Media melting down over Trump referring to a reporter as "sleaze".

originally posted by: BlueAjah

Is that a rhetorical question?

The media take clips and quotes out of context -ALL- the time. They go for the ratings, not the truth.

My engineering school had a semi-permanent display of 60 Minutes which showed a hidden camera filming the interview with this engineer (I forget what the issue was) and the "finished product" after production.

They had asked a lot of crap along with the 'actual' questions. In production, they assembled it like a photoshop. The answers didn't go with the questions necessarily, and some of the answers cut in were from innocuous things like 'what did you do last Thursday'. If they wanted him to 'not answer' they cut in a part where everyone was on break but the camera was still rolling. It was a travesty.

Pretty much since then, I have not watched MSM news. I assume it's all BS.

originally posted by: carewemust
CNN is spending an entire hour with a panel discussing Donald Trump bad-mouthing the media. Why the hell is CNN so fixated on this?

He's a wild card and he's not doing the kayfabe. While I think he's a nutbag, this is one thing I do admire about him. The ABC guy WAS a sleaze, was wrong, and got caught out.

The sleazy media doesn't like being called sleazy media?

Shocking.

a reply to: gladtobehere

I question Trump's overall ability to be the president he claims he will be, but I do enjoy his persona. I think that he's running a good game.

a reply to: St Udio
Here is how this issue is viewed: Back in Jan, 2016, Trump decided not to attend a debate, and instead hold a fund raiser for veterans. Claimed he raised 6 million dollars for them in a press conference. That opened the door up and people want to know which groups received that money.

Trump put himself in the spotlight, he is a candidate for President of the United States. As president or even as a candidate, there are parts of his life that is no longer his to be private and becomes a matter of public interest. He made a big deal about this, and thus people want to know about the groups he gave money to and how much did they received of that amount he claimed that was raised. Would not those groups have benefitted if more people wanted to donate directly to them? Don’t you think that the publicity would have done them a lot of good out there, and helped get support where it was needed?

For better or worse, he opened the door, and now the public wants to know. And he as a person who opened the door cannot hide behind the veil of privacy because he finds it inconvenient.

And if he is irritated now by what the media is doing, what does he think is going to happen if he becomes President of the USA? Every action, every speech, everything he does out in public will be reported on and ultimately discussed via the paper, tv, radio and internet.

Being President, the leader of the free world, means that one has to accept the good and the bad. If people complain, he can’t just shut them up or throw them in jail, he has to deal with it. If he moves against them, he could find himself embroiled in a legal battle that could cost him the presidency. Freedom of press and Freedom of speech also means stuff one does not want to hear. And if he moves against such, then he is going against the Constitution.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: BlueAjah

Journalistic integrity no longer exists.

Because they asked him where the money went?

:-)

Poor Donald

They knew where the money went. Millions had already been distributed, as they knew, and millions more pledged would still be distributed.

.

a reply to: Bedlam


ABC in general is sleazy. The network likes to find people who curse, and then use loud "beeps" to cover those curse words. Jimmy Kimmel is a prime example. Even the ABC nightly news does this. Strange behavior for a DISNEY company.

Oh come off it. Did anyone actually listen properly? Or research this thing? Trump was called out on a number of things on the money for veterans story. The man's excuses aren't even paper thin. In fact his skin is even thinner. It's the job of the media to check facts. They did check facts and discovered that a) only half of the organisations he says he donated to have even received the money, b) many of those that did got cheques dated the day that the Washington Post published the story asking where the money was and c) Trump whines piteously about not being appreciated by the media, which should just instantly believe everything he says and never call him out on anything that he doubles back on in terms of policy. If any other politician did what he did, they'd be toast. But no, Trump has to scream that the nasty journalists are being ultra nasty to him by daring to question him.
The man's a joke. A dangerous joke come to that.

originally posted by: BlueAjah

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: BlueAjah

Journalistic integrity no longer exists.

Because they asked him where the money went?

:-)

Poor Donald

They knew where the money went. Millions had already been distributed, as they knew, and millions more pledged would still be distributed.

.

Odd that it didn't start arriving until someone asked where it was though. Right?

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Well, if those are the "facts" as you say, then we should be expecting mister Trump to be charged with fraud. Can't wait for it happen.

Just don't tell me it will happen but in a different timeline and just call it another case of mandela effect.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Very well said! Trump is now the presumptive Republican nominee. He's got to expect a lot more scrutiny of his language, his promises and every statement he makes.

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: BlueAjah

Is that a rhetorical question?

The media take clips and quotes out of context -ALL- the time. They go for the ratings, not the truth.

My engineering school had a semi-permanent display of 60 Minutes which showed a hidden camera filming the interview with this engineer (I forget what the issue was) and the "finished product" after production.

They had asked a lot of crap along with the 'actual' questions. In production, they assembled it like a photoshop. The answers didn't go with the questions necessarily, and some of the answers cut in were from innocuous things like 'what did you do last Thursday'. If they wanted him to 'not answer' they cut in a part where everyone was on break but the camera was still rolling. It was a travesty.

