Author Topic: Liberal Media Bias  (Read 168282 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39449
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #300 on: July 25, 2016, 05:29:55 AM »
MEDIA
Politico Admits ‘Mistake’ In Sending DNC An Article In Advance
No substantive changes were made to the piece, though the arrangement has prompted criticism from the RNC and prominent conservatives.
 07/24/2016 05:25 pm 17:25:27
Michael Calderone 
Senior Media Reporter, The Huffington Post

MSNBC
Politico says it was a mistake for reporter Ken Vogel to have sent the DNC an article in advance.
NEW YORK ― Politico acknowledged Sunday that it was a “mistake” for one of its top reporters to send the Democratic National Committee an advance copy of an article while emphasizing there were no substantive changes made to the piece prior to publication.

A May 2 article by Politico’s Ken Vogel and Isaac Arnsdorf ― “Clinton fundraising leaves little for state parties” ― has come under scrutiny since WikiLeaks published over 19,000 internal DNC emails on Friday.

In an April 29 email thread, DNC national press secretary Mark Paustenbach shared Vogel’s detailed questions with others working to coordinate a response to what would be an unflattering story about fundraising efforts. Paustenbach also spoke to the Clinton campaign that day in preparing the DNC’s pushback, according to the emails.

On April 30, Paustenbach told DNC Communications Director Luis Miranda that he’d received the story in advance. “Vogel gave me his story ahead of time/before it goes to his editors as long as I didn’t share it,” he wrote. “Let me know if you see anything that’s missing and I’ll push back.”


WIKILEAKS
Sharing articles with sources in advance is generally frowned upon in newsrooms.
Journalists are expected to ask questions of those they write about prior to publication, but sharing entire stories in advance is generally discouraged in newsrooms.

On Sunday, Politico spokesman Brad Dayspring told The Huffington Post in an email that sharing stories with sources isn’t standard practice.

“Politico’s policy is to not share editorial content pre-publication except as approved by editors,” Dayspring wrote. “In this case the reporter was attempting to check some very technical language and figures involving the DNC’s joint fundraising agreement with the Clinton campaign. Checking the relevant passages for accuracy was responsible and consistent with our standards; Sharing the full piece was a mistake and not consistent with our policies. There were no substantive changes to the piece and in fact the final story was blasted out by the both RNC and the Sanders campaign, and prompted Politifact to revise its rating on the issue in question.”

Vogel, Politico’s chief investigative reporter and author of the 2014 book Big Money, is regarded as one of the top journalists on the politics and money beat. He’s reported critically on fundraising across party lines and the article in question wasn’t one the DNC or the Hillary Clinton campaign would have liked to see in print. Vogel and Arnsdorf reported that only 1 percent of $61 million raised by the Hillary Victory Fund ― a group comprised of Clinton’s campaign, the DNC and 32 state party committees ― had gone to state parties.

Two days later, Politifact revised its rating on a claim from actor and Clinton supporter George Clooney that “the overwhelming amount” of money raised at a Clinton fundraiser would go to down-ballot Democrats. In light of Politico’s reporting, the fact-checking organization changed its assessment from “Mostly True” to “Half True.”

As Vogel and Arnsdorf wrote at the time, allies of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) were concerned with the joint fundraising arrangement. “They see it as a circumvention of campaign contribution limits by a national party apparatus intent on doing whatever it takes to help Clinton defeat Sanders during the party’s primary, and then win the White House,” they wrote.

The WikiLeaks trove, more broadly, has reinforced long-running perceptions among Sanders supporters that the DNC was assisting the Clinton campaign during the Democratic primary. DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz announced her resignation Sunday in response to the fallout from the leak.

Though the Politico story wasn’t positive toward the DNC, the courtesy Vogel extended to the party has been seized upon as evidence of liberal media bias by some conservatives media figures, such as radio hosts Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin and Republican pollster Frank Luntz.

 Follow
 Frank Luntz ✔ @FrankLuntz
Dear Media: If you're wondering why conservative Americans don't trust you, please see @Politico reporter @KenVogel. https://twitter.com/zackbrownca/status/756542939791253504
2:27 PM - 22 Jul 2016
  1,255 1,255 Retweets   1,023 1,023 likes
The Republican National Committee, too, has turned a spotlight on leaked emails involving Politico.

On Saturday, The Republican National Committee blasted a Business Insider story on Vogel’s emails to its press mailing list and communications director Sean Spicer charged that the reporter allowed the Democrats “to edit” his stories in advance.

Disclosure: The reporter worked with Vogel at Politico from November 2007 to March 2010.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39449
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #301 on: July 25, 2016, 07:57:39 AM »
by NEIL W. MCCABE24 Jul 2016Washington2489
SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

email address
SUBMIT
The tight relationship between The Washington Post and the Democratic National Committee was borne out in emails discovered in the 20,000-deep email trove from the DNC posted on WikiLeaks.
In an April 26 email to Mark Paustenbach, the DNC’s deputy communications director, the paper’s White House Bureau Chief Juliet Eilperin wrote:

Subject: just FYI, the story is running on A1 tomorrow
Dear Mark,
I think you all will be totally fine with it. Thanks again for all your help.
Best, Juliet

VIDEO: OBAMA ON DEMOCRATIC RACE: LET THE PROCESS PLAY ITSELF OUT

The article was a review of President Barack Obama’s stewardship of the Democratic Party — “Obama, who once stood as party outsider, now works to strengthen Democrats” — written by Eilperin.

