More Blatant Bias From the Leftmedia The Patriot Post, 02/28/2017
Deceit comes in a variety of forms, from the blatant lie to the subtle shading of the truth. Those in the high calling of news reporting hold a historically trusted position of delivering stories that are both factually correct and contextually accurate. The aim of the journalist should be seeking to inform the public, not to influence the public. In other words, a true journalist can never be an activist. This concept is something the mainstream media may espouse but in practice has utterly rejected.
Case in point. Last Friday, The New York Times reported thusly on Donald Trump's CPAC speech:
"Mr. Trump launched what was easily the most blistering attack on the media and corporate elites of his already bellicose and eventful presidency. His speech also included a promise to throw undocumented immigrants 'the hell out of the country' and a recitation of his law-and-order campaign promises."
Did Trump say he wants to throw any and all illegal aliens out of the country, without any condition or caveat? That's what any reader would conclude after reading the Times. But what did Trump actually say — in its complete context?
"We are also going to save countless American lives. As we speak today, immigration officers are finding the gang members, the drug dealers and the criminal aliens and throwing them the hell out of our country."
Clearly, the Times engaged in selective editing so as to insinuate that Trump was calling for the removal of all illegal aliens, period. This is defined as propaganda, or "fake news."
Obviously, the Times seeks to paint Trump as anti-immigrant and anti-Hispanic. Why? The Times favors Democrats, who seek to build a unified Hispanic voting bloc.
...Trump has made a habit of calling out the biased reporting of the mainstream media, and The New York Times has been a consistent target of his ire. On Monday the Washington Post decided to run a circle the wagons story, claiming that Trump had little evidence to back his arguments against the Times. The Post sought to paint the Times as having been unfairly criticized by Trump, pointing to the lack of meaningful corrections as evidence of accurate reporting.
But just because the Times got the wording of Trump's truncated quote literally correct doesn't mean they were even in the ballpark with accuracy. And they'd never issue a correction for that kind of bias, which makes it all the more insidious.
"people familiar with the process" "people familiar with the talks"
So..... this entire article is based on tales from political hidden sources not actually anything?
And it's a classic trope. "The White House is considering the use of force against Slobovia".
Of course it is. There's a folder somewhere with attack plans. The Pentagon has a lot of people who's only job is to draw up attack plans. Dubai, Ottowa, Queen Maud's Land, whatever, there's a file. When the President isn't on Twitter, or Golfing, or getting a Lewinski, he talks to people who have the file handy in case he wants to bomb bridges on the Danube to distract the press from his sexual antics.
Turned on the TV while coffee brewed. "Today" was running a piece on Sessions, and "did he have contact with Russians / the Dems have proof of Russian election fix, left behind by Obama administration".
Then - I shit you not - a story about the Oscars with a MINUTE BY MINUTE PHOTO ACCOUNT of what the Price-Waterhouse accountants were doing that "led up to the horrible mistake on what should have been Hollywood's shining moment".
THIS is what the American public cares about?
Wait...sorry, I forgot. This is what the American MEDIA cares about. Silly of me. Coffee's brewed...sanity shall follow.
We now know EXACTLY how a minor mistake led to public embarrassment of Hollywood icons.
We have vague rumors spread by partisan treasonous curs about some Trump minions.
We would know EXACTLY how a decision by Bill Clinton led directly to the massacre of Sept. 11, 2001, except a Clinton Minion stole & destroyed the records from the National Archives. ( and was convicted... But not his Masters )
You hear a lot about the Hollywood Embarrassment. You hear even more about made up propaganda of the Obama minions. And not a word for years about the quaint habit of the Clintons to destroy evidence of their crimes.
Swinging a stick at anti-Trump protesters? I guess you can say that's "truthful". I'm not sure it's really representative of what's going on though. Compare that take on events to this one... http://ijr.com/2017/03/817178-berkeley-riot-explodes-trump-supporters-beaten-to-ground-as-rally-turns-into-bloody-nightmare/ This one includes video that happens to show the same guy with the stick. He can be seen fending of numerous people from someone who is on the ground being beaten. He fends them off until the police finally decided to walk up the the scene and he backs away. Take another look at the first picture with that in mind. You can see someone backed against a wall, holding his head like he has just been in a beating. It's very likely that the people he is swinging a stick at are the people who were beating on the guy holding his head. Normally, that's called defending someone. Not with our current media though.
You can debate the merits of going into what is likely to be a riot in the first place. That's not the intention of this post, or this thread. Clearly, when you have to resort to this sort of defense, your 1st amendment rights are no longer intact.
Oh the poor snowflakes. For eight years Obama gave them their talking points every weekday morning. Still does. But Saturday was a day of ignore. Friday afternoon was when the Obama administration would dump their criminal activity, & fails, after it was too late for the six o'clock news. Reports from that time were meant to be "publicly released" but not actually commented on. Friday night was when they'd "announce" things like budget over runs, unconstitutional actions, civil liberties violations. Then Saturday Barry would golf ( never with a woman, Allah be praised ) & the faithful could rest. Knowing they were to ignore rights violations or illegal wars.
