

What would you expect press coverage of a truly shitty president to look like?

a lot of ass kissing tbh... lol

[RandomGuy]

a lot of ass kissing tbh... lol

Would people be critical of a truly shitty president? Wouldn't there be a lot of bad coverage that president didn't like?

[RandomGuy]

there is no proof of Russia collusion

No proof at all? None?

[hater]

No proof at all? None?

No proof at all. Otherwise please post it and Ill gladly review

[koriwhat]

No proof at all. Otherwise please post it and Ill gladly review

but but but manafort, flynn, and that damn meeting with trump jr???? lol

[Pavlov]

but but but manafort, flynn, and that damn meeting with trump jr???? lollol adoptions

[koriwhat]

lol adoptions

what?

[Pavlov]

what?Where did you way you got your news again?

[Warlord23]

calf tats clearly establishing himself as one of the top 3 idiots on this subforum - ducks and Chris have some competition now

[koriwhat]

Where did you way you got your news again?

what?

[koriwhat]

calf tats clearly establishing himself as one of the top 3 idiots on this subforum - ducks and Chris have some competition now

i'm trying... i hope to be #1 asap!

[Pavlov]

what?Can't be very good if you don't get the adoption reference.

[koriwhat]

Can't be very good if you don't get the adoption reference.

what?

[Pavlov]

what?:lol

[koriwhat]

:lol

what?

[spurraider21]

calf tats clearly establishing himself as one of the top 3 idiots on this subforum - ducks and Chris have some competition now
they're all running for second. spurtacular is unopposed

[koriwhat]

they're all running for second. spurtacular is unopposed

bunch of fucking retards with yalls dumbass retard online awards.

[spurraider21]

bunch of fucking retards with yalls dumbass retard online awards.
you mean like the retard in chief with his fake news awards? :lmao

[koriwhat]

you mean like the retard in chief with his fake news awards? :lmao

exactly! i think it's pathetic too. i totally agree with you on that. our president shouldn't even bother with the "news" networks and just keep going forward.

[TeyshaBlue]

exactly! i think it's pathetic too. i totally agree with you on that. our president shouldn't even bother with the "news" networks and just keep going forward.

If he didn't possess the sensorium of a tantramatic 9 year old girl, he could.

[koriwhat]

If he didn't possess the sensorium of a tantramatic 9 year old girl, he could.

there's a lot wrong with the dude sure. i don't want a president acting like i do here on ST. lol

i want real change but unfortunately i don't think that's ever going to happen in my lifetime.

[TeyshaBlue]

there's a lot wrong with the dude sure. i don't want a president acting like i do here on ST. lol

i want real change but unfortunately i don't think that's ever going to happen in my lifetime.

+10. :tu

[hater]

No proof at all. Otherwise please post it and Ill gladly review

Came back here to see if Randomguy or anyone posted proof. Nothing yet?

I am wilking to change my mind on the whole Russia collusion deal if someone ANYONE posts proof....

[RandomGuy]

what?

Would people be critical of a truly shitty president? Wouldn't there be a lot of bad coverage that president didn't like?

[RandomGuy]

Came back here to see if Randomguy or anyone posted proof. Nothing yet?

I am wilking to change my mind on the whole Russia collusion deal if someone ANYONE posts proof....

What proof would convince you?

Meetings between campaign officials and Russian assets?

Data-sharing? Money provided on behalf of the candidate?

Tell me what evidence you would accept first.

[Blake]

Came back here to see if Randomguy or anyone posted proof. Nothing yet?

I am wilking to change my mind on the whole Russia collusion deal if someone ANYONE posts proof....

Damn you're lazy

[hater]

What proof would convince you?

Meetings between campaign officials and Russian assets?

Data-sharing? Money provided on behalf of the candidate?

Tell me what evidence you would accept first.

Thanks man. Im ready to believe!

Meetings obviously do not proove anything.

If the data sharing caused votes enough gotes to flip lection or at least had that potential yes that could work. Money? I dont think that would work as shillary had 1 billion dollars to burn and Trump had 1/2 a billion.

Im ready to switch camps but I need real solid evidence to throw back at Trumptards once I jump ship

[hater]

Nothing????

What a bummer . I guess it is a hoax after all :wow

[RandomGuy]

Nothing????

What a bummer . I guess it is a hoax after all :wow

Happy to wait until Mueller is finished. Easiest way to prove something is with solid evidence that those involved would not disclose publicly.

[RandomGuy]

Thanks man. Im ready to believe!

Meetings obviously do not proove anything.

If the data sharing caused votes enough gotes to flip lection or at least had that potential yes that could work. Money? I dont think that would work as shillary had 1 billion dollars to burn and Trump had 1/2 a billion.

Im ready to switch camps but I need real solid evidence to throw back at Trumptards once I jump ship

First question is: What was the margin of victory for the election?

How many people would have to have switched their votes to change the outcome? That answer is knowable.

[spurraider21]

First question is: What was the margin of victory for the election?

How many people would have to have switched their votes to change the outcome? That answer is knowable.
What ISN'T knowable is how many people DID switch their votes solely as a result of said meddling.

[boutons_deux]

What ISN'T knowable is how many people DID switch their votes solely as a result of said meddling.

Silver said there was significant shift to Trash in PA, OH, MI after Comey "meddled", a second time, by telling Nunes that FBI was investigating emails on Huma's PC, but didnt tell Nunes that FBI had been investigating Trash-Pootin for over a year, Comey meddling which gave those 3 states and the WH to Trash by minuscule margins.