The biased Media vs Trump!

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

Here are some sources you requested for the bullet points made regarding information that has come out over the email leaks...

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/11/leaked-emails-reveal-hillary-clinton-hates-the-phrase-everyday-americans/
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439852/hillary-clintons-obstruction-justice-email-and-server-deletion-was-crime
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441115/hillary-clinton-barack-obama-emails-wikileaks-john-podesta-concern

From the first link:

Leaked Emails Reveal Hillary Clinton Hates The Phrase ‘Everyday Americans’

Compare and contrast with your claim.

She hates average Americans.

Second link has no reference whatsoever to the wikileaks emails.

Third link is a supposition, that doesn't actually prove anything whatsoever about Podesta, let alone about Hillary or Obama with regard to the claim that:

With the president’s knowledge and involvement in Hillary’s private e-mail scheme, it’s clear there was never going to be a prosecution.

Christy42

Amerika wrote: »

Just a couple of points we’ve learned from the email leaks:

• She believes in open borders.
• She hates average Americans.
• That everyone knows Hillary is a liar
• The Hillary Campaign decided to take donations from foreign agents.
• The campaign believed Benghazi was a legitimate issue for failing to protect US personnel at the embassy.
• Hillary's lawyer admits to obstruction of justice
• Hillary admits she is out of touch.
• With the president’s knowledge and involvement in Hillary’s private e-mail scheme, it’s clear there was never going to be a prosecution.

And all my posts regarding the media in this thread were in regard to the US media. I thought that was clear, but apparently not. And 1776 was the birth of our nation... the comment was more a political metaphor than anything else.

Several of these are horrible interpretations.

She hates the phrase everyday Americans. Not everyday Americans. She also said that she hasn'r forgotten where she comes from in that sentence where she says she is out of touch (which you somehow forgot).
Yeah open borders is where she hopes the world ends up and not a short term goal.
I agree that the lying thing is hardly great for Hillary but you can only give so mcluch time to that given her opponent's record with the truth.

They are just the obvious misinterpretations you have in your list.

I have taken this thread as world media given everyone has a take on the election.

B_Wayne

Also the 'out of touch' claim is not backed up. She showed concern over the fact that her status might make her more distant to the concerns of average Americans. However she then went on to discuss the concerns and unrest that is felt in the US. Demonstrating that she is not out of touch.

B0jangles

Remember how Trump was claiming the polls were rigged against him?

Apparently they are now not rigged, because he got a scrap of good news from one:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/788050035539865600

Also Trump has an interesting history of claiming vote rigging / corruption when he doesn't like the results:

From the 2012 presidential election:



From the 2012 Emmys:



Form the 2013 and 2014 emmys:



Donald Trump is the Sorest Loser on the Planet.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Here are some sources you requested for the bullet points made regarding information that has come out over the email leaks...

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/11/leaked-emails-reveal-hillary-clinton-hates-the-phrase-everyday-americans/
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439852/hillary-clintons-obstruction-justice-email-and-server-deletion-was-crime
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441115/hillary-clinton-barack-obama-emails-wikileaks-john-podesta-concern

Okay, let's see here let's see here.



You said, "She hates average Americans." Even your own provided source clearly makes the distinction that she hates using the phrase, "Everyday Americans," in an email conversation Jen Palmieri and John Podesta. So your claim was determined to be a lie.

You said, "Hillary's lawyer admits to obstruction of justice," in relation to the Wikileaks release. Your source doesn't cite the Wikileaks release, and was an article dated before the release even occurred. The article doesn't include any admission of an Attorney to an obstruction of justice. That was determined to be a lie.

In regard to your last point, "With the president’s knowledge and involvement in Hillary’s private e-mail scheme, it’s clear there was never going to be a prosecution," there appears to be insufficient evidence and a lot of theorizing. There's also the question of executive privilege, and whether or not the contents of the emails involved any state business or indeed anything classified. I don't see the content of these Obama[Alias]-Hillary emails? They could be shooting the ****, he could have invited her to lunch, he could have shared the Launch Codes - we have no evidence. Knowing she had a private email address and knowing she was using it inappropriately are not identical claims.