Eilperin (pictured) told Breitbart News: “As with most reporters, I regularly contact officials at the DNC, RNC, and political offices for information. The context of the email was that I honored the conditions of our discussions. The story speaks for itself.”

Walter Garcia, who is the party’s press secretary for its Western Region, weighed in on the article after it was published: “Not sure if you’ve already seen it, but flagging this article for you guys. Overall, not too bad for us.”

Garcia pointed out where in the article the DNC’s messaging was reflected in Eilperin final draft — particularly that the president’s own private political machine “Organizing for Action,” which was once “Obama for America.”

Eilperin wrote:

Organizing for Action (OFA), the nonprofit group that grew out of Obama’s campaign operation, has continued to compete with the Democratic National Committee for Democratic dollars — first as a parallel organization within the DNC and then as a separate entity. In the first six months of 2013, the DNC raised $30.8 million, while OFA raised $13 million. And this was at a time when the DNC was carrying more than $18 million in debt.

Garcia also cited a conversation Eilperin related: “During a 2010 gathering of Democratic governors in Washington, according to multiple attendees, one governor asked a senior presidential political adviser, ‘Will the OFA please join the Democratic Party?'”

Apparently, Eilperin had been working with the Paustenbach, because when he forwarded the email to the DNC’s Director of Communications Luis Miranda, Miranda replied: “Yup. Thanks to you and walker for connecting Roberta. I think her line was helpful.”

The quote Mirada appreciated was this one: “Close cooperation has taken time; OFA gave the DNC limited access to its list of supporters starting in 2013, but it turned over the entire list only in August 2015. Now, according to Nevada Democratic Party chair Roberta Lange, ‘That voter file is used by everyone in our state.'”

Certainly, the DNC appreciates it anytime there is close cooperation.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #302 on: July 25, 2016, 07:07:35 PM »
'60 Minutes' Omitted Clinton's Answers on DNC Stifling Sanders
By Mark Swanson   |   Monday, 25 Jul 2016

The CBS news magazine show "60 Minutes" aired a two-part interview with Hillary Clinton and new running mate Tim Kaine on Sunday night, but omitted a key segment about email leaks that showed Democratic National Committee members interfering with Bernie Sanders' run for the nomination.

CBS elected, instead, to play that segment on "Overtime," its digital-only product with millions of fewer eyeballs.

Interviewer Scott Pelley, also the CBS Evening News anchor, asked Clinton three questions about officials within the DNC trying to prop up Clinton while undermining Sanders' campaign, and Clinton gave three versions of "I don't know" anything.

Clinton did muster up criticism of the DNC's chief financial officer, revealed in the email leaks that came out, trying to make some headway in southern states by getting a question posed to Sanders about his religious beliefs — Jewish or atheist?

"I am adamantly opposed to anyone bringing religion into our political process," Clinton told Pelley. "The Constitution says no religious tests so that is just absolutely wrong and unacceptable."

The email leaks and what they contained led to DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz to immediately announce her resignation.

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/60-minutes-hillary-clinton-tim-kaine-bernie-sanders/2016/07/25/id/740373/#ixzz4FTbTJeZD

Las Vegas

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7423
  • ! Repent or Perish !
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #303 on: July 25, 2016, 07:21:16 PM »
 ::)  ::)  ::)

I can't stand when CBS plays their stupid, lying tag-lines for the CBS news.

Because the reality of it speaks for itself.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #304 on: August 01, 2016, 11:11:03 AM »
Condemning Republicans, Cheering Democrats: The Media’s Biased 2016 Convention Coverage
By Rich Noyes | July 29, 2016 |

With both the Republican and Democratic conventions now concluded, it’s time to judge the news media on how fairly they covered the two parties. Media Research Center analysts looked at various aspects of coverage, all of which demonstrate that journalists obviously favored the Democratic gathering.

By a 12-to-1 margin, journalists spent far more time deriding the Republican convention for its negativity, even as their reactions to Democratic speakers were consistently positive and often enthusiastic. Cable news had its own unique biases: MSNBC carved out time on each night of the GOP convention for interviews with top Democratic officials, but — despite promises to the contrary — aired no such interviews with Republicans during the Democratic convention. Meanwhile, CNN devoted more than an hour of airtime during the Democratic convention to airing 18 party-produced videos, but only included three such videos during the GOP convention.

Here are details of our research evaluating the convention coverage, with special thanks to MRC analysts Matthew Balan, Mike Ciandella, Nicholas Fondacaro, Curtis Houck and Scott Whitlock.

■ Double standard on convention videos: During the Republican convention, CNN’s primetime (8pm to midnight, ET) coverage included just three RNC-produced videos totalling a bit more than 14 minutes of airtime: a non-partisan tribute to the Apollo 11 mission; a video narrated by Lynne Patton telling how she was helped by the Trump family; and the six-minute Thursday night biography of Donald Trump shown in advance of his acceptance speech. CNN skipped videos on important topics such as the Benghazi attack and the Obama administration’s Fast and Furious scandal, instead airing journalist panel discussions.

