Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Politicalchat.org discussion boards > Conspiracy theory corner

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #391  
Old 01-13-2017, 10:05 AM
finnbow's Avatar
finnbow finnbow is offline
Reformed Know-Nothing
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dondilion View Post
With intelligence and the public, often one has to wait until twenty , fifty years to know what's what.

It is the very nature of the discipline.

Additionally, right now we have intel community which is highly politicized.

The head of the FBI Comey is about to be drawn and quartered.

Clapper of NSA fame is shown to be a liar.

Under Obama the CIA and the State Department have been at each other.

It would just foolish to accept anything the intel community is pushing as gospel.

One should practice a healthy dose of skepticism when we are dealing with public intel.
Indeed. OTOH, it does not logically follow that if a news organization correctly reports the contents of an intelligence report (which itself may or may not be proven correct through the lens of history) that their reporting is fake news.

If that's your standard, then the press should discontinue all coverage of Trump as it has been shown that ~75% of his assertions are false (his first press conference in 6 months contained ~15 examples of lies or shaded truth). However, IMO, even Trump's lies, unbelievable as they are (to me, anyways), are still news.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
Reply With Quote
  #392  
Old 01-13-2017, 12:29 PM
whell's Avatar
whell whell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow View Post
Indeed. OTOH, it does not logically follow that if a news organization correctly reports the contents of an intelligence report (which itself may or may not be proven correct through the lens of history) that their reporting is fake news.
OK, last time on this.

If that was all CNN did, Finn, you'd have a point. But that's not what happened. The "news" contained in that so called intelligence report had been making the rounds for a months. No one in the mainstream news - to their credit - opted to report on it because the info in it was not credible / verifiable.

So, a 5th estate news rag finally decides to publish it - in an effort to keep the "Trump / Russian connection " story alive. CNN takes the occasion of that publication as a green light to not only report on the document's release, they also spin it to suggest that it contains "compromising info" about Trump, knowing that the info was not verifiable. They then devoted hours of TV time to blabber about it.

CNN's days as a credible news organization - if they ever had any - are over.
Reply With Quote
  #393  
Old 01-13-2017, 12:49 PM
finnbow's Avatar
finnbow finnbow is offline
Reformed Know-Nothing
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell View Post
OK, last time on this.

If that was all CNN did, Finn, you'd have a point. But that's not what happened. The "news" contained in that so called intelligence report had been making the rounds for a months. No one in the mainstream news - to their credit - opted to report on it because the info in it was not credible / verifiable.
Funny that you chose to skip over the very instance of "fake news" that you were hyperventilating about for most of this thread (the NYTimes article) which proved to be true.

As for CNN, they never published the contents of the unverified dossier, nor stated that its contents were verified. They truthfully reported that Trump (and Obama) were briefed on it. This, like the NYTimes article you took issue with earlier, is also true. The Times and CNN may have said something you're uncomfortable with, but their reports were true. You can argue whether Trump and Obama being briefed on the dossier was newsworthy, but you cannot argue that they didn't receive the briefing (as CNN truthfully reported).

It seems to me that the real issue here is that the MSM reports news items that you wish weren't true. That being the case, maybe you should continue getting your news from a Trump-approved source like Sean Hannity, Breitbart, InfoWars, Rush Limbaugh and the National Enquirer.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.

Last edited by finnbow; 01-13-2017 at 01:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #394  
Old 01-13-2017, 12:50 PM
Rajoo's Avatar
Rajoo Rajoo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Sierras
Posts: 14,151
So this unsubstantiated report had been circulating for months till the US Intelligence heads decided to inform the POTUS and POTUS elect about the existence of this report, and at which time this became news. And then CNN decided to make hay with it and what's wrong with that? It's what media does these days, sell.

You have the option of switching channels to a news source of your liking. Besides why should any MSM, especially CNN show any respect for Trump?
__________________
White Christian Nationalism:
Freedom for us, order for everyone else, and violence for those who transgress.
Reply With Quote
  #395  
Old 01-13-2017, 02:39 PM
whell's Avatar
whell whell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow View Post
Funny that you chose to skip over the very instance of "fake news" that you were hyperventilating about for most of this thread (the NYTimes article) which proved to be true.
I've dealt with the NY Times article several times in this thread. I was responding to YOUR post about CNN's reporting. Please try to stay on topic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow View Post
As for CNN, they never published the contents of the unverified dossier, nor stated that its contents were verified. .
Wrong again. They referenced the document and asserted that the document's contents contained information that could potentially be used to compromise Trump. They KNEW the information was not verifiable.