PopePalpatine

I couldn't help but laugh at Kourtney Kardashian's Twitter profile being listed as similar to Trump's. :pac:

Amerika

Good lord, this is the level we have to resort to in order to defend Hillary Clinton... Semantics? Well, Thesaurus.com lists ‘average’ as a synonym for ‘everyday.’

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/everyday?s=t

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Good lord, this is the level we have to resort to in order to defend Hillary Clinton... Semantics? Well, Thesaurus.com lists ‘average’ as a synonym for ‘everyday.’

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/everyday?s=t

Hang on,

You still don't understand the conversation that took place?

Christy42

Amerika wrote: »

Good lord, this is the level we have to resort to in order to defend Hillary Clinton... Semantics? Well, Thesaurus.com lists ‘average’ as a synonym for ‘everyday.’

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/everyday?s=t

That wasn't the complaint????

The complaint was that Hillary hates the phrase and not the people.

Overheal

They were emails about using the phrase in her speeches.

I know you aren't that obtuse. Come on.

Amerika

Podesta was concerned about the Obama/Clinton e-mail exchanges and turned to Mills, Hillary’s council, for advice. He stated:

Think we should hold emails to and from potus? That’s the heart of his exec privilege. We could get them to ask for that. They may not care, but I [sic] seems like they will.

Only the president can invoke executive privilege. Hillary’s lawyers not turning over the emails can be considered an obstruction of justice.

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

Hillary’s lawyers not turning over the emails can be considered an obstruction of justice.

Except it wasn't. Remember?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/06/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fbi-email-comey.html

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Podesta was concerned about the Obama/Clinton e-mail exchanges and turned to Mills, Hillary’s council, for advice. He stated:



Only the president can invoke executive privilege. Hillary’s lawyers not turning over the emails can be considered an obstruction of justice.

Perhaps. Debate for the courts.

I don't think something so obscured would lose her any votes this close to November though

Billy86

B0jangles wrote: »

Remember how Trump was claiming the polls were rigged against him?

<snip>

And in typical hypocritical fashion, he once sued a beauty pageant contestant for €5mn for claiming it was rigged.

I wonder what his take on those same batch of today's CNN polls showing him behind in Nevada and North Carolina is? :pac:

Amerika

alastair wrote: »

Except it wasn't. Remember?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/06/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fbi-email-comey.html

Old news. We’ve recently found out Comely had to give Mills immunity from prosecution in order to get anything out of her. He should have just arrested her instead.

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

Old news. We’ve recently found out Comely had to give Mills immunity from prosecution in order to get anything out of her. He should have just arrested her instead.

Old news or new news, it's unambiguously a determination that there was no case for obstruction of justice. So we've this claim debunked by an investigation.

Mr. Comey said the F.B.I. did not find that Mrs. Clinton’s conduct revealed “intentional misconduct or indications of disloyalty to the United States or efforts to obstruct justice.”

Amerika

I understand everyone has different interpretations of the email leaks. I contend my understanding is correct. And it doesn’t surprise me one bit if the mainstream media won’t side with the majority viewpoint here. The media is in the tank for Clinton. But bottom line is Hillary’s council had emails deleted after receiving a congressional subpoena. That is an obstruction of justice.

http://www.empirestatenews.net/2016/10/16/worse-than-watergate-wikileaks-proves-clinton-emails-deleted-after-congressional-subpoena/

Amerika

alastair wrote: »

Old news or new news, it's unambiguously a determination that there was no case for obstruction of justice. So we've this claim debunked by an investigation.

“Intentional misconduct or indications of disloyalty" seems to be some new law Comely made up. Please show me where there is some basis for this contention in the past. Haven't people been prosecuted, in regards to the mishandling of classified and top secret information, for much less?

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

I understand everyone has different interpretations of the email leaks. I contend my understanding is correct. And it doesn’t me one bit if the mainstream media won’t side with the majority viewpoint here.