But during the Democratic convention, CNN chose to air 18 of the Democrats’ videos, six times more party videos than they aired during the GOP convention. Included in those that made the cut on CNN: two “Funny or Die” videos mocking Donald Trump’s policies, and several “Trump In His Own Words” videos criticizing the GOP candidate’s controversial statements. In addition, CNN showed the party-produced videos introducing speakers including Michelle Obama, Bernie Sanders, Bill Clinton, Joe Biden, Tim Kaine, President Obama, and the nearly 12-minute video for Hillary Clinton that aired on the final night of the convention.

The total airtime for Democratic videos shown during CNN’s primetime coverage: 62 minutes, or more than four times the 14 minutes of airtime given to Republican videos during the same time slot the prior week.

■ Double standard on giving free airtime to the opposition: During the first night of the Republican convention, CBS’s 10pm ET primetime coverage included a four-minute long segment of an interview of Hillary Clinton, during which Rose invited Clinton to bash her Republican opponent, asking if Donald Trump was “the most dangerous man ever to run for President of the United States?”

But during their primetime coverage of the Democratic convention, CBS included no interviews with Republicans so they could bash Hillary Clinton.

Similarly, MSNBC’s primetime coverage (8pm to midnight ET) of the GOP convention included five interviews with elected Democrats: Representatives Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Tim Ryan (D-OH) on Monday, July 18; Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) on Tuesday, July 19; Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) on Wednesday, July 20; and Senator Al Franken (D-MN) on Thursday, July 21.

None of the Democratic interlopers missed a chance to take shots at the GOP. Schiff was brought on board a few minutes after Pat Smith spoke about the loss of her son in Benghazi. “We’ve never politicized a tragedy like this,” Schiff claimed, “and I just think it really is unfortunate to bring a grieving woman before the convention this way.”

Later in the week, Senator McCaskill condemned the GOP program as “very dark and angry, and mostly fact-free,” points echoed the next day by Senator Franken, who blasted the convention as “very ugly.”

Setting up his interview with Representative Ryan, anchor Brian Williams explained that “we like to bring in the other side, as in fairness we’ll be doing when it’s the Democrats’ turn.” But that wasn’t true: during all four nights of the Democratic convention, MSNBC’s 8pm to midnight coverage included absolutely no interviews with any Republicans.


■ Double standard on complaining about negative rhetoric: During the first two days of the Democratic convention, various speakers called Donald Trump a con man, a fraud, a bigot, and a racist; someone who “cheats students, cheats investors, cheats workers,” who “rejects science” and would take America “back to the dark days when women died in back alleys.” Trump’s policies and rhetoric was described as “cruel,” “frightening,” “deceitful,” “deeply disturbing” and “ugly.” He was someone who promoted “racial hatred,” who had “hate in their heart,” and was “making America hate again.”

But while the media routinely attacked the Republicans during the GOP convention for negative attacks on Hillary Clinton, the Democrats’ attacks on Trump were given a pass. MRC studied ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC and NBC’s coverage from 9pm to midnight during the first two nights of each convention. During the GOP convention, journalists scolded the Republicans for negativity 63 times; for the same time period during the Democratic convention, viewers heard only five such comments from reporters, a more than 12-to-1 disparity.

A few examples: CBS’s Bob Schieffer on July 19 said Clinton had been “accused of everything from a ‘who’d a thought it’ to the diphtheria epidemic.” On NBC, Tom Brokaw said the convention was trying to “work up a big hate for Hillary.” On MSNBC, Chris Matthews called the convention a “festival of hating Hillary tonight, this brewing up of almost a witch-like ritual tonight,” adding the words “bloodthirsty” and “blood curdling” to describe the delegates’ reaction to Chris Christie’s speech. [See video compilation below for many more examples.]

During the Democratic convention, the references to negativity were far fewer and much milder. CNN’s Gloria Borger on July 25 pointed out that speakers were “belittling and making fun of Donald Trump a lot tonight.” On MSNBC the next night, regular panelist Steve Schmidt, a former GOP campaign consultant, said there had been “real tough blows tonight on Donald Trump,” for the purpose of “the destruction of Donald Trump’s character.”

Tell the Truth 2016

■ Gushing over Democratic speeches while panning the GOP: In addition to the supposed negativity of the overall program, journalists scorned the individual speeches delivered at the GOP convention, especially nominee Donald Trump. CBS’s Scott Pelley said Trump was “more vengeful than hopeful,” while ABC’s Terry Moran called it “more of a harangue than a speech.” NBC’s Tom Brokaw thought some viewers “are going to see someone they will only think of as a demagogue of some kind.”

Thursday’s reactions to Hillary Clinton’s address, while unenthusiastic, included none of the criticism aimed at Trump. NBC’s Savannah Guthrie said Clinton’s was “a do-no harm speech,” while her colleague Chuck Todd thought it “was a grinder” of an address. CNN’s Gloria Borger admitted “it was not an oratorical masterpiece” but called Clinton’s speech “sturdy” and “steely.” Over on CBS, co-anchor Norah O’Donnell touted Clinton for “stressing her steadiness, her readiness, her experience and her empathy.”

Up until Clinton’s speech, the media had been positively swooning over the Democratic speakers. On Monday, CNN’s Jake Tapper was excited by New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, calling his speech “a crowd pleaser like no speech I’ve seen at a convention since a young state senator Barack Obama in 2004.”

Minutes later on ABC, anchor George Stephanopoulos gushed over First Lady Michelle Obama: “Polished, passionate and personal,” while on MSNBC, Joy Reid called the First Lady’s speech “magnificent, exquisite...[and] splendid.”

