Jump to content

The Media's Portrayal of Trump and His Presidency


Nanker

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

As an independent it is hilarious how Trump people go from calm to purple-anger in 2 second flat.  I think they call them Snowflakes 

an unwarranted sense of entitlement, or is easily offended and unable to deal with opposing opinions.

 

Yeah, you're about as "independent" as gator...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, garybusey said:

So far there are 97 pages of right wing whining about Trump being treated unfair by the media. Boo hoo. Will you dweebs make it 100 pages?

 

and every third page, one of you simpletons writes the same asinine post (as above)

 

Demonstrable examples of poor journalism and outright bias are given...................and since you certainly cannot refute it ,

 

you fall back to the weak-ass "Oh look, they're whining silliness"..............:lol: 

 

Like night follows day, libs thumb through their (worn-down) playbook

 

No one believes those lines anymore.......................................see 2016

 

 

.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2018 at 8:25 PM, B-Man said:

Meanwhile, “CNN Exploits Holocaust, Suggests ICE Agents are Nazis,” Joel Pollack writes at Big Journalism:

 

While it is brutally tiresome to hear leftists refer to everyone who disagrees with them as Hitler or Nazis or the Gestapo, we can take a little breath knowing that they've finally stopped calling everyone a racist.

 

So that's something, I guess.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

While it is brutally tiresome to hear leftists refer to everyone who disagrees with them as Hitler or Nazis or the Gestapo, we can take a little breath knowing that they've finally stopped calling everyone a racist.

 

So that's something, I guess.

I suppose, although I always just assumed that they had escalated, and assumed they were using the Nazi references to imply the highest most extreme form of racism.

 

I take my little breath knowing that they've turned the volume on the racism charges all the way up to 11, and can't take it any further than "Nazi".

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

I suppose, although I always just assumed that they had escalated, and assumed they were using the Nazi references to imply the highest most extreme form of racism.

 

I take my little breath knowing that they've turned the volume on the racism charges all the way up to 11, and can't take it any further than "Nazi".

 

Look on the bright side: without President Clinton, we escaped four years of every criticism of her being blamed on sexism and misogyny.

 

Sidenote: racism is making a comeback as I was reading today how CNN suggested Sen. John Kennedy was racist yesterday for suggesting to Zuck that Facebook's user agreement feels like it was written in Swahili.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

JOHN HINDERAKER: Washington Lies In A Parallel Universe.

In the real world, the Trump administration is humming along. Its domestic policies are sensible and have been remarkably successful in a short time. Abroad, the administration has pursued American interests, again with considerable success. It has also made progress, at least, at cleaning up the appalling messes left behind by Barack Obama in Iran, Syria, Russia and North Korea. By any objective standard, the Trump administration is, so far, a major improvement on its predecessor.

 

But our “news” organizations have little interest in any of those topics. They are obsessed with tweets, with ten-year-old liaisons, with non-existent collusion and with investigations of nothing that apparently will never end. In their parallel world, Trump is such a failure that he might as well quit and save the Democrats the trouble of impeaching him. (For what? is a question that rarely seems to be asked.)

 

Take yesterday’s press briefing by Sarah Sanders. As always, she began by describing the substantive work going on in the White House that day. As always, the press corps ignored such mundane topics and went straight to la-la land.

 

 

Well, yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The media outlets like the Washington Post and NY Times, CNN etc. are the truly good American institutions exposing a corrupt, ignorant President who is damaging our nation. That the "base" is outraged that they actually report his incredible incompetence and don't bow down and worship his bigoted nonsense shows why our founders put the first amendment into the Constitution. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

The media outlets like the Washington Post and NY Times, CNN etc. are the truly good American institutions exposing a corrupt, ignorant President who is damaging our nation. That the "base" is outraged that they actually report his incredible incompetence and don't bow down and worship his bigoted nonsense shows why our founders put the first amendment into the Constitution. 

 

 

 

5lytn.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Koko78 said:

 

How about honestly, for a change?

About what specifically? Did some section of the NYTimes report something wrong and you are using that to say everything is lies? 

 

I get the slant or what they choose to cover my irk some people, but what lies are they telling about Trump who is a proven liar, bigot, con artist and incompetent? Those are all demonstrably true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

About what specifically? Did some section of the NYTimes report something wrong and you are using that to say everything is lies? 

 

I get the slant or what they choose to cover my irk some people, but what lies are they telling about Trump who is a proven liar, bigot, con artist and incompetent? Those are all demonstrably true. 

 

Oh, so we're pretending that the NY Times is now a bastion of fair and impartial journalism rather than Democrats with by-lines?

 

5lytn.jpg

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Oh, so we're pretending that the NY Times is now a bastion of fair and impartial journalism rather than Democrats with by-lines?

 

5lytn.jpg

What lies or untruths are they telling? 

 

Seems like they come out with a completely truthful story and you guys act like its a lie 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

What lies or untruths are they telling? 

 

Seems like they come out with a completely truthful story and you guys act like its a lie 

 

When a "news" outlet only selects half the story to tell, they're not being honest. They're being DNC propagandists.

 

However, if you want a specific example: they lied about the intelligence community fully supporting the now-debunked Steele dossier. They took months to print a retraction, and guess what? The retraction wasn't a featured story like their false assertions were.