Poor, complicit, obedient useful idiots.
Now Donald dumps bombshells any time any day and there's nothing they can ignore without orders from Obama & Soros.
( my golf comment was, yes, to imply Barry is a misogynist. He certainly has no problem listening to fellow communists, Valerie is in a position of deniable power above most men in the Obama administration and anti American agit-prop revolutionary HQ. ( she may be the hired go between with Barry's Master, Soros ) & Barry hired many dedicated communist women for positions of power, like Loretta, but apparently never went golfing with a woman. Possibly because that would interfere with getting laid. Just speculating.
Normally Putin's minions complaints about bad press can be assumed to be fake outrage.
I mean, sure, they are angry about reports of their criminal activity, but it's usually the "how dare you tell the truth, your family will die horribly" kind of anger, not "how dare you lie about me" kind. ( although they always claim the latter )
In this case it seems to be honest anger at being lied about, combined with envy that they missed an opportunity to mess with our election, & puzzlement that the useful idiots in America's press actually think Putin wouldn't have preferred Hillary since she's so easy to blackmail and bribe.
We used to have a movie review guy who hated or didn't understand science fiction. For example he hated "Highlander" calling it a rock video with sword play. Fair enough. He gave more stars that week to a killer Santa Claus movie.
So when he hated a science fiction movie, I'd go see it. Most reliable reviews around if you grasped his bias. Worked great for me.
CNN is now in the same bucket. Along with NBC & the rest, I now know they lie like Pravda. Completely reliable news. All lies. Makes me glad I cancelled cable.
Sure, you can believe traffic and weather up to the point it gets political, then you know it's bull crap.
And anything they call "worst" or "crisis" is not. Their indoctrinated interpretation of the world is predictable. Like a medieval monk, all is related to their religion. A medieval monk would write "as red as the blood of Christ" instead of just red.
Thus everything said by a talking head on tv is "as evil as Hitler" or "evil Republican has the racism of the Klan" which is highly amusing in that the talking head IS a socialist of the Klan Party.
Every aspect of life is subject to criticism by the elites. The press considers itself superior to, well, you, since they are well indoctrinated into Prog-think ( see also sheep mentality, herd animals, and unearned virtue ) and you, you mouth breathing neaderthal, are a peasant who must be spoon fed your opinions, since you obviously lack any right to your own.
To be honest, I mock Journalism Students because anyone with a room temperature IQ who can learn to ignore reality and make notes on their professors pet hatreds can get a degree.
List multiple forms of victim hood? Well trained. Change a tire? Comprehend F=MA? not so much.
I have stuff to do today so I was short on read between the lines 'headlines' time this morning. I if I feel like it, I may go back later to see what they are skipping over for today.
Every third headline page I read on AOL news(I know) was about the poorest run, lowest income, badly managed, most dependent communities in the US. What are they covering up for, or hiding that was against liberals today?
First lie, the push back against George Soros and his "world government" agitation predates Trump running for President.
Total spin, this blames American Conservatives for the fact that former Soviet client states are being messed with by Soros, and resent it. ( and some who profit big time from his bribes love him, of course )
Oh, and Putin, who has ZERO intention of letting his power be lessened by a World Government in the mold of the EU collective dictatorship, kicked Soros out years ago. He may be an evil monster, but he's not a dumb evil monster.
Just remember, Hitler hated the Communists. He hated them because they were competition, not for any major ideological differences, but he was Right to hate them. As more than a hundred million murdered would testify, if they weren't dead.
Every once in a while a talking head does us proud.
Full disclosure, I believe lawyers that use the "she was asking for it" defense in rape trials should be disemboweled with a samurai sword dipped in Sriracha sauce. ( I may be a bit extreme in that thinking. Others prefer Tabasco. )
The problem with trials here is, our legal system is just as corrupt as the politicians. And, we give "rights" to them that they don't get at home.
THEY ARE NOT CITIZENS.
They don't get to play by our rules. They're not obeying our laws...so why should we obey our system when we deal with them. No "third strike" bullshit here. One, you're here illegally. Two, you broke ANOTHER of our laws by raping a little girl. You get to go home now. Do not pass go, do not collect $200, and by the way, you can call your whole family and you can ALL go back where you came from.
Want to come back to the States (if you survive Mexican prison as a child rapist, that is)? DO IT RIGHT. Take the tests. Fulfill the immigration requirements.
And (again, if you survive prison back home)...be forever branded as a sexual predator.
Will Mexico even give them a trial? More likely they will just let them head north again. Not their problem any more. They save the cost of a trial, the cost of care and feeding of the animal, and don't have to deal with the aftermath of what the animal does in the future.