President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Maximus]

VNHIV1M.jpg

[Northwestcoug]

I just read the transcript of the Trump press conference. He is such an embarrassment. And his staff or whoever applausing at his attacks on the press, that's real presidential Trump. What a joke.

[Uncle Ted]

I just read the transcript of the Trump press conference. He is such an embarrassment. And his staff or whoever applausing at his attacks on the press, that's real presidential Trump. What a joke.

Seems that Drumpf is not going to give CNN the time of day...

The next four years will be interesting.

[Uncle Ted]

From the drift of the conversation, I didn't want to chance it. I forgot my cell phone today so I couldn't google it on the phone.

If what was reported by CNN last night is false they will have a lot of egg on their faces. Their people were all over it and quoting unnamed intelligence sources.

CNN had a lot of egg on their faces already when it was disclosed that their paid contributor, Donna Brazile, was leaking debate questions to Hillary Clinton. I am not sure if there is any more room for egg on their faces. All credibility as an unbiased news organization went out the window then especially given that little was done to identify how exactly Brazile was leaking the debate questions (e.g., who else at CNN was involved). Brazile, for her part in all this, was reward the DNC chair position. (Obviously the dems don't give a rat's ass if the debates are fair and honest.) What little credibility CNN had before this may be gone (they were recently surveyed to be the least trusted news network).

[byu71]

CNN had a lot of egg on their faces already when it was disclosed that their paid contributor, Donna Brazile, was leaking debate questions to Hillary Clinton. I am not sure if there is any more room for egg on their faces. All credibility as an unbiased news organization went out the window then especially given that little was done to identify how exactly Brazile was leaking the debate questions (e.g., who else at CNN was involved). Brazile, for her part in all this, was reward the DNC chair position. (Obviously the dems don't give a rat's ass if the debates are fair and honest.) What little credibility CNN had before this may be gone (they were recently surveyed to be the least trusted news network).

It was humorous last night watching them over and over again defending themselves. They aren't like Buzzfeed because they didn't give details and stated they couldn't confirm the rumors.

I watched the panel discussion Tuesday night which included the distinguished Carl Berstein who is an avid Trump hater. As indicated by my post yesterday, after watching I was convinced Russia had dirt on Trump. For them to claim they weren't spreading a fake story is laughable. That said they may be following the Trump marketing model. I haven't watched CNN much for a while. I watched again last night. They are gaining viewership. I suspect they are going to be cutting into MSNBC's viewership.

[Northwestcoug]

It was humorous last night watching them over and over again defending themselves. They aren't like Buzzfeed because they didn't give details and stated they couldn't confirm the rumors.

I watched the panel discussion Tuesday night which included the distinguished Carl Berstein who is an avid Trump hater. As indicated by my post yesterday, after watching I was convinced Russia had dirt on Trump. For them to claim they weren't spreading a fake story is laughable. That said they may be following the Trump marketing model. I haven't watched CNN much for a while. I watched again last night. They are gaining viewership. I suspect they are going to be cutting into MSNBC's viewership.

You do realize that there was in fact a dossier reported, right? How was CNN reporting a fake story?

[byu71]

You do realize that there was in fact a dossier reported, right? How was CNN reporting a fake story?

LOL, you sound like CNN. You do realize I said they didn't report the fake story. They reported there was a story out there that could harm Trump. The way they discussed it made me believe they (Russians) had dirt on them. A collegue here at work asked me if I had seen CNN the night before and Trump could be up shit creek.

Maybe the two of us were too stupid to realize what CNN was really saying.

[Northwestcoug]

LOL, you sound like CNN. You do realize I said they didn't report the fake story. They reported there was a story out there that could harm Trump. The way they discussed it made me believe they (Russians) had dirt on them. A collegue here at work asked me if I had seen CNN the night before and Trump could be up shit creek.

Maybe the two of us were too stupid to realize what CNN was really saying.

For them to claim they weren't spreading a fake story is laughable.

You were referring to CNN here, right? Were they or weren't they spreading a fake story?

[snowcat]

Interesting take on Goldengate:

The Deep State Goes to War with President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/11/...as-dems-cheer/

IN JANUARY, 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation of the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11 era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even further.

This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”

Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and traumatic election loss as well as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced further and further from reason with each passing day, are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry and damaging those behaviors might be.

The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest. There are a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combatting those threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional legal challenges to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil disobedience. All of those strategies have periodically proven themselves effective in times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.

But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it.

Beyond all that, there is no bigger favor that Trump opponents can do for him than attacking him with such lowly, shabby, obvious shams, recruiting large media outlets to lead the way. When it comes time to expose actual Trump corruption and criminality, who is going to believe the people and institutions who have demonstrated they are willing to endorse any assertions no matter how factually baseless, who deploy any journalistic tactic no matter how unreliable and removed from basic means of ensuring accuracy?

[byu71]

You were referring to CNN here, right? Were they or weren't they spreading a fake story?

OK, I don't have a lawyer here making sure I state it correctly. CNN spread the possibility of the Russians having dirt on Donald. That particular possibility proved to be untrue.

[Moliere]

You were referring to CNN here, right? Were they or weren't they spreading a fake story?

Technically they weren't spreading a fake story, but they sure didn't have or report many facts and now, according to the NBC story, it looks like CNN really screwed the pooch on this one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Katy Lied]

So I wasn't paying attention, and had to catch up. But it's all rumors flying about, and nothing is really concrete. But since Trumps already been tarred by it, I may as well add my opinion (thus far; knowing very little). Here are the two points I took away:

1. Allegedly, Trump didnt pay for the GS because he had a sick attraction to it; he wanted it done in the bed that the Obamas slept in when they stayed in Moscow. He planned for the KGB to record the defiling of the Obama temporary marital bed.
2. John McCain is a world class narc.

[Northwestcoug]

Technically they weren't spreading a fake story, but they sure didn't have or report many facts and now, according to the NBC story, it looks like CNN really screwed the pooch on this one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe. But I don't think CNN got it too wrong. They reported that there was a dossier prepared for one of the opponents of Trump. They didn't give any details of it. This isn't in dispute, is it? There is a document.

[SCcoug]

Technically they weren't spreading a fake story, but they sure didn't have or report many facts and now, according to the NBC story, it looks like CNN really screwed the pooch on this one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Embedded Tweet

[byu71]

Maybe. But I don't think CNN got it too wrong. They reported that there was a dossier prepared for one of the opponents of Trump. They didn't give any details of it. This isn't in dispute, is it? There is a document.

A lot of things are in the eye of the beholder. So you watched the panel with Jake, Carl B, and some others discuss this at length Tuesday night and you didn't think Trump was going to be up the creek. Surely it at least gave you a glimmer of hope.