Hardball host Chris Matthews loved all of it: “I just thought the whole night was a slugger’s row of wonderful sentiments.”

As the week wore on, none of the major Democrats earned a bad review. On Tuesday night, CBS’s Gayle King found Bill Clinton’s speech on behalf of Hillary “heartwarming.” The next night, correspondents for NBC, CBS and ABC praised vice presidential candidate Tim Kaine for his “suburban dad” personality, whose “extraordinary” Spanish-speaking skills made for “a Spanish lesson down here.”

And, of course, President Obama sent thrills up journalists’ legs. “I don’t think we’ve ever had a President, save Lincoln, who is as great a speechwriter as this man,” NBC’s Andrea Mitchell oozed. “It was magnificent,” MSNBC’s Matthews tingled, “a wonderful farewell address.”

++++++

Every four years, the party conventions give the establishment news media a chance to provide even-handed coverage of the two parties. Once again, unfortunately, the networks have shown their obvious bias in favor of the liberals that rule the Democratic Party.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2016/07/29/condemning-republicans-cheering-democrats-medias-biased-2016

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #305 on: August 10, 2016, 01:01:51 PM »
Trump frenzy proves media need Xanax
By  Todd Starnes 
Published August 10, 2016
FoxNews.com
 
The Mainstream Media and Democrats have gone bat-crap crazy over Donald Trump.

This time they’re accusing Mr. Trump of threatening to assassinate Mrs. Bill Clinton.

I mean it's full-blown, head-spinning, Linda Blair-projectile vomiting kind of crazy, folks.

So first - I want you to hear what Donald Trump actually said about the Second Amendment.

“Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment," Trump started. "By the way, and if she gets to pick - if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although, the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don't know."

Before Mr. Trump could say, “God bless America -- Thanks for coming,” - the Mainstream Media had interrupted regular programming with the emergency broadcast system.

Breathless anchors -- their faces ashen in sheer horror - held back tears as they delivered the breaking news.

CNN acquired the services of renowned political scientist Rob Reiner, known for his acclaimed role as Meathead in the 1970’s hit, “All in the Family.”

Mr. Reiner dutifully advanced the left-wing narrative that Trump was calling for his supporters to take out Mrs. Bill Clinton.

Senator Chris Murphy, (D-CT), also piled on – tweeting: “Don't treat this as a political misstep. It's an assassination threat, seriously upping the possibility of a national tragedy & crisis.”

Rolling Stone's posted this headline: “Trump's Assassination Dog Whistle Was Even Scarier Than You Think.” New York Magazine’s was just as bad, “Trump's Assassination 'Joke' Was Thinly Veiled Sedition.”

It was full-blown liberal media bias.

Last month, Sen. Elizabeth Warren told MSNBC that she wanted to make Trump “disappear.” Was that a threat? What exactly did the senator mean by wanting to make Trump disappear?

Where was the Mainstream Media outrage to such a nefarious suggestion? Where was the wall-to-wall speculation, smothered in righteous indignation?

There was none – nary a peep.

And the truth is there should not have been – because Warren was not suggesting she wanted someone to assassinate Trump and Trump was not suggesting someone should take out Mrs. Bill Clinton.

Maybe it’s a good time for the cable news networks to pull the plug on the breaking news banners, stop hyperventilating and take a Xanax.

Finally - here's a bit of friendly advice to the Trump Campaign - y'all need to knock off the nonsense.  Say what you mean to say -- and stop explaining what you said instead of what you meant to say in the first place.

Sweet mercy, America.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/08/10/trump-frenzy-proves-media-need-xanax.html

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #306 on: August 12, 2016, 10:40:19 AM »
Missing Mateen: Top Newspapers Even WORSE Than TV In Hillary v. Trump Controversy Coverage
By Tim Graham | August 11, 2016

Our number-crunchers found the networks gave Trump’s “Second Amendment” crack about stopping Hillary-nominated judges drew five times as much air time as Hillary’s embarrassment when the father of mass-murdering Orlando terrorist Omar Mateen showed up behind her on TV at a Florida rally.

Guess what? The nation’s top newspapers were even worse in demonstrating a double standard on these two bad-news moments from the campaign trail in their Wednesday editions.

The New York Times printed a 1,287-word article at the top right of the front page headlined (all caps) “TRUMP SUGGESTS GUN OWNERS ACT AGAINST CLINTON: ALARM AT HIS REMARK.” Just to the left of that on top of the front page was an article headlined “G.O.P. Women Are Retreating From Nominee.” The Times also wrote a scathing staff editorial leading that page with the headline “Further Into the Muck With Mr. Trump.”

But the Times offered absolutely nothing in the print edition on Mr. Mateen, dismissing the story in a 440-word feature online by Matt Flegenheimer with the headline “Clinton Campaign Plays Down Appearance at Rally by Orlando Gunman’s Father."

The Washington Post wasn’t much better. Like the Times, it plopped the Trump story on top right of Page One, a 1,409-word story headlined “Trump decried for gun remark: Critics see his comments on 2nd Amendment as a threat against Clinton.” Also like the Times, its lead staff editorial piled on, with the headline “An ugly call to ‘Second Amendment people’: Mr. Trump seems to offer a veiled threat in comments about Mrs. Clinton and gun rights.”

