Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

POTUS 45.65: I'm Just Here For The Lincoln Project Ads

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Handyman
    replied
    Wait, is Hovey saying that MAGA doesn't whine and complain about the media? The same MAGA who ditched Faux for saying Trump lost Arizona? The same MAGA who threatened the press from all mainstream outlets at rallies?

    That is an interesting take...

    Leave a comment:


  • Slap Shot
    replied
    Originally posted by SJHovey View Post

    Well, in the last 5-6 years, the people who I have heard complaining the most about mainstream media have been Donald Trump and posters on this board.
    Those complaining on this board haven't been nearly as vocal nor threatening as the MAGAs and you know this.

    Leave a comment:


  • SJHovey
    replied
    Originally posted by Slap Shot View Post

    Even if that is true I also don't blame them given the actual likely cause - MAGAs and their predecessors have had a full-on assault of the profession for years.
    Well, in the last 5-6 years, the people who I have heard complaining the most about mainstream media have been Donald Trump and posters on this board.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Originally posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post
    The New York Times has zero credibility.
    And also more credibility than any other newspaper.

    The NYT is the news my parents want to hear, in the same way that Fox News is the news Cletus and Brandine want to hear and Jacobin is the news I want to hear. None of these entities stay in business by violating the Weltanschauung of their subscribers. They are not information, they are lullabies.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Originally posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post
    The New York Times has zero credibility. I'm not saying everything they print is incorrect or lacks fact-checking. Probably most of it is reasonably accurate. But anyone who reads anything in the Times without eyeing another source for confirmation on a topic is just asking to be mis-informed (or lied to). I do think Haberman's conflicts (and potential conflicts) of interest are numerous. She should be avoided at all costs. While it is interesting and funny to read that trump was flushing more than just his stool down White House toilets, in the end did anyone really need to read that to know he was violating all sorts of record keeping laws? Not likely.
    Apparently yes. Because he's NOT IN JAIL YET. I would be in jail. You would be in jail.

    Leave a comment:


  • WeAreNDHockey
    replied
    The New York Times has zero credibility. I'm not saying everything they print is incorrect or lacks fact-checking. Probably most of it is reasonably accurate. But anyone who reads anything in the Times without eyeing another source for confirmation on a topic is just asking to be mis-informed (or lied to). I do think Haberman's conflicts (and potential conflicts) of interest are numerous. She should be avoided at all costs. While it is interesting and funny to read that trump was flushing more than just his stool down White House toilets, in the end did anyone really need to read that to know he was violating all sorts of record keeping laws? Not likely.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Originally posted by SJHovey View Post

    Fewer and fewer journalists get into journalism, or stay in journalism, just to be a journalist. The question now is how can they monetize their access, their writing skills, their insider knowledge, etc..., through their online presence, through a book, through a tv gig, or whatever.

    I don't really blame them given the minuscule wages many of them have worked for in their careers. But more and more the stuff they put out there is just a teaser for the coming book.
    I don't care if she wants to write a book...lots of journalists do. I dont care if she finds ways to monetize things either. I care that she and the NYTs obviously held back on reporting a story about illegal activities so she could monetize her story. And make no mistake that is what they did. Do you think they would do that if it was another BS story about Hunter Biden's laptop? They would ask Psaki about it at the next press briefing.

    But even if I grant that maybe they didn't do that and this is just a weird timing situation...this is front page news. Maybe not above the fold but a former President essentially stealing documents, shredding documents and housing classified documents in an unsecure location is a big deal. It trumps (no pun intended) literally everything they ever even accused Hillary of by FAR. (let alone what she actually did) "All The News That Is Fit To Print" couldn't find space for it? The same paper that when talking a bomb being delivered to Hillary's house a couple years back inserted a rhetorical attack on her? The same one that has taken every chance to white wash controversy away from Trump and his allies? The same Maggie Haberman that attacked a comedienne because she made a joke about Sarah Huckabee lying and made it sound like she attacked her for being a woman?

    Leave a comment:


  • MichVandal
    replied
    Originally posted by SJHovey View Post

    Fewer and fewer journalists get into journalism, or stay in journalism, just to be a journalist. The question now is how can they monetize their access, their writing skills, their insider knowledge, etc..., through their online presence, through a book, through a tv gig, or whatever.

    I don't really blame them given the minuscule wages many of them have worked for in their careers. But more and more the stuff they put out there is just a teaser for the coming book.
    At some point, we need to get over this BS- this has been true since the dawn of journalism. If you don't sell papers, you don't make a living. Look back 250 years and see what our founding fathers were lying about each other, constantly, over. One of the leaders of this editorialism now has a musical about his life.

    It was better when there were actual regulations forcing "news" to cover things more balanced- but since that went away, and Fox News became a profitable calling card for what they are- we are back where we have been before. And given the money Faux makes, I doubt it will go back. The only way it ever will end is when people see behind the curtain and understand that they are being fleeced.

