Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-22-2017, 04:55 PM
 
14,489 posts, read 6,076,341 times
Reputation: 6842

Advertisements

Quote:
These reporters and networks have been named in the WikiLeaks to have colluded with the DNC or Hillary campaign during the 2016 election cycle:

ABC – Cecilia Vega
ABC - David Muir
ABC – Diane Sawyer
ABC – George Stephanoplous
ABC – Jon Karl
ABC – Liz Kreutz
AP – Julie Pace
AP – Ken Thomas
AP – Lisa Lerer
AURN – April Ryan
Bloomberg – Jennifer Epstein
Bloomberg – John Heillman
Bloomberg/MSNBC – Jonathan Alter
Bloomberg – Mark Halperin
Buzzfeed – Ben Smith
Buzzfeed – Ruby Cramer
CBS – Gayle King
CBS – John Dickerson
CBS – Norah O'Donnell
CBS – Steve Chagaris
CBS – Vicki Gordon
CNBC – John Harwood
CNN – Brianna Keilar
CNN – Dan Merica
CNN – David Chailan
CNN – Erin Burnett
CNN – Gloria Borger
CNN – Jake Tapper
CNN – Jeff Zeleny
CNN - Jeff Zucker
CNN – John Berman
CNN – Kate Bouldan
CNN – Maria Cardona
CNN – Mark Preston
CNN – Sam Feist
Daily Beast – Jackie Kucinich
GPG – Mike Feldman
HuffPo – Amanda Terkel
HuffPo – Arianna Huffington
HuffPo – Sam Stein
HuffPo – Whitney Snyder
LAT – Evan Handler
LAT – Mike Memoli
McClatchy – Anita Kumar
MORE – Betsy Fisher Martin
MSNBC – Alex Seitz-Wald
MSNBC – Alex Wagner
MSNBC – Andrea Mitchell
MSNBC - Beth Fouhy
MSNBC – Ed Schultz
MSNBC – Joe Scarborough
MSNBC – Mika Brzezinski
MSNBC – Phil Griffin
MSNBC – Rachel Maddow
MSNBC – Rachel Racusen
MSNBC – Thomas Roberts
National Journal – Emily Schultheis
NBC – Chuck Todd
NBC – Mark Murray
NBC – Savannah Gutherie
New Yorker – David Remnick
New Yorker – Ryan Liza
NPR – Mike Oreskes
NPR – Tamara Keith
NY Post – Geofe Earl
NYT – Amy Chozik
NYT – Carolyn Ryan
NYT – Gail Collins
NYT – John Harwoodje
NYT – Jonathan Martin
NYT – Maggie Haberman
NYT – Pat Healey
PBS – Charlie Rose
People – Sandra Sobieraj Westfall
Politico – Annie Karni
Politico – Gabe Debenedetti
Politico – Glenn Thrush
Politico – Kenneth Vogel
Politico – Mike Allen
Reuters – Amanda Becker
Tina Brown – Tina Brown
The Hill – Amie Parnes
Univision – Maria-Elena Salinas
Vice – Alyssa Mastramonoco
Vox – Jon Allen
WaPo – Anne Gearan
WaPo – Greg Sargent
WSJ – Laura Meckler
WSJ – Peter Nicholas
WSJ – Colleen McCain Nelson
Yahoo – Matt Bai
The Top 100 Most Damaging WikiLeaks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-22-2017, 04:59 PM
 
Location: North Carolina
6,957 posts, read 8,464,288 times
Reputation: 6777
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova View Post
The liberal media never reports what Trump has done for the American people.. they are too busy on a witch hunt trying to find a crime or collusion which is not even a crime.. they have been on the same story line for months and months.. fake news networks.
The truth is that Trump has done nothing for the American People and any remotely positive thing he has done ...tends to benefit him and his family a lot more more than the average American!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2017, 05:01 PM
 
17,273 posts, read 9,526,371 times
Reputation: 16468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova View Post
The liberal media never reports what Trump has done for the American people.. they are too busy on a witch hunt trying to find a crime or collusion which is not even a crime.. they have been on the same story line for months and months.. fake news networks.
What has he done that hasn't been covered?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2017, 05:02 PM
 
Location: Not far from Fairbanks, AK
20,276 posts, read 37,049,222 times
Reputation: 16391
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
The first thing to go in a nation that is no longer free is the press. Dictators don't like criticism and prefer to monopolize the messaging their people can hear.

It seems to me that conservatives will accept no criticism of Donald Trump and would go to any lengths to dismantle the ability of media organizations to do so.

Sure, they say that they just don't like the "liberal media" and would accept one that is "fair"...which I take to mean "doesn't criticize Donald Trump."

Look, I don't like Breitbart, FOX, or Infowars, but I support their right to continue to exist, because I think that we're overall better off with a press corps capable of asking questions independent of government than without it.