So where was the story on Papa Mateen in the Post? There wasn’t a story. On the back page came an article by Anne Gearan headlined “Clinton prods GOP congressional leaders to take emergency action on Zika.” In the sixth paragraph of the Zika article, the Post offered a measly two sentences adding up to 54 words:

Separately, the Clinton campaign said it was unaware that Seddique Mateen, the father of the suspect in the June mass shooting at an Orlando nightclub, secured a prime seat at a Clinton rally on Monday in Kissimmee, near Orlando. Mateen told Florida television station WPTV that he had been "invited by the Democratic Party."

The Trump story carried over to the back page, where the Post reprinted the 41-word Trump 'Second Amendment people' quote in headline-size type, taking up about 24 column inches of space.

The Post’s free tabloid Express also showed the double standard. It published a 16-paragraph version of the regular front-page article on Trump, and only ran a 20-word “Verbatim” quote from Papa Mateen at the bottom of the same page (13). The quote was “Clinton is good for the United States, versus Donald Trump...I was invited by the Democratic Party. I’m a member.” Aligned next to the Trump story on page 13 was a five-paragraph story on how Hillary is spending more than $13 million in political ads on the Olympics broadcasts while Trump airs nothing.

USA Today isn’t exactly in the same territory. They offered a front-page story on Trump’s Second Amendment remarks, as well as a front-page story headlined “Never Trump Ranks Grow.”

There was also an article of some depth on the Mateen embarrassment...but not by a news reporter. It was a column on the editorial page by conservative "Instapundit" blogger/professor Glenn Reynolds.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2016/08/11/missing-mateen-top-newspapers-even-worse-tv-hillary-v-trump

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #307 on: August 15, 2016, 04:19:12 PM »
The MSM will be in overdrive till November.

NYT story on Manafort's Russia ties omits reporting on Clinton's Moscow speech
Published August 15, 2016
FoxNews.com

The New York Times published an extensive report Monday examining Donald Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s work for a pro-Russian party in Ukraine – but despite pointing to it as a “rising issue” in the presidential campaign, glossed over its own past reporting on the Clintons’ Russian connections.

The latest article detailed ledgers purportedly showing more than $12 million earmarked for Manafort by the pro-Russian party. According to the Times, investigators claim they were part of an illicit off-the-books operation, though Manafort denies ever getting such payments.

The Times noted that Manafort’s “involvement with moneyed interests in Russia and Ukraine” has been reported before – but said American relationships there have emerged as a “rising issue” in the presidential campaign.

Yet the article focused on Trump and Manafort’s ties, without harkening back to another extensive Times report in April 2015 on, among other details, a $500,000 payment to Bill Clinton for a controversial Moscow speech.

The payment came from “a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting” the stock of a company called Uranium One, which reportedly was taken over by the Russians between 2009 and 2013 – and had donor links to the Clinton Foundation.

According to the Times’ own reporting, among other donations, the company’s chairman used his family foundation to direct $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department also was among the agencies to sign off on the Russian takeover of what had been a Canadian company.

The report on the dealings, which Fox News also reported on at the time, was based in part on the findings of Peter Schweizer, author of the anti-Clinton book “Clinton Cash.”

The Clinton campaign at the time pushed back on any suggestion that Hillary Clinton took action to support foundation donor interests, calling the idea “utterly baseless.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/15/nyt-story-on-manaforts-russia-ties-omits-reporting-on-clintons-moscow-speech.html

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39449
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #309 on: August 29, 2016, 02:14:21 PM »
BIAS ALERT: CNN scrubs 'Crooked' from Trump tweet
Published August 29, 2016
FoxNews.com
 
CNN ensured a Sunday night Donald Trump statement about Hillary Clinton wasn’t “crooked” – but that might be the entire problem for the news network.

A tweet from the Republican presidential candidate appeared to be edited and scrubbed of the word “crooked” when a graphic on Trump was shown Sunday night, Breitbart News reported. The only word omitted from the tweet was part of Trump’s infamous descriptor for his Democratic opponent, whom he almost unfailingly calls “Crooked Hillary.”

No other words were left out of the CNN graphic or anchor Jim Sciutto’s read of the tweet.

CNN appeared to edit the word "Crooked" from Donald Trump's tweet on Sunday.

Trump had originally written: “I think that both candidates, Crooked Hillary and myself, should release detailed medical records. I have no problem in doing so! Hillary?”

Trump’s use of nicknames to describe his adversaries – Crazy Bernie, Lyin’ Ted, Little Marco, Low Energy Jeb, Goofy Elizabeth Warren – have been one of his most consistent traits during the 2016 cycle.

CNN and the Trump campaign did not immediately respond to emails from FoxNews.com.


Donald J. Trump
✔  ‎@realDonaldTrump  
I think that both candidates, Crooked Hillary and myself, should release detailed medical records. I have no problem in doing so! Hillary?
1:24 PM - 28 Aug 2016



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/29/bias-alert-cnn-scrubs-crooked-from-trump-tweet.html

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #310 on: August 29, 2016, 02:15:45 PM »
Some of us with minor scoliosis don't take too kindly to the use of a the word 'crooked'.

Las Vegas

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7423
  • ! Repent or Perish !
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #311 on: August 29, 2016, 02:25:25 PM »
It's so weak, anyway.  Maybe the "guys" in the media who spend all their time bending-over took offense.

