(post shortened)
Anderson Cooper’s biased/incorrect/fake news/twist/spin of the Lewandowski/Michelle Fields incident only hurt Cooper’s and CNN reputation.
Every news media outlet that would like to be known as a news media outlet could have verified the facts of this story BEFORE they repeated Field’s version as if it were fact.
And the news media wonders why they have lost credibility.
Or they could have just said whatever they wanted to and prefaced it with “People are saying…”
There is still no evidence that the RNC was even hacked. It seems that “someone” is claiming that the RNC was hacked. Does that “someone” have any evidence that the RNC was actually hacked, or is this just another one of those fake news stories that have become so popular?
AFAIU (and I am open to correction, of course) there is nothing indicating that any RNC emails were compromised. From what I have seen, it has been determined that one email account of an RNC employee that has left several years ago was compromised, and last summer some emails “from Republican campaigns and state GOP staffers” were released. Other than that, I have seen no proof of the breathless pronouncements that “RNC was hacked too, but its emails were not released”.
I don’t think the real timeliness matches your analogy. I’m pretty sure the DNC had already been hacked when Trump made his joke, and then neither the Russians nor anyone else managed to recover the 33,000 emails Clinton’s staff deleted.
This is more like: Tim got murdered, then you joke with your buddies that it would be great if someone also murdered Tim’s brother Jim, but no one ever kills Jim.
So, still not answering the question about what news sources you consider trustworthy, huh?
Of course the specific emails Trump requested to be “hacked” were considered lost and had already been deleted by HRC and Co. So it was more like “Hey Russians, you seem to have the technological expertise the FBI seems to lack or is unwilling to use, so do the American people a solid on this one.”
And also, these emails were never published, so it isn’t like Trump made a request and Russia followed through on said request like some partisans are implying.
Except nobody murdered Tim. They murdered Tim’s campaign manager. Trump wanted HRC’s deleted emails. The Russians allegedly responded to this by hacking Podesta. Your analogy fails, sorry.
I haven’t checked the timelines on all of this, did the hacking of Podesta occur before Trump made his request? I know the release occured after, but the actual hacking could have occured before considering WikiLeaks sits on this stuff.
Trump’s statement was on July 27, 2016. As much as it can be determined, the Podesta “hack” (really was a “phish”, but whatever) happened around March 19, 2016 or maybe March 20.
These attempts to defend treason are quite sad, really.
Well, if 2016 has taught the world anything, it’s that ideology>reason+morals.
Lol no. Trump lacks an ideology. 2016 taught the world that new > old. That’s it. If you want to make something bigger out of it, you’re probably crafting a “think piece”.
What’s sad to me is mindless unsubstantiated accusations of treason by neo-McCarthyites.
Lies, Putin envy, misogyny, cluelessness and bombast are “new?”
Why do you think that a lack of ideology rules out treason? You would associate a right-wing ideology with treason?
As a child of the 80s, and a former Republican, that the party of Reagan has been reduced to this is pathetic.
Where’s the treason?
The media ran with lots of stuff to damage Trump. After the media promoted Trump to damage the Republican Party. And now the media is talking about fake news. How sad.
The poster made two wrong claims. One was that 2016 was about ideology vs. reason and morals. The other was that there has been evidence of treason by Trump.
Trump was new. Everything he did was new to American politics. Clinton was old. Everything she did was stale.
And she still got more votes than Trump.
Yes, I know. Not in the right places to make her President. All those “urban” votes don’t count. Or count about 3/5’s…
And Trump is hauling out a bunch of old, stale fools & tycoons for his cabinet.
Your anger is not a refutation of my claims. Trump beat Clinton. Trump’s approach was new, which is why you are so angry. Clinton’s approach was stale. So in 2016 new>old. The other guy said ideology>reason and morals. Not true. Ideology, reason, and morals were absent on both sides.