It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: proximo
originally posted by: neformore
So the President elect is trying to mess with freedom of speech.
If he doesn't like it, shouldn't he (to paraphrase a lot of people here) leave and go somewhere more to his taste?
CNN screwed themselves by becoming a blatant propaganda arm of the left. They treated trump like trash and I have no problem if he returns the favor.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: proximo
What I am saying is the current press has already proven they are liars associated with the left, and they have no problem spreading lies to get their way.
Don't. Just don't. It's pointless.
www.washingtonpost.com...
originally posted by: JacKatMtn
What better way to get the news out on what you plan to do?
On the record, straight from the President elect's mouth...
MSM must be seething
What that article says to me is that at least Fox News will retract a story if they have no way to prove it.
Why air it with no substantiation? What purpose?
What that article says to me is that at least Fox News will retract a story if they have no way to prove it.
Did you look?
Where is the reporting on any of the Wikileaks period?
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14
I didn't know the press was supposed to act as a check on government. I thought that was the point of the whole 3 branches thing.
60 years. Ok. That puts it smack dab in Viet Nam and Watergate and stuff. Was that biased journalism?
Why weren't we told about these "facts" Phage?
originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: projectvxn
Didn't stop you guys moaning when Obama decried some of Fox's stuff though, did it?
Sauce for the goose.
originally posted by: gpols
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14
they think the media is still unbiased and "free.
The first amendment says "free press" not "a press that must present facts". The press is free to report how ever they see fit. I'm sure there are some laws in place that prevent some things for happening, but they are totally free to report how ever they see fit.
They take the chance with their credibility with what they report.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14
Why weren't we told about these "facts" Phage?
Because those facts were not public information. Because the facts, when eventually revealed, were the result of journalistic investigations. By journalists.
BTW, I never bought the 8x10 glossies of the "mobile chemical warfare labs." Because I have my own brain. Because I read the reports from the UN weapons inspections of Iraq.
Actually, that information is public information in a lot of historical sources.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14
Actually, that information is public information in a lot of historical sources.
Yes, now it is. Thanks to Ellsberg. Thanks to Woodward. Thanks to the FOIA.