Yamcha

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13292
  • Fundie
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #312 on: August 30, 2016, 05:26:06 AM »


 :D
a

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #313 on: August 30, 2016, 10:10:43 AM »

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #314 on: September 05, 2016, 11:18:23 AM »
Internet Goes Wild After People Find Out What's on Hero's T-Shirt Censored by Cable News Network
BY KYLE BECKER

A heroic man captured national attention for his action rescuing a baby from a hot car in New Jersey. But it was the way his interview on CNN-owned Headline News went down that has truly gone viral.

The man at the center of the story is Steve Eckel, a retired police officer who used a sledgehammer to break into a parked car at a New Jersey Kohl's, as reported by CBS News on Wednesday. The baby was taken from the vehicle, which Eckel said had reached a temperature of over 120 degrees.

HLN had Eckel on to get his story about the rescue, but apparently was not interested in getting all of his free speech. The network aired the interview... while blurring his T-shirt out.



What was on the retired police officer's shirt that was so controversial? An expletive-laded shirt? An image containing nudity? No. All Lives Matter? Support America's Police Officers? Nope, it was a "2016 Trump" T-shirt.



An interview version that arose after the segment originally aired shows exactly what was on the man's shirt. It was too late, however, the bias of the network had already been shown.

News followers on Twitter were not amused:


The only question someone needs to ask: Would CNN or HLN have done this if a guest was wearing a pro-Hillary T-shirt?

http://ijr.com/2016/09/685059-internet-goes-wild-after-people-find-out-whats-on-heros-t-shirt-censored-by-cable-news-network/

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #315 on: September 07, 2016, 03:58:05 PM »
BIAS ALERT: Media dismisses military brass backing Trump
Published September 07, 2016
FoxNews.com
 
Donald Trump likely hoped that a letter backing him and signed by 88 former generals and admirals would prompt journalists to report on his support within military leadership -- what he got, instead, were media guns using Pentagon brass for target practice.

Trump, who on Wednesday delivered a major policy speech on the state of the U.S. military, was touted in the letter as a commander in chief capable of dealing with “enemies of this country [who] have been emboldened” by weakness in Washington.

Boykin, (l.), and Bell, (r.), were among the former generals signing on for Trump.
 
“ … we support Donald Trump and his commitment to rebuild our military, to secure our borders, to defeat our Islamic supremacist adversaries and restore law and order domestically,” read the letter. “We urge our fellow Americans to do the same.”

The Washington Post immediately combed through the lengthy roster of signatories and noted that one, retired Lt. Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin, was reprimanded for disclosing classified information in a 2008 memoir, “Never Surrender: A Soldier’s Journey to the Crossroads of Faith and Freedom.” Boykin also happens to be the co-founder and former commander of the elite Delta Force, and carried out missions in Iran, North Korea, Somalia and Colombia during his storied career.

He angered Muslims around the world in 2003 when, giving a speech about his hunt for a Somali warlord, said, “I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol.”

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump gestures as he speaks to the American Legion National Convention, Thursday, Sept. 1, 2016, in Cincinnati. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
Expand / Contract

Trump was looking to bolster his image as a capable commander-in-chief. (The Associated Press)
 
Boykin, who had become executive vice president at the conservative Family Research Council by the time the Pentagon investigated him, has long insisted he had permission for the disclosures and has hinted that the probe was politically motivated.

The list of generals and admirals was put together by Army Maj. Gen. Sidney Shachnow, a Holocaust survivor, and Rear Adm. Charles Williams of the Navy.

The Daily Beast also searched the list for anyone with a black mark on his stripes. In a story headlined “The Disgraced and Little-Known Generals Backing Donald Trump,” the outlet reported that four were present during a massive 1991 scandal in which more than 100 Navy and Marine Corps aviation officers were alleged to have sexually assaulted 90 people at the 35th Annual Tailhook Association Symposium in Las Vegas. None of the signatories were charged, although one later served as a Navy lawyer in the case.

“To be sure, scores of the signatories had exemplary military records and continue to work in public service,” the Daily Beast article seemed to grudgingly acknowledge. “There are Vietnam veterans, three four-star generals and an admiral, as well as key commanders in the U.S. war in Iraq.”

The Washington Post even sought to drive a wedge between Trump and his military backers by noting that retired four-star Army Gen. Burwell Bell III was once a top NATO commander, and then noting that Trump has questioned NATO’s usefulness.

Three other four-star generals supporting Trump “all retired more than 20 years ago,” the Post wrote.

CNN’s Anderson Cooper scored a Tuesday night interview with retired Army Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, who dismissed the names on Trump’s list.

"I didn't recognize many of those names as being there in the fight with me over the last 16 years," Hertling said. "There aren't a whole lot of names in the fight against Al Qaeda or several of the other forces."

The media was not the only party to seemingly scoff at Trump’s flag officer support.

“Compare where Trump is with where both Romney and McCain were,” Hillary Clinton, Trump’s opponent in the November presidential race, told Fox News. “They had between 300 and 500. I am doing better than any Democrat. He is doing worse than recent Republicans.”

For his part, Trump thanked the military brass for supporting him.