As far as your claim that CNN didn't report on the contents: they used Buzzfeed for this. CNN's article They did everything but link to the PDF of the article on Buzzfeed. They also treated all of this info like it was something new. They failed to reference that the info had been around for months and that no one had been able to verify the info in all that time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow View Post
It seems to me that the real issue here is that the MSM reports news items that you wish weren't true.
Because its not true. They know it wasn't true but they ran with it anyway. And then they spent countless hours of airtime talking about it to try to give it credibility.

The real issue is that the pragmatist in you is cheering for this crap to continue for the next four years.
Reply With Quote
  #396  
Old 01-13-2017, 02:42 PM
whell's Avatar
whell whell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rajoo View Post
So this unsubstantiated report had been circulating for months till the US Intelligence heads decided to inform the POTUS and POTUS elect about the existence of this report, and at which time this became news. And then CNN decided to make hay with it and what's wrong with that? It's what media does these days, sell.

You have the option of switching channels to a news source of your liking. Besides why should any MSM, especially CNN show any respect for Trump?
Yup, sell. Even if its crap, sell it. Damage folks in the process? Who cares if it sells. Sounds like you're advocating for unbridled capitalism in the media. That's interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #397  
Old 01-13-2017, 03:36 PM
finnbow's Avatar
finnbow finnbow is offline
Reformed Know-Nothing
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell View Post
I've dealt with the NY Times article several times in this thread. I was responding to YOUR post about CNN's reporting. Please try to stay on topic.

Wrong again. They referenced the document and asserted that the document's contents contained information that could potentially be used to compromise Trump. They KNEW the information was not verifiable.

As far as your claim that CNN didn't report on the contents: they used Buzzfeed for this. CNN's article They did everything but link to the PDF of the article on Buzzfeed. They also treated all of this info like it was something new. They failed to reference that the info had been around for months and that no one had been able to verify the info in all that time.

Because its not true. They know it wasn't true but they ran with it anyway. And then they spent countless hours of airtime talking about it to try to give it credibility.

The real issue is that the pragmatist in you is cheering for this crap to continue for the next four years.
Yet again, you missed the entire point. Tell you what - I'll stop making you look like a complete (f)(t)ool if you change the thread title to either:

News Articles I Wish Weren't True, or
News Articles Rush Limbaugh Tells Me are Fake

Here's your "fake news" CNN article. Find me something/anything untrue or fake in it, Kellyanne.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.

Last edited by finnbow; 01-13-2017 at 03:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #398  
Old 01-13-2017, 04:03 PM
Dondilion's Avatar
Dondilion Dondilion is offline
Jigsawed
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rajoo View Post
So this unsubstantiated report had been circulating for months till the US Intelligence heads decided to inform the POTUS and POTUS elect about the existence of this report, and at which time this became news. And then CNN decided to make hay with it and what's wrong with that? It's what media does these days, sell.

You have the option of switching channels to a news source of your liking. Besides why should any MSM, especially CNN show any respect for Trump?
Good reason why a substantive and substantial section of the public ignore them.

Anyhow for CNN and Newsweek--their body of work indicate a Soros agenda.

And BTW over the pond the BBC still cannot believe the public did not follow them on Brexit.
Reply With Quote
  #399  
Old 01-13-2017, 04:18 PM
Rajoo's Avatar
Rajoo Rajoo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Sierras
Posts: 14,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell View Post
Yup, sell. Even if its crap, sell it. Damage folks in the process? Who cares if it sells. Sounds like you're advocating for unbridled capitalism in the media. That's interesting.
Whom, in this instance is damaged?
__________________
White Christian Nationalism:
Freedom for us, order for everyone else, and violence for those who transgress.
Reply With Quote
  #400  
Old 01-13-2017, 04:19 PM
Rajoo's Avatar
Rajoo Rajoo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Sierras
Posts: 14,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dondilion View Post
Good reason why a substantive and substantial section of the public ignore them.

Anyhow for CNN and Newsweek--their body of work indicate a Soros agenda.

And BTW over the pond the BBC still cannot believe the public did not follow them on Brexit.
If so, no harm no foul then, but that's not the agenda whell is pushing is it?
__________________
White Christian Nationalism:
Freedom for us, order for everyone else, and violence for those who transgress.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:31 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.