Your interpretation is unfortunately at odds with the reality of the extracts.

The majority viewpoint is also at odds with your claims, regardless of how you feel about the media. You think an electorate that believed Hillary 'hated them' would be about vote her into the presidency?

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

“Intentional misconduct or indications of disloyalty" seems to be some new law Comely made up.

And "obstruction of justice"? The claim under discussion?

764dak

I didn't even realize there are two other candidates, Johnson and Stein.

Overheal

764dak wrote: »

I didn't even realize there are two other candidates, Johnson and Stein.

If you wanna call them that.

They are, but at the same time..

(Weld looks completely baked in one clip)

wonderfullife

Trump:

"credible CNN poll shows me ahead in Ohio. Great news folks".

2 minutes later....

"crooked MSM poll from failing CNN shows me behind in 2 other states".


Random Observer:

But....but....they're from the same poll

Trump:

Wrong.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

If you wanna call them that.

They are, but at the same time..

(Weld looks completely baked in one clip)

I'm confused. Are you trying to portray some comedy entertainment show as legitimate news?

Water John

Ha well you try and denigrade John Oliver. His barbs are lethally accurate. We Irish especially like taking down a buffoon, with sharp wit.

meepins

I'll just leave this here if by remote chance someone wanders into this thread for something other than to repeat propaganda ad nauseum.This video was released earlier but it's being ignored (of course) by mainstream news. It reveals what was suspected all along about the violence around the republican party conventions and others. It may get taken down soon but for the moment youtube are just fiddling the view counter afaik.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

I'm confused. Are you trying to portray some comedy entertainment show as legitimate news?

http://m.motherjones.com/media/2014/05/john-oliver-last-week-tonight-interview-politics-comedy-hbo

It's a comedy show, just about things that we're interested in. So, yeah, we'll kind of look off the map a little bit, which will mean we'll end up looking at Supreme Court cases and foreign elections and international issues just because they're interesting and people don't joke about them much, and there's fun to be had there. But, no, it's not journalism, it's comedy—it's comedy first, and it's comedy second…There might just be a single serious point wrapped up in 35 stupid jokes."

...

Regardless of Oliver's insistence that Last Week Tonight is not in any respect a journalistic enterprise ("No!" as he put it. "In no respect, in no respect, whatsoever"), he and his team certainly observe some of the same standards that a newsroom does; in some cases, even higher standards. In preparing for upcoming episodes, Oliver & Co. will often reach out to journalists or experts in a certain field for more information and perspective. For instance, prior to the Keith Alexander interview, they got in touch with Shane Harris, who profiled Alexander for Foreign Policy late last year. Furthermore, their staff includes Charles Wilson, an alumnus of the New York Times and The New Yorker, who now serves as the show's "journalistic fact-checker," in Oliver's words.

"You can't build a joke on sand, because otherwise then the joke doesn't work and…everything falls apart," Oliver says. "So you gotta make sure, even if it's sometimes incredibly frustrating, if you get excited about a joke angle, and then your fact-checker says, 'Yeah, you can't say that. That's not right.' And it's a tough job. I remember when I was talking to Charles before he joined the show, I was just saying, 'It is the thankless position to have to walk into a room that has kind of a joyful momentum behind it…and be the one saying, 'Yeah, you can't do any of that. It's not true.'"

Water John

Thanks for that, Over, a good read.
Comedy based on facts. Well its diff than politics not based on facts.

ancapailldorcha

Water John wrote: »

My my, somebody is throwing the toys out of the pram again.

If you have an issue with a post, report it. Childish nonsense like this adds nothing.

Overheal

Gutfield (FOX): “True, the media is rigged, but it was rigged for Trump all damn year. He got more free media than the weather, dwarfing not just his primary foes but Hillary as well. If it wasn’t for the media who fell over Trump every time he sneezed, we’d have a different candidate. So yeah, it was rigged, and that rigging gave us Trump.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/foxs-gutfeld-yes-the-media-has-been-rigged-for-trump/