“I thank each of them for their service and their confidence in me to serve as commander in chief,” Trump said in a statement. “Keeping our nation safe and leading our armed forces is the most important responsibility of the presidency.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/07/bias-alert-media-dismisses-military-brass-backing-trump.html

Yamcha

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13292
  • Fundie
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #316 on: September 12, 2016, 09:06:50 AM »
Huff Post: "If you don't vote Democrat, then Fuck You!"

http://archive.is/IpdxU

Article archived so that the Huff Post won't get credit for views.
a

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #317 on: September 13, 2016, 01:40:34 PM »
BIAS ALERT: CBS edits out Bill Clinton slip on Hillary health
Published September 13, 2016
FoxNews.com

CBS Evening News edited out what sure sounded like a Freudian slip and a lawyerly correction when Bill Clinton was talking about how often his wife collapses from dehydration.

“She’s been well, if it is it’s a mystery to me and all of her doctors, because frequently, not frequently, rarely, but on more than one occasion, over the last many, many years, the same sort of thing has happened to her where she got severely dehydrated,” the former president said of Hillary Clinton, who is seeking the office he once held.
 
The CBS News website posted video showing the exchange, and Clinton’s mid-sentence correction. But when the exchange with Charlie Rose occurred during the nightly newscast, the “frequently, not frequently, rarely” part edited out.

For folks who wonder if the public is being told all there is to know about the former secretary of state’s health, Clinton’s full sentence seemed to hold a tantalizing clue. By the time other news channels, including Fox, picked up the comment, the slipup was gone.

The Daily Caller was first to compare the ex-president’s full statement to the one that aired, and NewsBusters followed up with a side-by-side comparison.

CBS backpedaled Tuesday and included the full quote on their morning newscast. NewsBusters claimed it was only the latest example of deft editing by the liberal media to make Hillary Clinton look good, or her opponent, Donald Trump, look bad.

Last month, CNN edited Trump Campaign Manager Kellyanne Conway speaking on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” to make it appear that Conway promised Trump would refrain from personal attacks. In fact, Conway said she didn’t approve of personal insults by candidates, but made no pledges on behalf of Trump.

Click for more from The Daily Caller

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/09/13/bias-alert-cbs-edits-out-bill-clinton-slip-on-hillary-health.html

Yamcha

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13292
  • Fundie
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #318 on: September 14, 2016, 04:48:50 AM »
These compilations are always funny. Start at 1:00

a

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #319 on: September 14, 2016, 05:46:08 PM »
Even when the Clinton camp admits it should have been more transparent, the MSM is in overdrive trying to protect her. 

CNN's Amanpour suggests Clinton health coverage sexist
Published September 14, 2016
FoxNews.com

After learning from the mainstream media during the last eight years of the Obama presidency that seemingly benign phrases and words like “Chicago,” “that one” and “golf” are now deemed racist, viewers are getting a similar lesson when it comes to Clinton coverage.

CNN host Christiane Amanpour suggested on air Monday that the heavy coverage of the Democratic nominee's health is simply sexist.

“Can’t a girl have a sick day or two?” Amanpour said, before asking: “What about Donald Trump’s tax returns, where are they?”

This was after Hillary Clinton for days experienced coughing fits on the trail and then came close to collapsing on the sidelines of a 9/11 event Sunday, before being whisked away in an SUV. Her campaign then revealed she had pneumonia, while saying she had become dehydrated and overheated.

Amanpour appealed to her colleagues to lay off.

“When it comes to overqualified women having to try a hundred times harder than underqualified men to get a break or even a level playing field, well, we know that story,” she said.

As proof that sick men can do the job of the presidency just fine, she first cited the example of President Franklin Pierce -- a mid-19th century president who passed out in the battlefield.

As first noted by Mediaite, Amanpour cited the examples of the media covering up President Franklin Roosevelt’s debilitating polio and John F. Kennedy’s many health issues – lapses in journalism that journalists generally accept as ethically problematic today. Amanpour said these health crises did not stop them from being good presidents.

“Leading the world in sickness and in health—if the boys can do it, why not the women?” she asked.

Amanpour seemed to approve of the bygone media attitude that the public didn’t need to know their commander-in-chief was wheelchair bound (FDR) or was given an anti-psychoticfor fluctuating moods (JFK).

Years ago, Amanpour’s husband, James Rubin, was a member of Clinton’s 2008 campaign.

Amanpour did not mention how male candidates' health has been scrutinized before. 2008 Republican nominee John McCain and 1996 nominee Bob Dole were both scuritinized for their health and their age – as was President Ronald Reagan when he stood for re-election.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/14/cnns-amanpour-suggests-clinton-health-coverage-sexist.html

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39449
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #320 on: September 14, 2016, 07:24:11 PM »
It's so funny how the 240 media covers for her


Even when the Clinton camp admits it should have been more transparent, the MSM is in overdrive trying to protect her. 

CNN's Amanpour suggests Clinton health coverage sexist
Published September 14, 2016
FoxNews.com

After learning from the mainstream media during the last eight years of the Obama presidency that seemingly benign phrases and words like “Chicago,” “that one” and “golf” are now deemed racist, viewers are getting a similar lesson when it comes to Clinton coverage.

CNN host Christiane Amanpour suggested on air Monday that the heavy coverage of the Democratic nominee's health is simply sexist.

“Can’t a girl have a sick day or two?” Amanpour said, before asking: “What about Donald Trump’s tax returns, where are they?”

This was after Hillary Clinton for days experienced coughing fits on the trail and then came close to collapsing on the sidelines of a 9/11 event Sunday, before being whisked away in an SUV. Her campaign then revealed she had pneumonia, while saying she had become dehydrated and overheated.