    Leave a comment:


  • Slap Shot
    replied
    Originally posted by SJHovey View Post

    Fewer and fewer journalists get into journalism, or stay in journalism, just to be a journalist. The question now is how can they monetize their access, their writing skills, their insider knowledge, etc..., through their online presence, through a book, through a tv gig, or whatever.

    I don't really blame them given the minuscule wages many of them have worked for in their careers. But more and more the stuff they put out there is just a teaser for the coming book.
    Even if that is true I also don't blame them given the actual likely cause - MAGAs and their predecessors have had a full-on assault of the profession for years.

    Leave a comment:


  • rufus
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post

    " as if the NYT wouldn't have made this a big deal about anyone else.
    Absolutely true. But no matter what Donnie does, our so-called liberal media can't seem to bring themselves to call it what it is.

    It’s also somewhat illuminating to visit The New York Times webpage on the morning after they reported that Trump illegally held onto classified information. Because a quick Where’s Waldo of that page would find … no Waldo. To be fair, the story does get one small headline far down the screen below reporting on the latest Olympics, a piece about worn-down pharmacists, and the “real cost of cheap chicken.” To be even more fair, the day after it learned that some of Hillary Clinton’s emails might be found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop, every single inch went to that one story.

    And I read somewhere, in the NYT article about Donnie flushing paper, the reporter described it as "another lapse in how Trump handled documents" or some such chit.
    Last edited by rufus; 02-10-2022, 12:26 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • SJHovey
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post

    Of course she did...her family is in bed with the Kushners and I believe Trump. (her mother's firm) She got very upset when the Mar-a-Lago story broke because people realized she knew about it (and the other stuff in her book) and yet nothing was ever put in print about it. She got so defensive she basically resorted to "Twitter isn't in charge of what is printed by the news" as if the NYT wouldn't have made this a big deal about anyone else.

    When history is written Jefferey Zucker and MAGA Haberman are going to be studied as the ultimate collaborators in the death knell of American Democracy. Even if things don't go south they are at best enablers to a rise in Nationalism and Jingoism that will leave a permanent scar and lead to the further dissolving of political discourse in this country. Zuckers CNN and the NYTs can eat a bag of dicks.
    Fewer and fewer journalists get into journalism, or stay in journalism, just to be a journalist. The question now is how can they monetize their access, their writing skills, their insider knowledge, etc..., through their online presence, through a book, through a tv gig, or whatever.

    I don't really blame them given the minuscule wages many of them have worked for in their careers. But more and more the stuff they put out there is just a teaser for the coming book.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Originally posted by Spartanforlife4 View Post
    Maggie Haberman held back reporting on Trump continuing communication with Kim Jong Un after he left office and that classified documents were attempted to be flushed down the toilet, so she could save it for her book.

    Despite having knowledge that he has been breaking records laws, she also managed to tip toe around that fact a couple days ago when the archivists had to go to Mar A Lago to retrieve items.
    Of course she did...her family is in bed with the Kushners and I believe Trump. (her mother's firm) She got very upset when the Mar-a-Lago story broke because people realized she knew about it (and the other stuff in her book) and yet nothing was ever put in print about it. She got so defensive she basically resorted to "Twitter isn't in charge of what is printed by the news" as if the NYT wouldn't have made this a big deal about anyone else.

    When history is written Jefferey Zucker and MAGA Haberman are going to be studied as the ultimate collaborators in the death knell of American Democracy. Even if things don't go south they are at best enablers to a rise in Nationalism and Jingoism that will leave a permanent scar and lead to the further dissolving of political discourse in this country. Zuckers CNN and the NYTs can eat a bag of dicks.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    I honestly don't think Hovey talked about her emails. I think he agreed with Sic about a lot of his "concerns" but never condemned her email server or the faux outrage over it.

    Leave a comment:


  • SJHovey
    replied
    Originally posted by MichVandal View Post

    Are you really suggesting that you didn't bring it up? Interesting.
    Well, you're asking me to remember all of my posts from what would have been almost five and a half or six years ago, which I can't claim to do. However, I claim no expertise in security issues, emails or otherwise. I certainly don't recall expressing any opinions here, or anywhere else for that matter, on security issues related to her emails.

    I was pretty clear back then that I wasn't going to vote for Clinton, and vote third party instead, primarily because I was simply tired of the Clintons and their whole entourage of people associated with them, and that there was too much dissembling when they were involved.

    As it is, I don't believe that it's good, from a security standpoint, that Trump or his people have held onto government documents. So, if I did express concern about her emails (about which I have no recollection) then I express the same concern for these documents.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Never ask a conservative to hold himself accountable. If he could he wouldn't be a conservative.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X