Jump to content

DOJ Appoints Robert Mueller as Special Counsel - Jerome Corsi Rejects Plea Deal


Recommended Posts

On 12/22/2018 at 11:12 PM, Deranged Rhino said:


Follow-up:
 

Supreme Court could act on mystery Mueller grand jury case
Foreign-owned company could have to pay fines

The Supreme Court could now decide as early as Wednesday afternoon whether an unnamed foreign-owned company will have to pay daily fines for avoiding a grand jury subpoena related to Robert Mueller's special counsel investigation.

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

It doesn’t matter.

 

Plan A. Slime Trump in the campaign so he loses. 

 

Plan B. Resist and pursue Russia collusion so his administration is hamstrung and can’t drive their agenda. 

 

Plan C. Retake the House. 

 

Plan D. Eliminate POTUS and VP.  Speaker Pelosi becomes POTUS 46. 

 

She he was never supposed to lose. 

 

She was NEVER supposed to lose. 

 

SHE WAS NEVER SUPPOSED TO LOSE!

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

14 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 


"but our sources say"... who is the source? Clyde the janitor? There was a time when I felt all journalist sources needed to be protected so they would not be afraid to inform investigative reports about the truth of a dangerous situation. Of course, there was also a time when I thought most reporters were journalists. These days, I am not so certain most of the press doesn't make up lies and just print "sources say". 

If this a lawsuit against McClatchy by Mitchell? 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


"but our sources say"... who is the source? Clyde the janitor? There was a time when I felt all journalist sources needed to be protected so they would not be afraid to inform investigative reports about the truth of a dangerous situation. Of course, there was also a time when I thought most reporters were journalists. These days, I am not so certain most of the press doesn't make up lies and just print "sources say". 

If this a lawsuit against McClatchy by Mitchell? 

 

You have it backwards.  Journalists, for the most part, used to be reporters.  Now, reporters seem to be very few and far between.

 

We need some good old fashioned reporters again who simply REPORT the facts as completely as they can and leave it to the reader (or listener or viewer) to interpret those facts. 

 

We don't need them to select how to best support the narrative of their journal.  Missing the days when "yellow journalism" was a bad thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

You have it backwards.  Journalists, for the most part, used to be reporters.  Now, reporters seem to be very few and far between.

 

We need some good old fashioned reporters again who simply REPORT the facts as completely as they can and leave it to the reader (or listener or viewer) to interpret those facts. 

 

We don't need them to select how to best support the narrative of their journal.  Missing the days when "yellow journalism" was a bad thing.

 

Not as much as you'd think, though.  Edward R. Murrow showed bias in his reporting (albeit against Hitler and McCarthy, so no one cared, and he did allow McCarthy a half-hour rebuttal on his show), and ultimately lost his job complaining that his producers didn't allow him to show enough bias.  And Cronkite's Vietnam reporting was decidedly, intentionally, purposefully slanted.  

 

It's always been present...it's just usually not nearly as bad as it is now.  Even Civil War reporting was less angry and biased than news is today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DC Tom said:

It's always been present...it's just usually not nearly as bad as it is now.  Even Civil War reporting was less angry and biased than news is today.

 

That's just because Johnny Reb wasn't orange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


"but our sources say"... who is the source? Clyde the janitor? There was a time when I felt all journalist sources needed to be protected so they would not be afraid to inform investigative reports about the truth of a dangerous situation. Of course, there was also a time when I thought most reporters were journalists. These days, I am not so certain most of the press doesn't make up lies and just print "sources say". 

If this a lawsuit against McClatchy by Mitchell? 

 

The article posted near the top of this page defending Flynn is also anonymously sourced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

The article posted near the top of this page defending Flynn is also anonymously sourced.

What a crockofshit answer. There are more than one articles related to Flynn near the top of the page. Why are you afraid to be specific?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Saturday, January 05, 2019 at 5:11 PM, DC Tom said:

 

Not as much as you'd think, though.  Edward R. Murrow showed bias in his reporting (albeit against Hitler and McCarthy, so no one cared, and he did allow McCarthy a half-hour rebuttal on his show), and ultimately lost his job complaining that his producers didn't allow him to show enough bias.  And Cronkite's Vietnam reporting was decidedly, intentionally, purposefully slanted.  

 

It's always been present...it's just usually not nearly as bad as it is now.  Even Civil War reporting was less angry and biased than news is today.

 

The bolded being the key.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

What a crockofshit answer. There are more than one articles related to Flynn near the top of the page. Why are you afraid to be specific?

 

The one that Rhino posted

Maybe now you can figure it out, considering that his post actually stated that it came from unnamed sources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

The one that Rhino posted

Maybe now you can figure it out, considering that his post actually stated that it came from unnamed sources.

I  don't need to try to figure out what you mean, you dumbass. If you want discussion then you should make it easy to have a discussion with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

I  don't need to try to figure out what you mean, you dumbass. If you want discussion then you should make it easy to have a discussion with you.

 

"I'm not going to have a discussion with you if you make it difficult!"

 

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...