Amanpour appealed to her colleagues to lay off.

“When it comes to overqualified women having to try a hundred times harder than underqualified men to get a break or even a level playing field, well, we know that story,” she said.

As proof that sick men can do the job of the presidency just fine, she first cited the example of President Franklin Pierce -- a mid-19th century president who passed out in the battlefield.

As first noted by Mediaite, Amanpour cited the examples of the media covering up President Franklin Roosevelt’s debilitating polio and John F. Kennedy’s many health issues – lapses in journalism that journalists generally accept as ethically problematic today. Amanpour said these health crises did not stop them from being good presidents.

“Leading the world in sickness and in health—if the boys can do it, why not the women?” she asked.

Amanpour seemed to approve of the bygone media attitude that the public didn’t need to know their commander-in-chief was wheelchair bound (FDR) or was given an anti-psychoticfor fluctuating moods (JFK).

Years ago, Amanpour’s husband, James Rubin, was a member of Clinton’s 2008 campaign.

Amanpour did not mention how male candidates' health has been scrutinized before. 2008 Republican nominee John McCain and 1996 nominee Bob Dole were both scuritinized for their health and their age – as was President Ronald Reagan when he stood for re-election.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/14/cnns-amanpour-suggests-clinton-health-coverage-sexist.html


240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #321 on: September 14, 2016, 07:26:30 PM »
It's so funny how the 240 media covers for her

Oh, I think I alerted getbig of her impending health demise long before you or coach or others.

If I was up here saying "oh she's fine", like other are, yes, you're accurate.

but I'm the first one to say that shit looks like parkinsons stage 3.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #322 on: September 19, 2016, 11:12:18 AM »
CNN’s Jake Tapper Edits out Hillary Clinton’s ‘Bombings’ Remark
by JOEL B. POLLAK
18 Sep 2016

CNN’s Jake Tapper asked New Jersey Governor Chris Christie on State of the Union on Sunday morning about the supposed contrast between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in their responses to the explosions Saturday in New York, editing out Clinton’s reference to “bombings” to create a false distinction.
Tapper cited Trump referring to a “bomb” in New York, then played a clip of Clinton criticizing him for saying that — leaving out Clinton’s reference, seconds before, to what she called “bombings.”

Here is the Tapper’s question for Christie, with the edited Clinton clip:

Tapper: There is a contrast, I would say, between how you’re speaking about it and how Mr. Trump spoke about it yesterday. He’s being criticized for talking about the New York bomb before local officials or local law enforcement had a chance to do so. He told the Colorado Springs crowd that “a bomb went off in New York, and nobody knows exactly what’s going on” — that’s really just a few minutes after the incident. And his opponent tried to draw a contrast. She waited hours later, until local officials spoke, and then she said this:

Clinton (clip): I think it’s important to know the facts about any incident like this. I think it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions.

Tapper: As a general note, do you think politicians should wait until more information comes in, and should they defer to local official and investigators? Isn’t that what you do as the governor of New Jersey?

Tapper made no mention of Clinton’s similar remark.

Here is the full, relevant exchange between Clinton and reporters on Saturday night, via Liz Kreutz of ABC News and other sources:

Clinton: I’ve breen briefed about the bombings in New York and New Jersey, and the attack in Minnesota. Obviously, we need to do everything we can to support our first responders, also to pray for the victims. We have to let this investigation unfold. We’ve been in touch with various officials, including the mayor’s office in New York, to learn what they are discovering as they conduct this investigation. And I’ll have more to say about it when we actually know the facts?

Reporter: Secretary Clinton, Do you have any reaction to the fact that Donald Trump, immediately upon taking the stage tonight, called the explosion in New York a “bomb” … ?

Clinton: Well, I think it’s important to know the facts about any incident like this. That’s why it’s critical to support the first responders, the investigators who are looking into it, trying to determine what did happen. I think it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions because we are just in the beginning stages of trying to determine what happened.

Ironically, later in the program, while introducing Clinton’s running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), Tapper played the full clip, including Clinton’s use of the word “bombings.” Tapper did not ask Kaine about whether Clinton’s remark was appropriate.

For the record, Christie’s response to Tapper’s question defended Trump without referring to Clinton’s statement.

Christie: Well, listen, I don’t think you have to defer when saying there was an explosion and a bomb in New York. I mean, everybody knew that. It was being reported in television, Jake, so there’s a difference. Now, you shouldn’t attribute it to any particular organization or group if you don’t have the facts or information to do that. But I think that what Donald did was perfectly appropriate to tell that group in Colorado Springs a bomb exploded. This is typical of Mrs. Clinton. She has absolutely no basis to be critical of what he did yesterday …

Tapper was not all smiles for Kaine: he questioned the Democratic vice presidential nominee aggressively about Hillary Clinton’s close confident Sidney Blumenthal’s alleged role in pushing the Birther conspiracy theory in 2008.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/09/18/cnn-jake-tapper-edits-clintons-bombings-remark/

Yamcha

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13292
  • Fundie
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #323 on: September 20, 2016, 05:54:56 AM »
a

polychronopolous

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19041
Re: Liberal Media Bias
« Reply #324 on: September 20, 2016, 05:57:12 AM »
Huff Post: "If you don't vote Democrat, then Fuck You!"

http://archive.is/IpdxU

Article archived so that the Huff Post won't get credit for views.

I like it!  8) ;)