I see no indication that Donald Trump has any respect for the role of a free press in our society, and I genuinely believe he would dismantle it entirely if he could. Do conservatives understand the value of a free press not beholden to a President, or do they really wish to do away with it?
There is not such thing as a "free" press these days. Everything is about political power, and in reality the press does not criticize Democrats, just Republicans, conservatives, and libertarians. When the Democrats are in charge, then it's "government press." The only free press these days is the news articles you don't have to pay for to read

There used to be investigative reporting, but that not longer exists in the news media.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2017, 05:02 PM
 
33,865 posts, read 16,906,563 times
Reputation: 17135
I'd like an independent press. Cronkite is dead, though, So how? He would not have a tingle up his leg for any POTUS, as Chris Matthews did. He would not feed questions ahead at a debate ala Crowley.

The independent press committed suicide by its actions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2017, 05:08 PM
 
1,348 posts, read 789,195 times
Reputation: 1615
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
So there you go. Why didn't the liberal press instead collude with Hillary to suppress it? It was covered to death, as it should be. And I recall a lot of investigative articles into her foundation as well.

Tell me one thing that is acceptable to criticize about Trump.
Something you don't understand is that the media intentionally soft-pedaled their coverage of HRC's transgressions. Example: they kept calling it an email issue. That was to intentionally confuse people and also to cause them to think it's not a big deal because we all have email. It's the same as Loretta Lynch telling Comey he should refer to the investigation as "a matter".

It was many MONTHS, if not a year, before people grasped that she had intentionally decided to personally CONTROL the email information flow of Sec of State of the USA by installing private equipment off-site from Govt property. Many people didn't follow the story all that time so continued to believe it was just some email stuff. The press counts on that as well.

In other words, their coverage was substantially fake. And I kept waiting to hear them question what the President knew about her rogue set-up. But, I never heard them delve into that. They covered for him.

Anyone can criticize Trump, or any other President, for anything they want that has a shred of merit.
And by the same token, anyone who does NOT hold a President accountable or want to question and investigate something as obvious as the Prez allowing the top diplomat of the USA to operate outside official channels is nothing but a massive, partisan hypocrite. And should be ignored.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2017, 05:10 PM
 
17,273 posts, read 9,526,371 times
Reputation: 16468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travel Crazy View Post
Something you don't understand is that the media intentionally soft-pedaled their coverage of HRC's transgressions. Example: they kept calling it an email issue. That was to intentionally confuse people and also to cause them to think it's not a big deal because we all have email. It's the same as Loretta Lynch telling Comey he should refer to the investigation as "a matter".

It was many MONTHS, if not a year, before people grasped that she had intentionally decided to personally CONTROL the email information flow of Sec of State of the USA by installing private equipment off-site from Govt property. Many people didn't follow the story all that time so continued to believe it was just some email stuff. The press counts on that as well.

In other words, their coverage was substantially fake. And I kept waiting to hear them question what the President knew about her rogue set-up. But, I never heard them delve into that. They covered for him.

Anyone can criticize Trump, or any other President, for anything they want that has a shred of merit.
And by the same token, anyone who does NOT hold a President accountable or want to question and investigate something as obvious as the Prez allowing the top diplomat of the USA to operate outside official channels is nothing but a massive, partisan hypocrite. And should be ignored.
So it wasn't about her emails? Odd considering that's the phrase everyone including cons were screaming.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2017, 05:11 PM
 
1,168 posts, read 1,222,076 times
Reputation: 1435
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
The first thing to go in a nation that is no longer free is the press. Dictators don't like criticism and prefer to monopolize the messaging their people can hear.

It seems to me that conservatives will accept no criticism of Donald Trump and would go to any lengths to dismantle the ability of media organizations to do so.

Sure, they say that they just don't like the "liberal media" and would accept one that is "fair"...which I take to mean "doesn't criticize Donald Trump."

Look, I don't like Breitbart, FOX, or Infowars, but I support their right to continue to exist, because I think that we're overall better off with a press corps capable of asking questions independent of government than without it.

I see no indication that Donald Trump has any respect for the role of a free press in our society, and I genuinely believe he would dismantle it entirely if he could. Do conservatives understand the value of a free press not beholden to a President, or do they really wish to do away with it?
The press these days is not independent. They are biased and provide little more than propaganda.
Then call it news.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2017, 05:12 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
15,154 posts, read 11,598,825 times
Reputation: 8625
You say "Independent" press. Independent of what? Kind of hard to be independent when the vast majority of so called journalists openly identify as radical left wing democrats.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2017, 05:13 PM
 
Location: Not far from Fairbanks, AK
20,276 posts, read 37,049,222 times
Reputation: 16391
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
I'd like an independent press. Cronkite is dead, though, So how? He would not have a tingle up his leg for any POTUS, as Chris Matthews did. He would not feed questions ahead at a debate ala Crowley.

The independent press committed suicide by its actions.
The old reporters would go out there and pound the pavement to dig (investigate) whatever news they had in mind to bring to the public. Nowadays journalists come out of college already indoctrinated about one side of the political spectrum. Nowadays they don't have to investigate, but to disseminate the news somebody else has told, and all of this can be done while sitting in front of a computer. Once investigative reporting does not longer take place, anything can be fake news.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:05 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top