Cmon man. CNN and MSNBC are DNC talking points networks at this point. WaPo actually held joint fundraisers for the DNC. The NYT hasn't endorsed a Republican for president since Dwight Eisenhower. These aren't "media" outlets anymore. They are propaganda for the left.
Also CNN and other MSM media sources having legitmate criticisms doesn't make them the "enemy of the people". That's absurd and dangerous rhetoric. But of course since Trump has no nuance in his rhetoric because he's a ****ing child, he goes to the extremes with his rhetoric with no understanding of the repercussions because again, his mind is like a child.
"all punches are not equal" **** you Chris Cuomo. This is why we don't trust the media. CNN is a disgrace!
Breitbarter nonsense. If it's not nutbag factor 8 then it's propaganda for the left. Meanwhile the President of the United States is mentally deranged and lies just about every time he speaks.
It's amazing that legit news is now considered fake and not calling it fake is a crime. And the obvious fake news like newsbusters, beirbart, infowars, and so on are what these guys consider the truth. It's Orwellian.
It’s complete BS. They don’t serve the Democrat agenda at all either. They merely serve as a political entertainment outlet. They follow the scandals. It’s that simple. A propaganda network would do poltical coverage entirely different. They would be talking Day and night about how Republicans are taking away your health insurance. They’d basically be a weather channel (which is unfortunate that the health of our earth has become partisan). They’d actually put democrats on tv to talk about something other than the Russia investigation. They would NOT have covered 100% of Trumps campaign rally’s and have a panel discuss every single one of his boneheaded tweets.
Could you kindly show me a link that discusses the Washington Post DNC fundraiser? Did some searches and couldn't find any info. I could find a bunch of WaPo articles reporting on different fundraisers. Nothing that says they actually hosted one. The NYT hasn't endorsed a republican for president since Eisenhower? In one of the most progressive cities in the country?
kudos to the fox news reporter... hopefully more cooperation between media outlets will counter this toxic presidency
Several points. CNN has always enjoyed breathless scandal. They have made lots of money on Trump, including broadcasting some of his earliest rallies in full. They truly helped create him and they're riding the Two Scoop gravy train. MSNBC is more liberal by design. For WaPo and NYT, you really have to distinguish editorials from reporting. There still aren't other outlets to measure up to the quality of investigative reporting of those two. Meanwhile, and separately, their editorial pages lean left, especially if considered in the current odd spectrum where you have infowars and breitbart on the far right. Fact-honoring pragmatists (see Evan McMullin, David Frum, even George Will, et multi alia) start to look "left" on that spectrum. But leave that aside. I imagine you just ignore that growing gang of republicans who regularly gig Trump and his favorite network, Fox. Let's just throw out CNN, MSNBC and FOX together for a moment as very biased. Now, you still have to argue that everyone else is biased. WSJ (with old school right wing editorial content) criticizes 45 on the regular, and in their reporting, they report the awful, naked facts: namely, 45's actions, tweets, and statements. Are they shills for the DNC? How about CBS? Or BBC? Weekly Standard? Deutsche Welle? CS Monitor? It defies all logic to see all of these outlets as part of a liberal cabal, with only Drudge or FOX as some sort of bastion of real content. Doesn't pass the sniff test.
Well considering that the vast majority of your posts are completely inaccurate and purposely misleading, I'm sure you'll be fine.
The majority of republicans are following trump into the hole... Poll: Majority of GOP agrees news media is 'enemy of the people' https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/14/poli...medium=social&utm_content=2018-08-14T20:30:10
Either you can't handle using Google or you purposefully didn't look very hard. It took me all of 30 seconds to find this tweet and a corroborating story. https://www.dailywire.com/news/7777/5-emails-showing-dnc-was-coordinating-press-aaron-bandler
What? I know you have digested this to mean exactly what your team wants it to mean, but I finally looked into this. Even the biased source says this evidence "may" indicate a joint fundraiser. There is so little information in that partial email quote. So all we can see is the DNC sent an internal email about someone who wanted tickets but maybe didn't want their organization listed for some party? How big a fundraiser? How many employees of WaPo? If the employees of WaPo were acting as private citizens (gee, is that allowed?) then ... maybe they would want their org name scrubbed if not acting on behalf of that org, right? I don't show up to every charity event broadcasting my employer -- that's for sure. They may or may not approve and it's none of their frapping business anyway. Seriously, I can't believe there's not more burger to this frequent talking point. It's pretty amazing, and sad. Also, the comrades at Wikileaks have no cred left after their revealed 2016 shenanigans and obvious collaboration with a certain campaign. I mean, if you really care about bias. LOL.
Great post. Some these dotardites would not accept a true fact if it slapped them across the ballot box.
CNN was all aboard the Trump train during the Primary process when they thought he was taking down the Republican party. In their wildest dreams, they never thought at that time he could actually win. Hell, most of us (including myself) didn't think he could win. But once it was obvious it HAD to be him as the Republican standard bearer they switched from reporting on him to attacking him. So yes, they did help create him but not out of some altruistic process. MSNBC isn't just liberal. It's the propaganda arm of the DNC. I've never seen anyone representing MSNBC that was supportive of the right. Why do I "have" to distinguish editorials from reporting? Do you REALLY think the publishers and editors of the Times and WaPo have no influence on the reporting side of their publications? At the VERY least my suspicion is they downplay or simply don't report facts detrimental to their left leaning positions just like Fox does with the right. It would be hard to ignore unless I was obtuse. Of course I see their criticisms and many of them are valid. But Fox is one lone opposing right leaning network that DOES have its share of Trump critics. Shep Smith, Juan Williams, Jessica Tartoff, Ed Henry, Chris Wallace, Gillian Turner, Marie Harff and the late Charles Krauthammer (among others) have all been critical of Trump during his time in office. No. They are relatively fair and balanced. Left leaning but less so than NBC, MSNBC, CNN currently. You're right it doesn't. This is also a strawman. Nobody besides you has mentioned the above publications as part of a "left wing cabal". But lets be honest...the influence these publications yield is tiny in comparision to the behemoths of Fox, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, NYT, and WaPo.
B-bob, you can pooh pooh this as a nothing burger all you want. No amount of attacking Wikileaks as a source of the information can change the fact that this is a DNC email and that is not in dispute. What's also not in dispute is the subject of the email is "WaPo Party" and the DNC Senior advisor Anu Rangappa wrote to the DNC national fundraiser director: "They (WaPo representatives) aren't going to give us a price per ticket and do not want their party listed in any package we are selling to donors. If we let them know we have donors in town who will be at the debate, we can add them to the list for the party" "Great - we were never going to list since the lawyers told us we cannot do it," Kaplan wrote back. (Presumably because its unethical or illegal)