 

But hey, at least we still have the centrists at CNN telling us all about how Trump had TWO scoops of ice cream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Koko78 said:

 

When a "news" outlet only selects half the story to tell, they're not being honest. They're being DNC propagandists.

 

However, if you want a specific example: they lied about the intelligence community fully supporting the now-debunked Steele dossier. They took months to print a retraction, and guess what? The retraction wasn't a featured story like their false assertions were.

 

But hey, at least we still have the centrists at CNN telling us all about how Trump had TWO scoops of ice cream.

I'm a news junkie, I don't recall the Times or anyone saying the intelligence community fully supported the Steele dossier. When the F did that happen? And when did it become "debunked"? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

I'm a news junkie, I don't recall the Times or anyone saying the intelligence community fully supported the Steele dossier. When the F did that happen? And when did it become "debunked"? 

 

Apparently not.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

I'm a news junkie and I don't recall the Times or anyone saying the intelligence community fully supported the Steele dossier. When the F did that happen? And when did it become "debunked"? 

Maybe you were just high every time someone said that 17 different agencies were in agreement with the assessment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

I'm a news junkie, I don't recall the Times or anyone saying the intelligence community fully supported the Steele dossier. When the F did that happen? And when did it become "debunked"? 

 

For 7 months they touted "All 17 intel agencies agree" with the ICA report released January 6th, 2017... 

 

Then issued this retraction... 7 months later. 

Quote


A White House Memo article on Monday about President Trump’s deflections and denials about Russia referred incorrectly to the source of an intelligence assessment that said Russia orchestrated hacking attacks during last year’s presidential election. The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.

 

http://archive.is/ndda2#selection-215.0-219.532

 

Try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

For 7 months they touted "All 17 intel agencies agree" with the ICA report released January 6th, 2017... 

 

Then issued this retraction... 7 months later. 

http://archive.is/ndda2#selection-215.0-219.532

 

Try again.

Ok, the Drug Enforcement Agency didn't conclude that and neither did the Coast Guard Agency, but while the report is not entirely on target, it was still correct. 

 

The main agencies did make the assessment CIA and FBI among others. 

 

So the right wing propaganda machine is splitting hairs and crying bias. They are not being honest. 

14 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Maybe you were just high every time someone said that 17 different agencies were in agreement with the assessment.

Back to being worthless again? 

 

You add nothing. Board Troll you are 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

Really?  No one thought to quote him directly referencing an IC "consensus"?

 

That required digging through his old stupidity and I didn't have the stomach for it. :lol:

6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Ok, the Drug Enforcement Agency didn't conclude that and neither did the Coast Guard Agency, but while the report is not entirely on target, it was still correct. 

 

No, your statement is proven to be false. The one where you said you never remembered the Times reporting something they clearly did (for seven months).

 

You could just admit that - but nah, Gator is gonna Gator til the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

You could just admit that - but nah, Gator is gonna Gator til the end.

 

That's why I wasn't going to do the work for him. We all know he was just going to dismiss it out of hand and claim more convenient memory lapses.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

That required digging through his old stupidity and I didn't have the stomach for it. :lol:

 

No, your statement is proven to be false. The one where you said you never remembered the Times reporting something they clearly did (for seven months).

 

You could just admit that - but nah, Gator is gonna Gator til the end.

Actually you are wrong. Koko said the Steele dossier, not the intelligence report on Russian interference. You guys are getting your propaganda points mixed up. Which is actually funny 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dumbass, the Steele dossier was covered in the ICA. If "all 17 intel agencies" signed off on the ICA like the Times said (and lied about), they also signed off on all the material included in the ICA which the Steele dossier was. 

 

It helps to read before you expound. A lesson I still hope you'll learn one day.

 

You're wrong. 

 

But that's not breaking news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

Dumbass, the Steele dossier was covered in the ICA. If "all 17 intel agencies" signed off on the ICA like the Times said (and lied about), they also signed off on all the material included in the ICA which the Steele dossier was. 

 

It helps to read before you expound. A lesson I still hope you'll learn one day.

Not true at all! That is total Bull Sh it and you know it. 

 

 

Try again! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tiberius said:

Op ed :huh:  Really? 

 

I know you won't read the primary source material that makes it clear. I skipped a step for you. 

 

The ICA, by Clapper and Brennan's own testimony, was based in part on the Steele dossier and its "merit" (which we now know was never established). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, njbuff said:

 

I think she enjoys laying the smack down on those “so called” hateful journalists.

 

Spicer ran from it, she hits back.

 

you couldn't design a more perfect and effective person to do this job better than her

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is CNN................................

 

 

Quote

f053ce187d9fe1393f4684ca92c89d74_bigger.Brian StelterVerified account @brianstelter

FollowFollow @brianstelter
A source familiar with the president's thinking tells @GloriaBorger that Trump is "pissed, flailing and upset..." More upset than ever... His anger is "beyond what anyone can imagine."

 

 
 
Wow this is as shocking as the last time someone reported this,
 
which was just yesterday
 
and the day before that
 
and the day before that
 
and the day before that
 
and the day before that …
 
.
Edited by B-Man
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, B-Man said:

This is CNN................................

 

 

 
 
Wow this is as shocking as the last time someone reported this,
 
which was just yesterday
 
and the day before that
 
and the day before that
 
and the day before that
 
and the day before that …
 
.

 

That little George Costanza is this most disengenuous pricks imaginable in MSM today. And an ultra-annoying voice to boot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...