Pretty much since then, I have not watched MSM news. I assume it's all BS.

This is pretty much what Couric did with her gun control interview, as discussed on another thread. You're right about MSM.

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Well, if those are the "facts" as you say, then we should be expecting mister Trump to be charged with fraud. Can't wait for it happen.

Just don't tell me it will happen but in a different timeline and just call it another case of mandela effect.

Like much of what Trumpster says, there's a certain amount of smoke and mirrors. Ha can't be accused of fraud on this because it wasn't an official fundraiser with an official beneficiary pre-announced. He just said that he'd be raising money for veterans. The excuses came afterwards.

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: ugmold

originally posted by: xuenchen
LOL

He really told those guys what side their bread is buttered on didn't he.

Yes he is a bit like Kim Jong Un, when Elected these "Journalists" will probably just disappear.

This is exactly how Obama and the media treats Fox, but that;s completely justified and different right?

What on earth makes you think that Faux News is a news organisation?

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

This is a false claim that people keep making. For months, people kept saying the money was not going out fast enough. Fundraisers don't work that way. It takes time to collect pledges and vet recipients. But it is totally FALSE to say that none of the money was distributed.

There are many sources, as media has been calling recipients for months.
It's so strange that the media kept making false claims that money was not going out, when the KNEW it was. They kept calling it a "fraction". Well, yeah, millions is a fraction of the total, but still, it was millions donated to veterans.

Here is one from April 8:

The Wall Street Journal, citing a survey of the 22 groups listed by Trump's campaign as prospective recipients for the money, reported that 19 organizations had obtained a total of $2.4 million from Trump's foundation or associates. Of the three other charities, one declined to disclose how much it had received, another said it needed to submit more paperwork before receiving any money, and the third didn't respond to questions by the Journal.

source

a reply to: BlueAjah

Even your source says that there are a large number of question marks over the money. Frankly the facts sound rather chaotic at the moment.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

That was my point. They were complaining even months ago that "only" 2.4 MILLION was already distributed.
It's absurd to complain about that.
There were MILLIONS already distributed, with more coming from pledges and more recipients going through the vetting process.

It's perverse to criticize that.

So, claims that nothing was distributed until recently after the media went berserk are wrong.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg
But that is the life of the President. Everything about the man becomes a part of the state interest and the publics as well. His overall health, is a matter of state interest, if he has a heart attack, or gets ill, the federal government knows immediately. The only time he has any privacy is when he is in his residence, and even then, there is always someone watching him, 24 hours a day for 4 years straight.

And when he is acting as president, sitting in the oval office, and doing the executive job, it will get worse, as then it will be not only the federal government, the other branches, but also the media as well. And they will debate, discuss, talk and ultimately decide if it is a good or a bad decision. And tell the public about it.

And as President he can do nothing about the press, as he is then sworn to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States. If he moves against the media, it would be against the constitution, and a violation of the Freedoms of the Press and Speech. And if he still persists, it could result in impeachment processes against him. In short as a private citizen, he would have more rights, but as president, while he has some of those rights, ultimately, he loses some in exchange for that position.

Think about it, during the early part of the campaign, he had no qualms about egging on the crowds to remove the protestors, even to the point where those protestors would commit acts of violence. But as President, he can’t do that. And when it comes to other countries, he has to realize, they are not going to always do what he wants them to do, and they can act against him, in ways he is not yet prepared for.

a reply to: BlueAjah

I think that it's also the fact that the Trump campaign claims that any delay comes from vetting the organisations involved. But there was supposed to be a list of the organisations at the time in January, which implies at least some form of pre-event vetting. So why the delay? Some organisations got just a little money, others more. Moreover Trump's own promise $1m took some time to materialise - and there was no excuse for that.
The other point is this. Shouting insults at the media is rude and moronic, especially when all some were doing was asking basic questions. This is not a case of journalists being rude or trashy, this was a case of journalists doing their damn jobs and asking basic questions. It's Journalism 101. It's also basic courtesy. Trump seems to think that anyone who dares to question him is against him. I've got news for him - if he thinks that the media will ever blindly accept what a presidential candidate says without at least some form of questioning, he's delusional. This is not the world he's used to, where he can put out a press release about a business deal and have people report it. It's a bigger issue than that.
I'm a reporter. I write about insurance news. You have to have basic courtesy and that has to be reciprocated. I know of one press officer whom I absolutely loathe, because I used to work with them and have an accurate assessment of their professional capability. But I do my best to work with them when I have to. Trump's constant insults about the media are going to have a few impacts. Firstly there's a dangerous amount of hate being directed at the media at his rallies. Two, the more he insults them then the less they'll take him seriously. If he's lying about them then what else is he lying about? And three, it makes him look like a petulant child who can't be trusted.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Of course the media is going to cover what goes on with the Presidency.

Would it not be better if we could trust that the media is actually telling the truth, instead of sensationalizing, twisting things, and outright lying?

NO, not even the President should have to put up with that.