It’s shocking to discover that Trump might lie and invent a supposed “ceasefire” completely out of thin air without confirming details with the actual parties involved first.
(Morgan Freeman voiceover: It was no way shocking.)
Speculation: This strikes me as a particularly hamfisted and transparently deceitful attempt at an October Surprise that will have virtually no affect on the elections.
Further speculation: When combined with the so called “diesel deal” with Russia is it possible… and bear with me on this as this too might be shocking… Is it possible this is something Putin has put Trump up to directly with the guarantee that lower gas prices will seal the deal with voters in November? The fact that the only party that this whole fucking charade benefits is Putin has to simply be a coincidence right? I mean perish the thought…
I haven’t seen any informed opinions that the ‘Trump okays buying Russian diesel’ development will lower American diesel prices even one penny. (The amount of diesel discussed is far too small.)
Of course this does help Russia because it effectively defangs the sanctions that have kept sales of all Russian oil products down, worldwide. They will now be reaping revenues, helping them pay for both pounding Ukraine, and aiding Iran in its war against the US. (How about that!)
The Supposed Ceasefire story may be more about stock market manipulation than anything else. (The stock market is open tomorrow, despite it being Columbus Day, so Donald will be able to pick up a few million dollars.)
Also, it is likely another example of how Trump insists on acting like he’s King of the World and can just unilaterally command other nations to do what he wants and they’ll have to do it. And then is completely ignored because he isn’t. He’s always making declarations and issuing commands about how this or that nation must do something he wants, and he just ignores that he is ignored.
I’m meaning in the sort of sense that the chart below shows. You can’t just read Mother Jones and Huffpost and think you’re getting the correct story. You’re getting a biased view, and you really need to read stuff from across the spectrum in order to get an idea of what’s actually happening.
It’s like how if something’s going on in the Middle East, you don’t just read Al Jazeera, but rather it and the BBC and the Washington Post. Between the three, you’ll have a better idea of what is happening than if you read one alone.
I get that but seriously, look at that chart. Is it actually measuring political “lean” in any sort of objective manner?
As they themselves note, they aren’t actually measuring bias in some sort of objective fashion but basing it on surveys. It’s really measuring the Overton window, instead. Putting the Atlantic in the same box as the Jacobin is rather telling, in that respect, as is painting CNN or NPR as ‘left leaning’.
Worse, it doesn’t really measure outreach. All of the media sources in that left column combined don’t have the reach of just Fox News alone.
This doesn’t really illustrate the point you think you are making.
Do you know the difference between straight, factual reporting and editorial content? Much reporting (and punditry) today is colored by editorial, i.e., feature content mixed in with the observable facts of an event. That is an evil of modern journalism.
But I believe in the FACTS of an event as reported by liberal media, even if too much biased commentary and interpretation are included. Right-wing media outlets like FOX and those even farther right don’t get the FACTS of the events correct in the first place. Usually because they are repeating trump’s LIES.
I see that the orange asshole has appointed a new Press Liar. This one makes the previous one look like a Girl Scout. She is associated with QAnon, is a Jan6 denier and calls liberals “pedophiles” and the like. A real class act.
